Re: In certain respects Islam used to be superior to Hinduism

by Seva Lamberdar Wed Apr 23, 2014 3:50 pm

"You are missing the larger point which is: if BJP cannot implement UCC among its own leaders like Hema Malini ( 2 times BJP Rajya Sabha member, now fighting on BJP Lok Sabha ticket) then how the hell can it talk of giving UCC to the nation? Bunch of hypocrites!" Rashmun

>>> The UCC (Uniform Civil Code: one law for everyone, irrespective of religion, race, caste and gender) is meant for the entire country, and not for a small or separate segment of society or a single political party. The BJP, on any other party for that matter, can't go around asking its individual members to adhere to the UCC if such a law / code does not exist or is not implemented at the national level.

by Guest Wed Apr 23, 2014 3:57 pm

Seva Lamberdar wrote:"You are missing the larger point which is: if BJP cannot implement UCC among its own leaders like Hema Malini ( 2 times BJP Rajya Sabha member, now fighting on BJP Lok Sabha ticket) then how the hell can it talk of giving UCC to the nation? Bunch of hypocrites!" Rashmun

>>> The UCC (Uniform Civil Code: one law for everyone, irrespective of religion, race, caste and gender) is meant for the entire country, and not for a small or separate segment of society or a single political party. The BJP, on any other party for that matter, can't go around asking its individual members to adhere to the UCC if such a law / code does not exist or is not implemented at the national level.

How can you talk of formulating a law when your own leaders are in violation of that law? Are you not supposed to set an example for others?

by Seva Lamberdar Wed Apr 23, 2014 4:04 pm

Rashmun wrote:
Seva Lamberdar wrote:"You are missing the larger point which is: if BJP cannot implement UCC among its own leaders like Hema Malini ( 2 times BJP Rajya Sabha member, now fighting on BJP Lok Sabha ticket) then how the hell can it talk of giving UCC to the nation? Bunch of hypocrites!" Rashmun

>>> The UCC (Uniform Civil Code: one law for everyone, irrespective of religion, race, caste and gender) is meant for the entire country, and not for a small or separate segment of society or a single political party. The BJP, on any other party for that matter, can't go around asking its individual members to adhere to the UCC if such a law / code does not exist or is not implemented at the national level.

How can you talk of formulating a law when your own leaders are in violation of that law? Are you not supposed to set an example for others?

No.
The UCC is a national need and adhering to it for everyone (irespective of any party, individual or a group of people) will become necessary after it is implemented. Before that, you can't ask or expect anyone (individual or a party) to set an example of something that does not exist currently.

by Guest Wed Apr 23, 2014 4:10 pm

Seva Lamberdar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Seva Lamberdar wrote:"You are missing the larger point which is: if BJP cannot implement UCC among its own leaders like Hema Malini ( 2 times BJP Rajya Sabha member, now fighting on BJP Lok Sabha ticket) then how the hell can it talk of giving UCC to the nation? Bunch of hypocrites!" Rashmun

>>> The UCC (Uniform Civil Code: one law for everyone, irrespective of religion, race, caste and gender) is meant for the entire country, and not for a small or separate segment of society or a single political party. The BJP, on any other party for that matter, can't go around asking its individual members to adhere to the UCC if such a law / code does not exist or is not implemented at the national level.

How can you talk of formulating a law when your own leaders are in violation of that law? Are you not supposed to set an example for others?

No.
The UCC is a national need and adhering to it for everyone (irespective of any party, individual or a group of people) will become necessary after it is implemented. Before that, you can't ask or expect anyone (individual or a party) to set an example of something that does not exist currently.

Can Dharmendra continue to have two wives after UCC is implemented and made into a law?

by Kris Thu Apr 24, 2014 2:09 am

Rashmun wrote:
Kris wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Regarding Muslims supporting Modi, here is a typical example of such a person:

https://such.forumotion.com/t18854-is-modi-supporter-zafar-sareshwala-a-crook#135147

Basically these are people who have been helped monetarily by Modi and are hence under Modi's obligation.

>>I have read about Sareshwala. The ones I am thinking of are Naqvi, MJ Akbar, Salim Khan etc. Wasn't there also a Farooq Khan (former IG of J&K)?.

Salim Khan has said he admires Modi, but he will vote for Congress:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/lok-sabha-elections-2014/news/Salman-Khans-father-Salim-Khan-launches-Urdu-website-on-Modi/articleshow/33826192.cms

What is one to make of this? My understanding is that he is supporting both Modi and Congress in the hope that whichever party comes to power they could help his son Salman get some relief in the court cases he is facing. For instance even after conviction in a case Salman could get a presidential pardon. Two cases Salman faces are: poaching black bucks in Rajasthan which is not permitted since black buck is I think an endangered species; and running over some people sleeping on the pavement with his car in which incident 1-2 people died.

Regarding MJ Akbar the guy is a careerist and an opportunist. Did you know that he was a spokesperson of rajiv Gandhi and a Congress MP at one time? Anyways, see here for more on Akbar:

https://such.forumotion.com/t21933-a-good-article-on-the-opportunism-of-akbar-the-great?highlight=M+J+Akbar

>>There are others as well. They may have personal agendas, but I would think they would look beyond that if indeed their man was involved in as heinous a crime as he is being accused of. On the train burning, you had indicated that Siddarth Varadarajan was of the opinion that some of the victims were muslims. I thought they were devotees coming back from a hindu place of pilgrimage. Regardless, the point I was making was why this event gets brushed under the carpet by the media when the riots are discussed, considering this was the trigger that set them off.

by Guest Thu Apr 24, 2014 4:39 am

Kris wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Kris wrote:
Rashmun wrote:Regarding Muslims supporting Modi, here is a typical example of such a person:

https://such.forumotion.com/t18854-is-modi-supporter-zafar-sareshwala-a-crook#135147

Basically these are people who have been helped monetarily by Modi and are hence under Modi's obligation.

>>I have read about Sareshwala. The ones I am thinking of are Naqvi, MJ Akbar, Salim Khan etc. Wasn't there also a Farooq Khan (former IG of J&K)?.

Salim Khan has said he admires Modi, but he will vote for Congress:

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/home/lok-sabha-elections-2014/news/Salman-Khans-father-Salim-Khan-launches-Urdu-website-on-Modi/articleshow/33826192.cms

What is one to make of this? My understanding is that he is supporting both Modi and Congress in the hope that whichever party comes to power they could help his son Salman get some relief in the court cases he is facing. For instance even after conviction in a case Salman could get a presidential pardon. Two cases Salman faces are: poaching black bucks in Rajasthan which is not permitted since black buck is I think an endangered species; and running over some people sleeping on the pavement with his car in which incident 1-2 people died.

Regarding MJ Akbar the guy is a careerist and an opportunist. Did you know that he was a spokesperson of rajiv Gandhi and a Congress MP at one time? Anyways, see here for more on Akbar:

https://such.forumotion.com/t21933-a-good-article-on-the-opportunism-of-akbar-the-great?highlight=M+J+Akbar

>>There are others as well. They may have personal agendas, but I would think they would look beyond that if indeed their man was involved in as heinous a crime as he is being accused of. On the train burning, you had indicated that Siddarth Varadarajan was of the opinion that some of the victims were muslims. I thought they were devotees coming back from a hindu place of pilgrimage. Regardless, the point I was making was why this event gets brushed under the carpet by the media when the riots are discussed, considering this was the trigger that set them off.

In the case of Maulana Madani it is said some of his family members have business interests in Gujarat. Of course there are others as well but I believe all his Muslim supporters are thinking of themselves and their families and not the country.

Yes there were devotees returning from pilgrimage on that train which is why the presence of some unidentified people among the victims was a little mysterious. I think I have Varadarajan's book somewhere in my apartment. I will try to give the relevant extract from the book later if I find it.

The Godhra train killings is not given as much importance as the later killings for two reasons. First the magnitude of deaths in the later killings was much greater.According to the Gujarat govt 1,000 people died in the later killings ( but they also place many others in a "missing people" list), while according to other respected independent estimates the number is 2,000-3,000. Regardless, the magnitude of deaths is much more. Second, and more importantly, the later killings was a state sponsored pogrom while the Godhra deaths were not. The state is meant to protect its citizens and not take sides and participate in pogroms.

by Seva Lamberdar Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:10 am

Rashmun wrote:
Seva Lamberdar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Seva Lamberdar wrote:"You are missing the larger point which is: if BJP cannot implement UCC among its own leaders like Hema Malini ( 2 times BJP Rajya Sabha member, now fighting on BJP Lok Sabha ticket) then how the hell can it talk of giving UCC to the nation? Bunch of hypocrites!" Rashmun

>>> The UCC (Uniform Civil Code: one law for everyone, irrespective of religion, race, caste and gender) is meant for the entire country, and not for a small or separate segment of society or a single political party. The BJP, on any other party for that matter, can't go around asking its individual members to adhere to the UCC if such a law / code does not exist or is not implemented at the national level.

How can you talk of formulating a law when your own leaders are in violation of that law? Are you not supposed to set an example for others?

No.
The UCC is a national need and adhering to it for everyone (irespective of any party, individual or a group of people) will become necessary after it is implemented. Before that, you can't ask or expect anyone (individual or a party) to set an example of something that does not exist currently.

Can Dharmendra continue to have two wives after UCC is implemented and made into a law?

Why is 2 wives or 2 husbands the biggest concern for you under the UCC?

The UCC stands for same / equal rights legally to everyone in the country, irrespective of religion, race, caste and gender.

by Guest Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:24 am

Seva Lamberdar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Seva Lamberdar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Seva Lamberdar wrote:"You are missing the larger point which is: if BJP cannot implement UCC among its own leaders like Hema Malini ( 2 times BJP Rajya Sabha member, now fighting on BJP Lok Sabha ticket) then how the hell can it talk of giving UCC to the nation? Bunch of hypocrites!" Rashmun

>>> The UCC (Uniform Civil Code: one law for everyone, irrespective of religion, race, caste and gender) is meant for the entire country, and not for a small or separate segment of society or a single political party. The BJP, on any other party for that matter, can't go around asking its individual members to adhere to the UCC if such a law / code does not exist or is not implemented at the national level.

How can you talk of formulating a law when your own leaders are in violation of that law? Are you not supposed to set an example for others?

No.
The UCC is a national need and adhering to it for everyone (irespective of any party, individual or a group of people) will become necessary after it is implemented. Before that, you can't ask or expect anyone (individual or a party) to set an example of something that does not exist currently.

Can Dharmendra continue to have two wives after UCC is implemented and made into a law?

Why is 2 wives or 2 husbands the biggest concern for you under the UCC?

The UCC stands for same / equal rights legally to everyone in the country, irrespective of religion, race, caste and gender.

Can a party whose leaders have two wives or two husbands implement UCC? Moreover, even if such a party implements UCC can its leaders continue to have to have two husbands or two wives?

by Seva Lamberdar Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:44 am

Rashmun wrote:
Seva Lamberdar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:
Seva Lamberdar wrote:
Rashmun wrote:

How can you talk of formulating a law when your own leaders are in violation of that law? Are you not supposed to set an example for others?

No.
The UCC is a national need and adhering to it for everyone (irespective of any party, individual or a group of people) will become necessary after it is implemented. Before that, you can't ask or expect anyone (individual or a party) to set an example of something that does not exist currently.

Can Dharmendra continue to have two wives after UCC is implemented and made into a law?

Why is 2 wives or 2 husbands the biggest concern for you under the UCC?

The UCC stands for same / equal rights legally to everyone in the country, irrespective of religion, race, caste and gender.

Can a party whose leaders have two wives or two husbands implement UCC? Moreover, even if such a party implements UCC can its leaders continue to have to have two husbands or two wives?

Don't you know that when a new law is enacted, it generally is not applicable retroactively?
Moreover, the existing mess and bad practices in society is not an excuse to not improve things in future and pass better laws.

by Sponsored content