Rashmun wrote:Gujarat’s apostasy law: it might come as a surprise that India has an apostasy law, but in 2003, a time of great communal polarisation, the Gujarat legislature passed the Freedom of Religion Act, a wonderfully Orwellian name for a law that restricts religious freedom. The act made it mandatory for a person converting to another religion to take permission from the district magistrate first. Only if the district magistrate is convinced that the convert has undergone a true religious transformation is the change allowed. That an ostensibly secular state sits in judgment of whether a person’s religious choice is true or fraudulent might have been funny, if it wasn’t for the four-year jail sentence the law carries.

Gujarat’s Disturbed Areas Act: In Gujarat it is illegal for Hindus and Muslims to enter into a property transaction unless it has the permission of the government. As of 2013, 40% of Ahmedabad was notified under the act. While religious ghettoisation is a fact in most Indian cities, this legislation makes it official government policy.

Religion-based reservations: A Presidential Order dating back to 1950 makes all non-Hindu Dalits ineligible for Scheduled Caste reservations, saying only Hindu Dalits can avail of reservations in government jobs, higher education and legislative bodies. This was amended to include Sikh Dalits in 1956 and Buddhist Dalits in 1990, but it has still not been extended to the other religious groups. This also means that Christian and Muslim Dalits are not protected against anti-Scheduled Caste atrocity legislation.

Tax breaks on the basis of religion: A well-known yet oddly uncontroversial measure, the Hindu Undivided Family provides, in the words of T Ramanujam, “almost a perfect medium for tax avoidance”. It is open only to Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists.

http://scroll.in/article/666262/BJP's-rhetoric-on-Uniform-Code-undermined-by-its-silence-on-laws-favouring-majority

smArtha wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Gujarat’s apostasy law: it might come as a surprise that India has an apostasy law, but in 2003, a time of great communal polarisation, the Gujarat legislature passed the Freedom of Religion Act, a wonderfully Orwellian name for a law that restricts religious freedom. The act made it mandatory for a person converting to another religion to take permission from the district magistrate first. Only if the district magistrate is convinced that the convert has undergone a true religious transformation is the change allowed. That an ostensibly secular state sits in judgment of whether a person’s religious choice is true or fraudulent might have been funny, if it wasn’t for the four-year jail sentence the law carries.

Gujarat’s Disturbed Areas Act: In Gujarat it is illegal for Hindus and Muslims to enter into a property transaction unless it has the permission of the government. As of 2013, 40% of Ahmedabad was notified under the act. While religious ghettoisation is a fact in most Indian cities, this legislation makes it official government policy.

Religion-based reservations: A Presidential Order dating back to 1950 makes all non-Hindu Dalits ineligible for Scheduled Caste reservations, saying only Hindu Dalits can avail of reservations in government jobs, higher education and legislative bodies. This was amended to include Sikh Dalits in 1956 and Buddhist Dalits in 1990, but it has still not been extended to the other religious groups. This also means that Christian and Muslim Dalits are not protected against anti-Scheduled Caste atrocity legislation.

Tax breaks on the basis of religion: A well-known yet oddly uncontroversial measure, the Hindu Undivided Family provides, in the words of T Ramanujam, “almost a perfect medium for tax avoidance”. It is open only to Hindus, Sikhs, Jains and Buddhists.

http://scroll.in/article/666262/BJP's-rhetoric-on-Uniform-Code-undermined-by-its-silence-on-laws-favouring-majority

Yes Modi was the CM way back in 1986 and 1991 or did a time travel to past and ensured that this Act came into effect. 


The Gujarat Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property and Provisions for Protection of Tenants from Eviction from Premises in Disturbed Areas Act, 1986 & 1991, introduced following communal riots, was intended to prevent distress sale of property between members of different communitiesThe Gujarat Prohibition of Transfer of Immovable Property and Provisions for Protection of Tenants from Eviction from Premises in Disturbed Areas Act, 1991, introduced following communal riots, was intended to prevent distress sale of property between members of different communities

Rashmun wrote:
Let us assume some communal law was already operative in Gujarat when Modi became CM of Gujarat. Should Modi have repealed such a law or should he have perpetuated such a communal law? If he chose to perpetuate communal laws in Gujarat, has he not lost the moral right to scream UCC ?

smArtha wrote:

Rashmun wrote:
Let us assume some communal law was already operative in Gujarat when Modi became CM of Gujarat. Should Modi have repealed such a law or should he have perpetuated such a communal law? If he chose to perpetuate communal laws in Gujarat, has he not lost the moral right to scream UCC ?

By your rule you have no moral right to scream against Modi (for or against UCC) as you didn't raise your voice against the above act and the Govts of the day in 1991 or 1986. It is okay for Modi to not honor your rules, if you value yourself your rules and logic, should you now shut up?

Rashmun wrote:Seva, why are you not responding to the original post in this thread?

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Seva, why are you not responding to the original post in this thread?

Because you don't have a leg to stand on if I respond.

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Seva, why are you not responding to the original post in this thread?

Because you don't have a leg to stand on if I respond.

This shows that deep down you do not really believe in UCC.

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:

Seva Lamberdar wrote:

Rashmun wrote:Seva, why are you not responding to the original post in this thread?

Because you don't have a leg to stand on if I respond.

This shows that deep down you do not really believe in UCC.

We already had a discussion on this topic with you a few  months ago. I remember about Uppili also posting a number of reasonable comments on this.

Anyway, the problem in this case is not with the UCC, which guarratees the freedom of religion equally to everyone in a pluralistic society to pray and worship in one's own way to the deity of one's own choice or not to pray and worship at all, but with some exclusionary religion / sects whose ultimate goal and core belief is to overtake and eliminate all other beliefs (using conversions etc.) thus going in the opposite direction of freedom of religion advocated by the UCC.