1. Revoke any law based on religion. A complete separation of religion and state. ONE law, ONE secular law for everybody.
2. Revoke all religious personal laws and cease to institutionally recognize Sharia. Similarly revoke Cow slaughter laws, which are also based on religion and totally ridiculous. All religions will only have ONE law to follow. If they dont wanna follow, they should either emmigrate to wherever they want to, or live their lives in prison.
3. Guarantee religious freedom, and reform affirmative action to be based on financial strength rather than religion or caste.
4. Reform existing divorce laws to include cases of irreconcilable differences etc as valid reasons for divorce. This will ensure more freedom/rights for women and no Talaqs or whatever.
This will ensure modern laws and regulations, no conflicts because of religion as well as guarantee religious and personal freedom for all.
Most of what you said is self contradictory. What you are essentially saying is secularism and religious freedom. I wonder how could these be practiced unless you either disobey the law or the religious beliefs. I posted this in response to your post in another thread. I'll post it here as well ......
The world is full of different communities, cultures, religions, societies etc and the rights of all are protected under the UN charter. However, it is a mere paper which has something written on it and nothing more.
The Mormons in the US have a dress code which is respected though their right to polygamy is not, many US states and many countries have rules which forbid inter-marriages between cousins whereas being in love is an accepted universal phenomenon, the animal rights are protected in many countries whereas they are also slaughtered in large numbers, though humanely etc etc.
There is a difference between enforcement of enacted laws by various nations and the respect due for various communities, religions and groups. When the balance unduly tellingly tilts towards one side, the problems arise and this is the case in most parts of the world.
Many years ago, no one was even pushed as to who wears a scarf and who doesn't, but these days everything even remotely related to Muslims as an entity turns in to a matter of major debate. At most times, this is also related to historical baggage between various religions and cultures.
Those Indian Hindus who are against women covering themselves as per their wishes, surprisingly, also relate it to the invasion of Muslims. They say, it was primarily done to avoid the invading Muslims from abducting their women and therefore, the women were told to cover themselves and now they shouldn't. Incidentally satti also supposedly falls in this category. But both these practices are still apparent in India even today.
I wonder if your opinion is based on what you saw and absorbed while growing up or is it based on a communal viewpoint or is it based on your own thinking - which must have a basis hidden somewhere or in something.