BREAKING-LEGISLATION ON BEEF BAN PASSED UNANIMOUSLY IN PARLIAMENT!!!

[Awan68]

Ok lets look at this from another perspective - you are not allowed to abuse your prophet or God. Will you allow non muslims to abuse your prophet or God in your country.

For most Hindus, Cow is an incarnation of God on earth. Then why do you expect them to be fine - if you butcher an incarnation of their God ?

I will utter only one sentence "humans were made to be intelligent creatures". Hope u get my point.

 

[maximuswarrior]

Well done India. Well done.

 

[Vikki]

There is only one God and muslims would object to abuse of the prophet who was a living person and has left behind a legacy.

Cow on the other hand is an animal.... anyone who considers a cow to be a God is patently dumb and such nonsense needs to be ignored.

What if hindus say they dont believe in prophethood and whoever calling himself prophet is a liar and cheat

 

[Cookie Monster]

A Muslim can be a true Muslim even being a vegetarian...
And I just don't understand why this fuss is about beef...what is the point in eating beef by hurting the sentiments of majority of people

It's not about a ppl to ppl relation. Out of respect a Muslim MAY CHOOSE to not consume beef in order to not hurt the sentiments of his fellow Hindu neighbor. That's all good and jolly...he didn't violate any Islamic principals and everyone is happy. In short the Muslim citizen has the FREEDOM to make that choice on his own.

It becomes an issue when the STATE that promised its minorities to be secular and was founded on the very basis of this secular ideology...gets involved and passes laws shoving down such a choice in their minorities' throats keeping in view the majority population's religious views. That is a state violating its promise and deciding on religious matters for its minority citizens. What happened to religious freedom? What happened to state not interfering? In this case the religious freedom no longer exists and instead the state is making ur religious choices for u. It's the principle of the matter.

If the tables were flipped...let's take the scenario of Muslims being the majority in India and Hindus being a minority.
Since worshipping and bowing down to idols is a big no no in Islam...how would u feel if a law was passed where Hindus couldn't make or pray to idols? All the idols were broken down...Muslims claimed that u can still practice ur religion and believe in all ur gods and worship them without having their idol/images. Is that religious freedom? Or is that the majority forcing their own beliefs down the throats of the minority?

 

[babbarsingh]

So your reducing everyone's personal freedom and forcing hindu religious requirements on non hindus in your alleged secular republic?

Secular does not mean hurting majority sentiments.

 

[GumNaam]

Muslims of india...oh, Muslims of india...

enjoying Muslim hindu bhai bhai yet?

 

[Cookie Monster]

Secular does not mean hurting majority sentiments.

Secular means the state doesn't get involved in religious matters. If a Muslim is hurting ur religious sentiments...go and talk to him and see if u both can come to an amicable solution on a ppl to ppl level. A secular state shouldn't start passing laws to accommodate one group's religious views while sidelining another.

 

[mb444]

What if hindus say they dont believe in prophethood and whoever calling himself prophet is a liar and cheat

They can very well say that.... would not bother me the least. But they would be speaking of a person and his prophethood would be a matter of faith.

A cow on the other hand is just an animal, it is not a matter of faith it is simple fact. And it is also downright obvious that one has to be quite dumb to consider it to be a God.

 

[Safriz]

https://imgur.com/id%3Dz2nqJmU%3Btype%3Dalbum

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

Well,,pardon me for the "breaking" title.
Just want the attention of Indian posters here.
Kindly vote n cite the reasons.
Guys this is internet,,u r anonymous,,post unapologetically,,,put forth ur views.
Thanks.
Ps-i expect pakistanis to refrain from posting or voting here,,,,but if they do,which they most probably will,,,i want Indian posters to ignore them.

I cannot find any news on this.

This seems like a #Fakenews or an election gimmick.

BJP does not have majority in Rajya Sabha to pass such legislation in parliament.

Well done India. Well done.

Well done for what? It is #Fakenews.

 

[SuvarnaTeja]

They should give everyone a choice, if Hindu's don't want to eat beef then don't.
They shouldn't impose this on others, who want to eat beef.

Fully agree. Everyone needs to have the right to choose what they want to eat. Some may like to eat cows while some may like to eat humans or some may like to eat no meat.

Government should not interfere in personal affairs.

Religion Is Good Just Don't hove It Down Peoples Throats

Religion is idiotic and all religions needs to be banned.

So your reducing everyone's personal freedom and forcing hindu religious requirements on non hindus in your alleged secular republic?

India is not a secular republic. It explicitly recognizes various religions and their civil laws.

I will utter only one sentence "humans were made to be intelligent creatures". Hope u get my point.

Humans are so dumb that they think they are intelligent.

Voted already. I don't support enforcing religious conditions on non followers of said religion.

Freedom can never be free, unlimited and absolute. Else you end up with chaos.

We cant drink alcohol yet we allow non muslims to drink, sell n purchase alcohol here in Pakistan. Indian zealots can learn a thing or two about religious freedom from Pakistan.

By indulgence, one could encroach upon others' freedom but by abstinence that may not be true.

No, I don't support beef ban..what do we do with all the buffaloes and oxen once they become old?do you expect the poor farmer to provide for it for its whole life?have you seen how buffaloes or oxen or cows that die naturally are thrown somewhere outside of the village whose stench spreads at least a kilometer around the area?who is going to give money for the cremation or burial of cattle for those cattle owners? Many indian familiea dont even have money to cremate their own family members...itt just doesn't work man...fortunately for us Hindus,there were untouchables who could eat dead and old cattle in ancient times..later Muslims joined them..we don't eat them and we don't need to worry about their disposal,thanks to Muslims and dalits...imagine the rot that's going to spread tomorrow if Muslims and dalits stop eating beef..

Agree. I support slaughtering of non productive cows and humans to feed the productive humans.

 

[Arulmozhi Varman]

It's not about a ppl to ppl relation. Out of respect a Muslim MAY CHOOSE to not consume beef in order to not hurt the sentiments of his fellow Hindu neighbor. That's all good and jolly...he didn't violate any Islamic principals and everyone is happy. In short the Muslim citizen has the FREEDOM to make that choice on his own.

It becomes an issue when the STATE that promised its minorities to be secular and was founded on the very basis of this secular ideology...gets involved and passes laws shoving down such a choice in their minorities' throats keeping in view the majority population's religious views. That is a state violating its promise and deciding on religious matters for its minority citizens. What happened to religious freedom? What happened to state not interfering? In this case the religious freedom no longer exists and instead the state is making ur religious choices for u. It's the principle of the matter.

If the tables were flipped...let's take the scenario of Muslims being the majority in India and Hindus being a minority.
Since worshipping and bowing down to idols is a big no no in Islam...how would u feel if a law was passed where Hindus couldn't make or pray to idols? All the idols were broken down...Muslims claimed that u can still practice ur religion and believe in all ur gods and worship them without having their idol/images. Is that religious freedom? Or is that the majority forcing their own beliefs down the throats of the minority?

Praying and eating is a two way thing. Dont muslim countries have a rule where public consumption is banned during the month of Ramazan? Are there news of hindus beating for eating in public, i mean an old guy.
Now Cow is considered an holy animal by majority hindus. Its only fair for social purposes, that its respected. Respecting minorities doesnt mean disrespecting majority. In US the horse meat is banned. Why? Its their culture.
Secular doesnt mean irreligious. It simply means separation of religion and state. And eating beef is no compulsory religious stuff in Islam. Just like Muslims are being given own Personal laws in a secular state(oxymoron). And eating beef isnt comparable to Hindu method of worship.

 

[ranjeet]

I support beef ban and police must enforce the law and put down the cattle smugglers with iron fist.

 

[Cookie Monster]

Praying and eating is a two way thing. Dont muslim countries have a rule where public consumption is banned during the month of Ramazan? Are there news of hindus beating for eating in public, i mean an old guy.

Those Muslim states don't claim to be secular republics. Nice of u to lump all the Muslim countries together just so u can make this one point about Muslims having laws according to their own religion. If u were to look at ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of Iran or ISLAMIC REPUBLIC of Pakistan...sure u will find that there would be laws passed heavily favoring Muslims. In case of Pakistan I'm not sure about a law that prohibits ppl from eating in public during Ramadan...it might just be a cultural thing to frown upon it but since I'm not sure I won't argue over that. My point is that these two countries for example never declared to be SECULAR republics...it says right in the name. Pakistan especially was created in the name of Islam so Muslims can freely practice their religion. They are not two faced...what u see is what u get. Now if we look at Republic of Turkey, u'll see that it's not called ISLAMIC Republic of Turkey even though it's a Muslim majority country...and accordingly there's no such law banning u from eating out during Ramadan out of respect for Muslims or anything. In fact u can even order alcoholic beverages...granted that not many restaurants would offer that during Ramadan(during fasting hours) but that's more their decision and not a law. U get the difference yet? So next time when u try comparing an Islamic Republic and cite that they have laws favoring Muslims...do know that India isn't called HINDU REPUBLIC of India...therefore any such analogies would fall flat on their faces.

Also I see u brought up the old guy(Hindu) who was beat up by a mob for eating in public during Ramadan. I remember reading about that in the news. To my knowledge there's no such law in Pakistan, which bans public eating during Ramadan. The mob that beat him up wasn't exactly going by the law. Don't cite a crime and equate it with state law. By that reasoning I can bring up countless examples of lynchings over beef...and using ur reasoning equate it with state law. However I know better than that. I know there's no law in Pakistan that permits beating up old men and there's no law in India permitting lynchings. So if u can stop trolling for a second...let's get back to the law banning beef.

Now Cow is considered an holy animal by majority hindus. Its only fair for social purposes, that its respected. Respecting minorities doesnt mean disrespecting majority. In US the horse meat is banned. Why? Its their culture.

The point I'm making is that it's not the job of a secular state to tell which religious choices its citizens should or should not make. If it does for whatever reason(making the majority happy or whatever else) then by definition it's not a secular state.

Secular doesnt mean irreligious. It simply means separation of religion and state.

Secular state means that the state will not interfere in the religious matters of its citizens. It will not make nor force religious choices on its citizens. In a secular state citizens are free to make their own religious choices.

So if a Muslim foregoes consuming beef and eats chicken instead in the presence of his Hindu friends out of consideration...that's great...that's his choice...he had the freedom to make that religious choice. If instead he was forced to make that choice due to a law passed by the state...then it is no longer his choice...he no longer has the religious freedom to make that choice. The choice was made for him by the state.

And eating beef is no compulsory religious stuff in Islam. Just like Muslims are being given own Personal laws in a secular state(oxymoron). And eating beef isnt comparable to Hindu method of worship.

How is eating beef not comparable to Hindu method of worship? Let's examine them both...

In case of beef...in terms of Islam: it is only in recent times that humans have had a surplus of food enough that generally middle class or above can almost have meat daily. In the old times when Islam came about meat was a luxury. On Eid-ul-Adha in commemoration of Prophet Abraham sacrificing his son, Muslims are to sacrifice one of the Halal animals and the meat is to be divided amongst u and ur family, neighbors/friends, and the poor/needy. So here a cow can be used as a halal animal for sacrifice. However it's also perfectly fine to use a goat, sheep, camel, etc. The main point is that the slaughter of COW isn't MANDATORY.

Now let's look at Hindu method of worship. The nature of worship in Hinduism remains undefined. It is not obligatory...like for example unlike Islam there isn't a set number of times Hindus have to pray/worship. It's unconditional, unrestricted and not dependent on fixed time...it's rather based on customs instead and not ordained by the religion. Even selecting who to pray/worship to is optional. One family member might pray to Ram while another may pray to Kali. Though common practice has been for centuries and remains that Hindus pray to moortis(idols), which are representations of their gods...it is also not mandatory. If a person is traveling...on a train...and he wishes to pray to Lakshmi devi, his prayer is just as valid as if he was to pray to her moorti.

This is why I gave that analogy
...if the circumstances were reversed...
how would Hindus feel if they were the minority and Muslims were majority in a SECULAR India...
...and a law was passed to ban all the idols/idol worshipping bcuz "it hurts the sentiments of the Muslim majority"(since idolatry is a big no no in Islam and is considered an insult to the one true God) and the reasoning was..."well it's not mandatory for u guys anyways"

Again if it was HINDU REPUBLIC of India...and laws were passed favoring Hinduism...that's fine. However ur forefathers specifically made the case of a secular India. If u guys don't want to continue in that direction then go ahead change it to a Hindu Republic...so at least ppl know what to expect while living in that country. It's this two face thing that's the issue here.

 

[halupridol]

I cannot find any news on this.

This seems like a #Fakenews or an election gimmick.

BJP does not have majority in Rajya Sabha to pass such legislation in parliament.



Well done for what? It is #Fakenews.

Ofcourse its fake news

Thts why posted in members club.
Made it up to grab eyeballs.
Just want to know pdf Indians stand on the issue.