Hindu migrants from Bangladesh must be accommodated: Modi

[rubyjackass]

India was not a Secular country right from birth because our constitution did not have this word when we became a republic in 1950. The word "Secular" has not been defined in the Constitution of India.

Just because our constitution guarantee "Freedom to practice and propagate Religion" doesn't change the nature of our society and state, which is Hindu in nature and in spirit. If a secular state like UK can have an "official church" then India can also be the home land of all Hindus.

Read something on the basic structure doctrine. If India did not have the word secular in constitution, I believe it is because the word was not that popular in usage when our constitution was framed. Otherwise you can read up on 'basic structure doctrine' to get rid of your doubt.

By the way, UK(your mention is incorrect) is not secular officially but is secular in working. India is secular officially and is actually less so in working(see how we have ground breaking ceremonies for new government buildings and opening of warships, which get justified saying Indian secularism is different and inclusive).

 

[SamantK]

If Hindus are persecuted in BD and have come to India to escape, seek asylum then maybe we should.. Same case with Pakistani and Bangladeshi Hindus, Christians, Sikhs and others..

 

[rubyjackass]

Nope. Israel is also a secular state. It just accepts what is an Universal Truth - all Jews feel safest in Israel. India is NOT a secular state either. India is a Muslim appeasing State.

Israel is not a secular state. They are the only country in the world who want every other country to recognise them as a religious state. On Shabbath day, even trains don't run in Israel. How can you call it secular?

India has always been a secular entity. For millenia it has remained tolerant. It remains true that for Hindus India will remain the natural home. That is the present reality.

For millenia, there was bloodshed along with tolerance. Please don't get cultural superiority complex. Buddhism and Jainism did not get reduced to what they are today because of tolerance. If the next lines are just some nice words then there is no problem.

If you are suggesting all Hindus should have the right to come to India, then we will have serious problems. What if people convert just to come to India? What if they don't even convert and just act? How will you test their 'Hinduness'?

 

[amitkriit]

Read something on the basic structure doctrine. If India did not have the word secular in constitution, I believe it is because the word was not that popular in usage when our constitution was framed. Otherwise you can read up on 'basic structure doctrine' to get rid of your doubt.

By the way, UK(your mention is incorrect) is not secular officially but is secular in working. India is secular officially and is actually less so in working(see how we have ground breaking ceremonies for new government buildings and opening of warships, which get justified saying Indian secularism is different and inclusive).

The word "Secularism" stems from Christianity and translates into "Separation of church and state". There is no Hindu equivalent word. This word is alien to the Indian culture, which is essentially Hindu culture. Secularism is not compatible with our way of life.

Israel is not a secular state. They are the only country in the world who want every other country to recognise them as a religious state. On Shabbath day, even trains don't run in Israel. How can you call it secular?

For millenia, there was bloodshed along with tolerance. Please don't get cultural superiority complex. Buddhism and Jainism did not get reduced to what they are today because of tolerance. If the next lines are just some nice words then there is no problem.

If you are suggesting all Hindus should have the right to come to India, then we will have serious problems. What if people convert just to come to India? What if they don't even convert and just act? How will you test their 'Hinduness'?

May be The same way as Israel tests "their" jew-ness?

India has a moral obligation towards all Hindus in the world. This obligation stems from India's written history which dates back to thousands of years. Constitution of India is just a few decades old. For most Hindus in the world India is much more than a political entity. If the constitution has to be thrown into the dust-bin in the process then so be it.

 

[rubyjackass]

The word "Secularism" stems from Christianity and translates into "Separation of church and state". There is no Hindu equivalent word. This word is alien to the Indian culture, which is essentially Hindu culture. Secularism is not compatible with our way of life.

I think you have been listening to a lot of US Republicans' speeches. Secularism did not come from Christianity. It came from sensible people and philosophers. Secularism is as compatible with us as is common-sense.

We have seen some other people say what you said, albeit with Hinduism replaced with Islam. They are called Taliban.

 

[amitkriit]

I think you have been listening to a lot of US Republicans' speeches. Secularism did not come from Christianity. It came from sensible people and philosophers. Secularism is as compatible with us as is common-sense.

We have seen some other people say what you said, albeit with Hinduism replaced with Islam. They are called Taliban.

WIKI says: The term "secularism" was first used by the British writer George Jacob Holyoake in 1851. 1851 doesn't sound like very ancient to me.

I wonder why did you not decide to compare with Israel or UK or US or Germany and chose Taliban instead. How convenient? Secularism has become a curse word because in India it is translated into "Anti-Hindu". Anything which seems like pro-Hindu makes the "secular and liberal people" go berserk.

 

[rubyjackass]

WIKI says: The term "secularism" was first used by the British writer George Jacob Holyoake in 1851. 1851 doesn't sound like very ancient to me.

I was talking about the separation of church and state which you said was equivalent of secularism. THe word secularism is new. I pointed out that this is the reason it did not get into our constitution or many others.

I wonder why did you not decide to compare with Israel or UK or US or Germany and chose Taliban instead. How convenient?

I chose Taliban as someone who would say that secularism is not in our culture because it is christian.

Secularism has become a curse word because in India it is translated into "Anti-Hindu". Anything which seems like pro-Hindu makes the "secular and liberal people" go berserk.

If someone pro-Hindu says Hindus should prosper then fine, there is no problem with it. But most solutions of 'pro-Hindu' people revolve around complaining about religious conversions and constitutional protections given to non-Hindus and demolishing standing mosques based on unproved stories. Why not improve our faith without b&t$hing about others'? And because these 'pro-Hindu' people pick up only fights against others instead of improving their religion and people, they will inevitably face resistance. And their commitment gets doubted. It is understandable why these people get impatient and call liberals as sickular and use secularism as curse word when they cannot find support in India. It is their problem.

 

[amitkriit]

I was talking about the separation of church and state which you said was equivalent of secularism. THe word secularism is new. I pointed out that this is the reason it did not get into our constitution or many others.

I chose Taliban as someone who would say that secularism is not in our culture because it is christian.

If someone pro-Hindu says Hindus should prosper then fine, there is no problem with it. But most solutions of 'pro-Hindu' people revolve around complaining about religious conversions and constitutional protections given to non-Hindus and demolishing standing mosques based on unproved stories. Why not improve our faith without b&t$hing about others'? And because these 'pro-Hindu' people pick up only fights against others instead of improving their religion and people, they will inevitably face resistance. And their commitment gets doubted. It is understandable why these people get impatient and call liberals as sickular and use secularism as curse word when they cannot find support in India. It is their problem.

1. Secularism was thrust upon the people of India by an illegitimate government. Even leaders like Ambedkar believed in "complete" partition.
2. Secularism is a foreign concept and rejecting it doesn't transform one into a militiaman.
3. Isn't it intriguing that all Hindu holy sites have mosques so closely built to the main temple structure or the mosques magically cropped up over the demolished structures? You call "it" a historical mistake, I call it "correcting the historical mistakes".
4. If we have to pick up a fight because some people do not want us to give refuge to destitute Hindus then we must pick this fight. This will be a legitimate fight.
5. It is not understandable why to the "liberals" the word "HINDU" sounds like a curse word.

 

[UKBengali]

This coming from a man who presided over the mass killings of Muslims a little over a decade ago.

 

[Aka123]

India should definitely try to accomodate them, IF they face persecution in the other countries. It might affect the economy initially but that should be taken care of.

On the other hand, India should always hold on to it's secular tag, educate people better on peaceful co existance and maintain religious harmony.

Religious/Racial intolerance and radicalization should be made a punishable offence !

 

[SarthakGanguly]

Israel is not a secular state. They are the only country in the world who want every other country to recognise them as a religious state. On Shabbath day, even trains don't run in Israel. How can you call it secular?

For millenia, there was bloodshed along with tolerance. Please don't get cultural superiority complex. Buddhism and Jainism did not get reduced to what they are today because of tolerance. If the next lines are just some nice words then there is no problem.

If you are suggesting all Hindus should have the right to come to India, then we will have serious problems. What if people convert just to come to India? What if they don't even convert and just act? How will you test their 'Hinduness'?

Not interested in testing Hinduness. That is a silly concept.
Plus I dont think being a Hindu disqualifies a non Indian person from just surviving in India as a refugee at least! This is especially ironical since pole vaulters get their citizenship cards so quickly.

If anyone feels threatened and feels safety in India because they follow a Dharmic faith, I will welcome them. We have worked to resettle Sikh Afghans and Hindu Pakistanis in the past and will continue to do so. Anyone can have issue with that. That is normal. They can take it up in court and get a 'cease and desist' order. And we will abide by the law of the land. Otherwise we shall continue. Don't take it personal bro. It is my duty as well.

 

[scholseys]

i alread like Modi

 

[IamBengali]

If Narendra Modi keeps on talking bullshits like this Bangladeshi Hindus will face more violence from extremist groups. They will say Hindus are Indians. So kick them off from this country and send them to 'their' country. Why is Narendra Modi so dumb?

 

[SarthakGanguly]

I think you have been listening to a lot of US Republicans' speeches. Secularism did not come from Christianity. It came from sensible people and philosophers. Secularism is as compatible with us as is common-sense.

We have seen some other people say what you said, albeit with Hinduism replaced with Islam. They are called Taliban.

He is not the flag bearer of the faith. I also am pretty sure he has not done any field work.
In any case, I want India to remain as secular as she has stayed for centuries (in a good way). Plus - I am all for the separation of the church/temple/mosque and the state. But that said there are gray areas. In several areas Indian culture or Hindu culture is used - like as you said for inauguration etc. If a handful of people have a problem with that, Hindus should give up their culture completely and stop being Hindus
May seem like a joke to you. But I have heard that and read that in my own hometown. What is a land of bliss for most mainlanders is a much harsher jungle for me. I don't have any illusions.

If Narendra keeps on talking bullshits like this Bangladeshi Hindus will more face violence from extremist groups. They will say Hindus are Indians. So kick them off from this country and send them to 'their' country. Why is Narendra Modi so dump?

No offence, but they have been regularly sent back to India. They or Modi don't need to do anything to be attacked by a handful of Jamaatis. They exist - that is reason enough.

1. Secularism was thrust upon the people of India by an illegitimate government. Even leaders like Ambedkar believed in "complete" partition.
2. Secularism is a foreign concept and rejecting it doesn't transform one into a militiaman.
3. Isn't it intriguing that all Hindu holy sites have mosques so closely built to the main temple structure or the mosques magically cropped up over the demolished structures? You call "it" a historical mistake, I call it "correcting the historical mistakes".
4. If we have to pick up a fight because some people do not want us to give refuge to destitute Hindus then we must pick this fight. This will be a legitimate fight.
5. It is not understandable why to the "liberals" the word "HINDU" sounds like a curse word.

No it was not. India has known the real meaning of tolerance centuries before the West coined 'Secularism'.
As for mosques over temples - there is nothing new in that. Hundreds of temple-turned mosques are mentioned by the ASI Gazette itself. Too bad they hardly upload them on the web.

 

[monitor]

What killer modi is trying is just to attract voter . we may hear a lot of this kind of talks from contesting Leader before election .