How about compensation for the loss of food?
Two things: See for yourself where it isn't just the cow, and cow slaughter. It's also a universal code.
When we put it together, what emerges?
When we want, we are OK with different laws in different states. But we want uniformity of laws in all states on another issue.
When we want, we tell one section of our population that they can't obey their dietary laws, but need to modify it to avoid hurting people's feelings. Nothing like subsidising or making tax-free alternatives, like cheaper chicken or mutton; it's just as easy as passing a law to prevent cow-slaughter.
We want uniformity in other areas, like the UCC; there we don't want differential applications, but right now, we don't mind using personal laws to save taxes filing as Hindu Undivided Families.
We want our temples back; the article quotes the author as having gone to the sites of some, and finding that nobody remembered the desecration or was even bothered. So who is keen on getting these re-built?
This humble arsehole would like to get these anomalies clarified, if possible.
There is a tendency for the rough right to concentrate on one issue at a time. That is fine, but the rules change, always in one direction. On one issue, it's fine, don't slaughter cows in the cow-belt. On another issue, we can't have exceptions made for one community; don't look at us, this is not about us, it's about you beardos without moustaches, wearing pajamas around your shins, with skullcaps on.
So what do we want? Just kick them in the knick-knacks until they say,'Please don't kick in the knick-knacks'?
