1)Stick to that constitution is for the people,by the people.If people don't want a constitutional change in majority it will happen, it is only a piece of paper not written in stone.or divine word of god.It is what the americans believe as such and seek to impose their views on every other democracy, if constitution doesn't give rights to what majority wants,what is the use of such rules?
What will supreme court do if they are impeached by people?The supreme court had jury system before it was changed to single judge system after Admiral Nanavati case.
Majority can, many a times, be wrong. It is exactly why the framework of constitution cannot be changed unless it is agreed upon by the legislature and the judiciary, finally getting a green light from the President of India.
The example of Nanavati case is irrelevant here. Contrary to your argument, the majority of the people supported Nanavati and yet, when the courts found that the jury had been misled, they overturned the not-guilty verdict and finally the Supreme court upheld the guilty verdict. After this the jury system was abolished in India. Btw, that was NOT a change in the Constitution of India.
When the government can change the court system surely we can bring back jury system where majority works.
Nope. The supreme court will not allow that, and neither will the President of India. You need to understand that the three branches of the government of India (executive, legislature and the judiciary) work independently of each other, a means of keep in check the powers. Any changes, and all three have to agree.
2)That is what you think,BJP made caste politics irrelevant this time,Dalits and everyone forgot caste barriers and voted for bjp as hindu block not due to secularism.
Secular block people still voted for secular parties and they retained their voter percentage from last elections, the biggest swing was new 7 crore hindus who joined hindutva camp this time.
again BS. The major issue in the elections was governance and economic development. Of course, some idiots voted on the basis of caste, but the majority voted for economic development. Else you would have seen many regional caste based parties win numerous seats. That didnt happen.
3)BJP manifesto clearly said they will aborgate article 370,Build ram mandir,Uniform civil code along with development, even congress promised development and secularism, why didn't people vote for them?There you see the word became so unbearable to hear it died its death, now they have another word coming called "Pluralism" It too will die the same way.
BS. Did you read and understand the BJP manifesto? Either you are really gullible believing BS being sprouted by vested interests or you are maliciously misleading general public ignorant of the true manifesto.
Btw, Congress didnt have a spectacular track record of development, compare and contrast that with Modi's track record. Period. People saw that, not some stupid (hidden or otherwise) Hindu agenda.
Bharat was always tolerant, but this brand of western notion of secularism is not needed.
You do not understand what secularism really means. Fortunately, this is enshrined in the Constitution of India, and cannot be changed unless all three branches of the government agree to the amendment, with the final approval of the President of India. Also, for whatever idiotic comments this Oswani dude makes, as obnoxious and stupid as they may be, it is his viewpoint guaranteed & protected by the Constitution's Freedom of speech and expression. Deal with it, whether you like it or not. You try to take law into your own hands, you will be punished. Simple as that.