dray
BANNED
- Joined
- Apr 8, 2013
- Messages
- 10,853
- Reaction score
- -1
- Country
- Location
I agree with ur logic.
not standing up for national anthem (in movie theater) is way more grave a crime than rapes, arson , lootings etc.
The true sense of patriotism, that the author is trying to emphasize does not rest in mere symbolism but essentially in what one believes and practices in one's daily life. The article is correct, in my opinion in a sense that majority of those who are gravely razed and offended by someone not standing up for national anthem may not feel the same about gender inequality,poverty, poor educational standards, corruptions, caste discrimination or pathetically lack of environmental cleanliness which need far more greater attention by the Indian society today.
I think, you are trying in vein to convince a set of 'patriots' who believe it is more necessary to thrash someone for not standing up during national anthem, but not those who openly spits or leaves a lady for being molested in a public place to fight her battle alone.
The point is, how many times those who thrashed the family in the theater have done the same when they saw someone taking bribe or urinating on road? We will be wrong if we think that the writer feels the other way if someone does not stand up during the anthem; but what she wants to make us realize that people who ignore much more graver issues in their day to day life must not feel so razed about an offence that is not even punishable by law.
Normally the discussions could have been about whether the actions of those people or that couple was right or not. But since we are discussing a different angle of the whole issue, let me ask you if there is anything to suggest that those set of people wouldn't have reacted similarly or more vehemently against the social ills that you have mentioned, if not, then how do you assume that they won't?