Nawaz 'not too happy' over India visit

[Bang Galore]

Please make yourself clear whether you are discussing secular state or secularism in general. Refer to your previous comments.

Secularism is a state attribute, individuals can merely be tolerant & liberal, not secular. Believing in secularism is not the same as being secular which would imply that you both value (as an individual) all religions equally(thereby having to deal with contradicting & conflicting claims) while also at the same time valuing atheism equally..... (see why it can't be done....?)

(the European meaning signifying separation of religion from state can only be a state attribute, not that of an individual)

 

[Pandora]

That's silly. What makes him an extremist Hindu? In any case, that would still be irrelevant even if he was. The character of the state does not change because of an individual's views.

Violence against muslims spiked after his election. His government alliance includes extremist parties such as RSS. He started his career through RSS. You would be surprised by the changes under his tenure. He is the PM of India what does that tell you about character of your state.

 

[Bang Galore]

Violence against muslims spiked after his election. His government alliance includes extremist parties such as RSS. He started his career through RSS. You would be surprised by the changes under his tenure. He is the PM of India what does that tell you about character of your state.

No spike, one case is not a spike and in any case, law & order is a state subject. Violence between communities has been happening long before Modi arrived on the scene or was even born. Being in the RSS signifies nothing by itself.

The beauty of India is that the character of the state is not dependent on whether the individual is an atheist(as Nehru was) or is a believer(as others were). It is dependent only on the constitution which doesn't change, no matter who occupies the post of PM.

 

[Pandora]

Secularism is a state attribute, individuals can merely be tolerant & liberal, not secular. Believing in secularism is not the same as being secular which would imply that you both value (as an individual) all religions equally(thereby having to deal with contradicting & conflicting claims) while also at the same time valuing atheism equally..... (see why it can't be done....?)

(the European meaning signifying separation of religion from state can only be a state attribute, not that of an individual)

I only replied to your claim that Hindus and Christians are secular yet you are contradicting your statement here. If secularism doesnt choose between religions then how can a single religion be secular. (Your first comment)

 

[Bang Galore]

I only replied to your claim that Hindus and Christians are secular yet you are contradicting your statement here. If secularism doesnt choose between religions then how can a single religion be secular. (Your first comment)

My claim? Where? No contradiction, been saying this for as long as I can remember. The notion that anyone following a religion can be secular is just plain silly. Can be tolerant, yes but secular? Not possible.

 

[Pandora]

No spike, one case is not a spike and in any case, law & order is a state subject. Violence between communities has been happening long before Modi arrived on the scene or was even born. Being in the RSS signifies nothing by itself.

The beauty of India is that the character of the state is not dependent on whether the individual is an atheist(as Nehru was) or is a believer(as others were). It is dependent only on the constitution which doesn't change, no matter who occupies the post of PM.

He was the CM of Gujarat when Muslims were slaughtered. Did he play his role to prosecute even a single murderer? Where was the law and constitution. Did even a single person get prosecuted to date? Law is useless if not same for all. He just sworn in so i don't want to speculate on his future endeavours but his track record ain't that good.

My claim? Where? No contradiction, been saying this for as long as I can remember. The notion that anyone following a religion can be secular is just plain silly. Can be tolerant, yes but secular? Not possible.

You did say it see below

If there is a secularism in India it is because of Hindus .Because they are the majority here.If some one in our religion have an extreme mindset then it is because extreme minority appeasement due to Congress.
Except Turkey ( at least for a certain extent) Can you name any other secular Muslim majority nation?
Christians are secular .Western countries already showed that.So what about you religion?
Sorry for offtopic.I am just asking.

Anyways that was what i was trying to prove so peace.

 

[Bang Galore]

He was the CM of Gujarat when Muslims were slaughtered. Did he play his role to prosecute even a single murderer? Where was the law and constitution. Did even a single person get prosecuted to date? Law is useless if not same for all. He just sworn in so i don't want to speculate on his future endeavours but his track record ain't that good.

That is actually good proof to prove you wrong. dozens have been convicted & sent to jail, including a former minister. Assuming Modi was not supportive, it proves the system works regardless of the individual in office.

You did say it see below

Anyways that was what i was trying to prove so peace.

Err....since when did i become @sreekumar

 

[Pandora]

That is actually good proof to prove you wrong. dozens have been convicted & sent to jail, including a former minister. Assuming Modi was not supportive, it proves the system works regardless of the individual in office.




Err....since when did i become @sreekumar

OPs mixed all those comments up. My mistake

 

[SrNair]

When you are secular then you are clearly not religious and just fooling yourself by calling yourself religious as secularism clearly follows atheism. Just my opinion.

Islamic ideology negates secularism but that doesn't mean it promotes Extremism. Only a sect of muslims mostly Deobandi/Wahabi promotes an extreme form of islam. Many people won't like this but extremism has nothing to with islamic teachings. Before 9/11 there was no such thing as extremist muslim so it is just a matter of bad image projection.

America is a secular state yet they probably killed more people in the last decade than in entire last century. This secular state also has a record of nuking a nation. Germany is a secular state yet they were the main reason behind two world wars and also wiped out most of the jews from Europe. British and French claimed to be secular but during their colonization they killed God knows how many people.

Being Secular does not guarantee being peaceful and being religious doesn't mean being an extremist. It is as simple as that.

According to our constitution all religions have equal rights.
But political parties used it for votebank politics and that is where all this problem starts.Congress talked a lot about minority protection ,in the end they didnt do anything for minorities and become a communal party that play with divisive politics.Congress ruled India only for democracy ,but didnt take serious measures for prosperity of India.

You are right.But what about the life condition of West countries and its human rights in their own country.It seems you are also from Britian .What about that country?May they have official religion unlike India,But they can give justice to their minorities ,something that cant even imagine in Saudi Arabia or any other Muslim majority nation.May we cant ensure complete justice to our minorities but at least they have some hope in India.But I dont see such a thing in Muslim majority nation.
Hinduism is not an official religion in India yet they can provide secularism to their country .No other country cant do that.