What's new

Political Test: Where do you stand?

. . .
Oh please compared to me you're nothing; just ask @Ayush how many Biharis did it take to be skewered at my weekend BBQs for the term 'Bihari Kebab' to be forever associated with my name ! :whistle:

:woot: what?? @Dillinger m sure @BDforever would come to our rescue if something like this happens..:)

and it took 113 kg of flab for ur name buttstrong to be associated with bihari kebab..:oops:
 
Last edited by a moderator:
. . . . .
i did not talk about pluralism, I just replied to the conditions that you put on religious paradigm that is acceptable to be associated with a state.. issue is that criteria is never going to be fullfilled....
Even if we get a perfect religion, which respects other religion, due to nature of democratically elected govt in a state, and because it is basically a human endeavour, there will be always bias.
We still possess tribal nature, we like to group together as one tribe and act against others.

Am not specifically talking about religion only, state should not be influenced by anything where we have more than one choice and state claims to treat all of them equally.

Applies to specific tribe, caste etc too.

But that is true for everything ! Any paradigm that you consider even if it be secular to the point of being completely devoid of any objective morality or values or ethics that can be remotely associated with religions; the limitations of the human experience are going to be there.

And we deal with such choices every single day for any paradigm, purely from an academic point of view, is just that 'a paradigm' ! The fact that people may associate 'divinity' or 'regression' with it is inconsequential in determining what it or isn't principally; therefore what logically follows is that if a citizen of the State should have the 'right' to put forth any legal paradigm whether it be the Swiss Civil Code or the English Civil Law as a viable legal paradigm to be institutionalized subject to certain conditions then any citizen should also have the right to table a resolution that talks about institutionalizing any other legal paradigm even if its origins are in 'religion' - Let the democratic process be the touch stone to determine what does or does not become institutionalized.

Furthermore both equality & the criterion I mentioned earlier are 'qualified' & that is the case even in the most Secular & the most Pluralistic of Societies out there for that is the very nature of things.
 
. . . . . . .

Latest posts

Back
Top Bottom