Triple Talaq bill passed by Parliament

[Chhatrapati]

For others, they can just dump their wives like our very own Prime minister. Infact they vastly outnumber the triple talaaq victims..

Abandoned women vastly outnumber victims of Triple Talaq; it's time Modi spoke up for them

Source: https://www.business-standard.com/a...me-modi-spoke-up-for-them-116121300251_1.html

Modi's wife earns her living, afaik she is a pensioner and a former school teacher and Modi left her after he was married as a Child, and the marriage was never consummated if any one of them went to court, the marriage get annulled.

So muslims are seen as votebank by Congress, Are muslim women not part of muslim community which is supposedly a vote bank for congress? Anyways for your info, muslim women who are divorced do get alimony in the form of Meher along with maintenance of women during iddat period.

Yeah, and how long is it? It is not until she remarries. And Meher is given at the time of Marriage, and how it becomes Alimony? And it is not decided by court, rather a bunch of people without authority of government.

A minuscule percentage of talaaqs are done instantly while majority of them follow a process of iddat period of 3 months with multiple meetings for reconciliation. Women can also take divorce in a similar way and is called khula.

Where is the proof for that? Is there a survey on number of Tripple Talaqs done? Then please provide them.

Pampering of muslims by political parties??? LOL they are so pampered that they languish at the bottom of development indices in India while the poor discriminated hindus disproportionately occupy almost all positions of power be it Police, Politics, Armed Forces, Bureaucracy etc

A lot of communities in Hindus lives in poverty. That's not the issue here, tell me are you denying there was no appeasement to Muslims by congress? Their own internal commission report debunk your claim.

 

[fitpOsitive]

One important step towards UCC. Now please ban polygamy and Nikah Halala also

Nikah e halala is already haram in Islam too.

 

[The_Showstopper]

Modi's wife earns her living, afaik she is a pensioner and a former school teacher and Modi left her after he was married as a Child, and the marriage was never consummated.

Modi's wife earns a living because she is forced to and has no other option. Instant triple talaaq victims are also forced to earn a living when they stop getting support from their husband. Modi was 18 when he got married to Yashodaben. LOL That doesn't look like child marriage. How can you claim that they never consummated their marriage?

"According to Jashodaben's accounting, she and Modi were married when they were 17 and 18 due to an arrangement between their parents. They were a couple for three years before separating, with Modi reportedly going to travel the Himalayas, and never coming back."

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...odi-keep-his-wife-secret-for-almost-50-years/

Yeah, and how long is it? It is not until she remarries. And Meher is given at the time of Marriage, and how it becomes Alimony? And it is not decided by court, rather a bunch of people without authority of government.

Meher can be given anytime, not just at the time of marriage. As I said that they also get alimony during the iddat period. Government appointed Qazis decide the sum to be paid as alimony and it has to be given as a condition for talaaq.

Where is the proof for that? Is there a survey on number of Tripple Talaqs done? Then please provide them.

Read the previous link provided by me, it does mention the data and its sources.

A lot of communities in Hindus lives in poverty. That's not the issue here, tell me are you denying there was no appeasement to Muslims by congress? Their own internal commission report debunk your claim.

Some hindu communities do live in poverty but overall hindus are in way better position than muslims are. So tell me the logic behind muslims remaining backward economically and socially while being appeased by successive governments since last 5 decades?

Nikah e halala is already haram in Islam too.

Indian Hindus should get rid of Niyoga where women are forced to sleep with Babas for children.

https://hindi.speakingtree.in/allslides/meaning-and-conditions-for-niyoga/264815

Why I wrote a novel about a baba raping a young woman
‘My husband was impotent, he sexually abused me. Then, my in-laws took me to a guruji...’

https://www.dailyo.in/voices/asaram...tation-of-women-fake-babas/story/1/23724.html

 

[user1]

Regardless of all the discussions, let me say that Quran does not allow triple talaq. This law needs to be implemented in Pakistan too.

 

[Soumitra]

Nikah e halala is already haram in Islam too.

So is Triple Talaq. The pre-conditions for polygamy are also strict but still all these are carried out. We need a strict law

 

[The_Showstopper]

There is no discrimination. In other communities, divorce is given via courts. Here, just saying talak talak talak makes men believe that they are free now. Divorces were being given on whatsapp for godsakes.

How about abandoned Hindu women, they are left in a limbo without been able to marry again or move on. Anything coming up for them?

Abandoned women vastly outnumber victims of Triple Talaq; it's time Modi spoke up for them

Source: https://www.business-standard.com/a...me-modi-spoke-up-for-them-116121300251_1.html

Congress is saying that its a civil matter then why jail? Well guess what, dowry is also a civil matter. Calling someone from less fortunate community by his/her caste is also a civil matter. All 3 of these are social ills and all 3 will have criminal punishment.
now they are saying that muslim men are being singled out.

Dowry is criminal offence because women have to face physical and mental abuse in lieu of money. Going by your logic, even practices like Sati, Niyoga etc are also civil matter, No?

Can u tell me an instance where hindu, christian or sikh gave triple talakh?
Yes there are cases where husbands abandon their wives, but the wives go to the court and get alimony and other benefits. Did muslim women had these rights? Men would simply claim that this is divorce as per Islam!

Hindus don't have to give 3T, they just have to dump their women and go to Himalayas like our PM LOL. How many women have gone to court for alimony and got them?
BJP government should infact work on getting rid of many social evils like Temple prostitution aka Devadasi system which clearly still exist even now...

Devadasi system still exists in Telangana, AP, says report

Read more at:
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/...ofinterest&utm_medium=text&utm_campaign=cppst

 

[Chhatrapati]

Modi's wife earns a living because she is forced to and has no other option. Instant triple talaaq victims are also forced to earn a living when they stop getting support from their husband. Modi was 18 when he got married to Yashodaben. LOL That doesn't look like child marriage. How can you claim that they never consummated their marriage?

"According to Jashodaben's accounting, she and Modi were married when they were 17 and 18 due to an arrangement between their parents. They were a couple for three years before separating, with Modi reportedly going to travel the Himalayas, and never coming back."

Source: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news...odi-keep-his-wife-secret-for-almost-50-years/

She never spoke to Washington post and no, both Modi and Jashodaben was not legal age to get married it is considered a Child Marriage. She never acknowledged both lived together for 3 years LOL! By her own accounts in interview with TOI she said, when she went to Modi's house
"I had quit studies once I went to his place and remember him saying he wanted me to pursue my education. He would mostly talk to me about completing my education…
He told me once that “I will be travelling across the country and will go as and where I please; what will you do following me?” When I came to Vadnagar to live with his family, he told me “why did you come to your in-laws’ house when you are still so young, you must instead focus on pursuing your studies”

Meher can be given anytime, not just at the time of marriage. As I said that they also get alimony during the iddat period. Government appointed Qazis decide the sum to be paid as alimony and it has to be given as a condition for talaaq.

Iddat period is just 3 months and Meher is certainly not given at the time of divorce. And in most cases as part of divorce deals, the Meher is taken back by husbands family. You sell it as if Meher is a parting gift. LOL!
That's why the Supreme court put a verdict to extend the Alimony after iddat period. There is no provision if the husband deny alimony in that case. That's upto the legislature to create the law.

Read the previous link provided by me, it does mention the data and its sources.

There is no data over the cases of tripple talaq. Your own links says, next time try to read up your sources before getting excited.

Some hindu communities do live in poverty but overall hindus are in way better position than muslims are. So tell me the logic behind muslims remaining backward economically and socially while being appeased by successive governments since last 5 decades?

It is not the fault of others which made the Muslim only seen as a vote bank and they vote based on it and yet remained SEBC.
Antony commission report clearly outlined why they lost because of appeasement politics. Even in W.Bengal, Muslim leaders asked the Mamta government to stop the appeasement politics.

Back to topic, if it wasn't appeasement then why Congress annulled Supreme court judgment on Shah bano case with a legislation.

 

[The_Showstopper]

She never spoke to Washington post and no, both Modi and Jashodaben was not legal age to get married it is considered a Child Marriage. She never acknowledged both lived together for 3 years LOL! By her own accounts in interview with TOI she said, when she went to Modi's house
"I had quit studies once I went to his place and remember him saying he wanted me to pursue my education. He would mostly talk to me about completing my education…
He told me once that “I will be travelling across the country and will go as and where I please; what will you do following me?” When I came to Vadnagar to live with his family, he told me “why did you come to your in-laws’ house when you are still so young, you must instead focus on pursuing your studies”

Marrying at the age of 18 years is considered "Child marriage"?? Whether it is legal age or not is a different matter, Marriage at 18 is not considered Child marriage by any means. Try harder. Infact 18 is a legal age for marriage in many countries. LOL you supposedly post an excerpt from TOI but don't mention the link to the source.

Iddat period is just 3 months and Meher is certainly not given at the time of divorce. And in most cases as part of divorce deals, the Meher is taken back by husbands family. You sell it as if Meher is a parting gift. LOL!
That's why the Supreme court put a verdict to extend the Alimony after iddat period. There is no provision if the husband deny alimony in that case. That's upto the legislature to create the law.

Meher is certainly not given at the time of divorce??? You speak as if you have intimate details about when the Meher is given? As I said previously there is no hard and fast rule. Show me instances of when Meher is taken back by Husband's family during Talaaq proceedings. Did the Legislature create any law for alimony in this bill?

There is no data over the cases of tripple talaq. Your own links says, next time try to read up your sources before getting excited.

The source clearly states

Abandoned women vastly outnumber victims of Triple Talaq; it's time Modi spoke up for them

Source: https://www.business-standard.com/a...me-modi-spoke-up-for-them-116121300251_1.html

If it doesn't state any particular number, then obviously it only implies that cases of instant 3T are minuscule when compared to number of women being abandoned.

It is not the fault of others which made the Muslim only seen as a vote bank and they vote based on it and yet remained SEBC.
Antony commission report clearly outlined why they lost because of appeasement politics. Even in W.Bengal, Muslim leaders asked the Mamta government to stop the appeasement politics.

I am eager to see the statement or excerpt where this "Antony commission" claims that muslims are SEBC because of appeasement politics.

Back to topic, if it wasn't appeasement then why Congress annulled Supreme court judgment on Shah bano case with a legislation.

That could termed as "not interfering into a personal law of a religious community" as promised in Constitution. Can the enactment of anti-Cow slaughter law termed as appeasement of Hindus?

 

[Adam_Khan]

The contentious bill to ban 'Triple Talaq', which failed the the Rajya Sabha test last time, sailed through the opposition-dominated upper house today aided by a series of walkouts and abstentions. The bill, which sought to end the practice of Muslim men instantly divorcing their wives by uttering "talaq" thrice, saw stiff opposition when it was presented in the Lok Sabha. But several of the parties that opposed it - including Nitish Kumar's Janata Dal United, AIADMK and K Chandrashekar Rao's Telangana Rashtra Samithi -- ended up aiding the bill's passage.

While the AIADMK and Nitish Kumar's party walked out, the Telangana Rashtra Samithi and Mehbooba Mufti's PDP abstained from voting, bringing down the majority mark.

A number of opposition lawmakers also gave the vote a miss. The list of absentees included Sharad Pawar and Praful Patel of the NCP, five lawmakers from the Congress, six from the Samajwadi Party, four from Mayawati's Bahujan Samaj Party, two from Trinamool Congress, and one each from Lalu Yadav's Rashtruya Janata Dal and MK Stalin's DMK.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi, after the bill was passed in Rajya Sabha, tweeted that it was a victory of gender justice.

"An archaic and medieval practice has finally been confined to the dustbin of history! Parliament abolishes Triple Talaq and corrects a historical wrong done to Muslim women. This is a victory of gender justice and will further equality in society. India rejoices today!" PM Modi tweeted.

The bill was passed, with 99 votes in its favour and 84 against. Law minister Ravi Shankar Prasad, who tabled the bill, said, "Today is a historic day. Both the Houses have given justice to the Muslim women. This is the beginning of a transforming India".

The smooth passage of a second contentious bill within a week marked a change in the government's fortunes in the upper house, where it lacks numbers.


Last week, the controversial amendment to the landmark Right to Information Act also made it through the upper house, with the help of non-aligned parties that give issue-based support -- the TRS, Naveen Patnaik's Biju Janata Dal and the YSR Congress of Jaganmohan Reddy.

The TRS and Biju Janata Dal, which were opposing the bill, changed their mind after calls from Prime Minister Narendra Modi and BJP chief Amit Shah.

Last evening, PM Modi had dialled Nitish Kumar to discuss the flood situation in Bihar. Despite being a BJP ally, Mr Kumar's Janata Dal United has made no secret of its opposition to the Triple Talaq bill. During its passage in the Lok Sabha last week, the party said the proposed law will "create a lack of trust in society".

AIADMK lawmaker Navneet Krishna told NDTV: "We walked out of Rajya Sabha because the government did not accept our demand to send the Triple Talaq Bill to a Select Committee... We believe that parliament does not have the legislative competency to make such a law. It will not withstand judicial scrutiny."

The opposition parties had demanded that the bill be sent to a select committee for further deliberation and scrutiny. They were against the provision for a three-year jail term for erring husbands and claimed that the proposed law will be misused to victimise Muslims.

The government maintained that the Triple Talaq bill was a step towards ensuring gender equality and justice and that the opposition parties were politicising the issue.

https://www.ndtv.com/india-news/bil...-sabha-in-big-win-for-modi-government-2077719

Well done India,better late then never.

 

[Soumitra]

That could termed as "not interfering into a personal law of a religious community" as promised in Constitution. Can the enactment of anti-Cow slaughter law termed as appeasement of Hindus?

Wow, a totally opposite interpretation of the Constitution of India.

Article 44 in The Constitution Of India
44. Uniform civil code for the citizens The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India

Basically means that Laws should NOT be based on personal laws. There should be same laws for everyone irrespective of religion.

The definition of secularism is that the state shall not discriminate or favor any person on basis of religion. Article 44 is one of the most secular article in the constitution yet the so-called "secular" parties do not want to implement it while so-called "communal" BJP is all for it.

Article 48 in The Constitution of India
48. Organisation of agriculture and animal husbandry The State shall endeavour to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle

The constitution actually favors anti cow slaughter laws.

BTW did you know that most of the anti cow slaughter laws were passed by the congress govts but they did not bother to implement them. The BJP has made these laws stricter and is implementing them more thoroughly.

 

[Chhatrapati]

Marrying at the age of 18 years is considered "Child marriage"?? Whether it is legal age or not is a different matter, Marriage at 18 is not considered Child marriage by any means. Try harder. Infact 18 is a legal age for marriage in many countries. LOL you supposedly post an excerpt from TOI but don't mention the link to the source.

Go read the law genius. Rather than being an ignoramus. Men cannot marry under 21 and females not under 18. If such a marriage happen, it's Child marriage.

Meher is certainly not given at the time of divorce??? You speak as if you have intimate details about when the Meher is given? As I said previously there is no hard and fast rule. Show me instances of when Meher is taken back by Husband's family during Talaaq proceedings. Did the Legislature create any law for alimony in this bill?

LOL! Dude, I live among them, I most certainly know and it looks like i know better than you. Yes, Mehr is certainly not a parting gift, and in many cases Meher is returned once divorce happen. Where I live, Meher is mostly given in the form of gold. Anyway, for your information, since you seem to be in denial.
"Noor Mohammed does not want his daughter, Kaisar Jahan, 20, to sue for divorce for fear of losing the gifts he gave her when she married. This is because of a belief that, by asking for a separation, a woman fore goes her claims." Link

The source clearly states

Abandoned women vastly outnumber victims of Triple Talaq; it's time Modi spoke up for them

Source: https://www.business-standard.com/a...me-modi-spoke-up-for-them-116121300251_1.html

If it doesn't state any particular number, then obviously it only implies that cases of instant 3T are minuscule when compared to number of women being abandoned.

We are not talking about other communities. This thread and topic specifically talks about Muslim women. And 3T only affects Muslim women, later the government will bring uniform civil code and there will be strong laws over marriage registration, alimony, punishment for non payment etc... One step at a time.

I am eager to see the statement or excerpt where this "Antony commission" claims that muslims are SEBC because of appeasement politics.

haha now do you have comprehension issues? antony commission make no such claims, he claims they lost because they appeased Muslims too much. It doesn't mention anything about uplift, which was a question I asked you, why you couldn't use it your advantage. Government is not denying Muslims anything, they have the right to education, ration etc... but hey guess what, Muslim women are the lowest educated groups the chances of educated Muslim women going for a job is low compared to others. Is it because government holding them off or because their husband/parents or guardians not letting them. If Muslims still remain SEBC despite favorable conditions it's their own fault. Government can introduce these types of small steps for their upliftment and empowerment. And Mullahs living in 7th century can go to a country where having 4 wifes and 3T them is legal, but there aren't many.

That could termed as "not interfering into a personal law of a religious community" as promised in Constitution. Can the enactment of anti-Cow slaughter law termed as appeasement of Hindus?

Supreme court time and time again have clarified it has the right to decide over religious matters when there is a conflict with the constitution and it can interfere in Muslim personal law, Muslim or any community personal law is not above constitution of India.

Coming to cow slaughter ban, no it is not appeasement. It wasn't even an issue when the laws were enacted. On the contrary previous governments went soft over the ban, and only recently these laws are strictly being followed. Remember the furor when Yogi government banned illegal abattoirs. And yes, I guess this government is doing it for the appeasement, which is bad but hey it's karma.

 

[fitpOsitive]

So is Triple Talaq. The pre-conditions for polygamy are also strict but still all these are carried out. We need a strict law

Triple talaq is not haram, but in scriptures, it is seen as bad. So overall, a good and Islamic move by a Hindu govt. Albeit, polygamy is still negotiable.

 

[The_Showstopper]

Wow, a totally opposite interpretation of the Constitution of India.

Article 44 in The Constitution Of India
44. Uniform civil code for the citizens The State shall endeavour to secure for the citizens a uniform civil code throughout the territory of India

Basically means that Laws should NOT be based on personal laws. There should be same laws for everyone irrespective of religion.

The definition of secularism is that the state shall not discriminate or favor any person on basis of religion. Article 44 is one of the most secular article in the constitution yet the so-called "secular" parties do not want to implement it while so-called "communal" BJP is all for it.

The constitution states "The State shall endeavour", I hope you understand what endeavor means. I am sure that you are aware that all religions in India have separate personal laws. The communal BJP wants to implement Hindu laws in the name of Uniform Civil code.

Article 48 in The Constitution of India

48. Organisation of agriculture and animal husbandry The State shall endeavour to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle

The constitution actually favors anti cow slaughter laws.

BTW did you know that most of the anti cow slaughter laws were passed by the congress govts but they did not bother to implement them. The BJP has made these laws stricter and is implementing them more thoroughly.

As I said previously, cow slaughter ban was brought in to appease Hindus, and irrespective of whether its included in the constitution or not, no real secular country does that to appease one particular religion.

 

[The_Showstopper]

Go read the law genius. Rather than being an ignoramus. Men cannot marry under 21 and females not under 18. If such a marriage happen, it's Child marriage.

Stop being a dolt. I knew it all the way that you will come up with this excuse of "Legal age", hence I stated in my previous post
"Whether it is legal age or not is a different matter, Marriage at 18 is not considered Child marriage by any means."
and added
"Infact 18 is a legal age for marriage in many countries"

I advise you to work on your comprehension skills before blurting.

LOL! Dude, I live among them, I most certainly know and it looks like i know better than you. Yes, Mehr is certainly not a parting gift, and in many cases Meher is returned once divorce happen. Where I live, Meher is mostly given in the form of gold. Anyway, for your information, since you seem to be in denial.
"Noor Mohammed does not want his daughter, Kaisar Jahan, 20, to sue for divorce for fear of losing the gifts he gave her when she married. This is because of a belief that, by asking for a separation, a woman fore goes her claims." Link

You live among them, I am ONE OF THEM.You know nothing and just trying to sound wise while displaying your ignorance. Meher is not returned when Talaaq happens, Meher is returned only if a Khula takes place. So dear, read and understand things if you are capable enough or you may chose to remain silent and save time for both of us.

We are not talking about other communities. This thread and topic specifically talks about Muslim women. And 3T only affects Muslim women, later the government will bring uniform civil code and there will be strong laws over marriage registration, alimony, punishment for non payment etc... One step at a time.

India isn't composed of just muslim women. There should be priorities. If a certain section suffers more and are in huge number, Government should give priority to that particular section's sufferings instead of tinkering around with low priority tasks.

haha now do you have comprehension issues? antony commission make no such claims, he claims they lost because they appeased Muslims too much. It doesn't mention anything about uplift, which was a question I asked you, why you couldn't use it your advantage. Government is not denying Muslims anything, they have the right to education, ration etc... but hey guess what, Muslim women are the lowest educated groups the chances of educated Muslim women going for a job is low compared to others. Is it because government holding them off or because their husband/parents or guardians not letting them. If Muslims still remain SEBC despite favorable conditions it's their own fault. Government can introduce these types of small steps for their upliftment and empowerment. And Mullahs living in 7th century can go to a country where having 4 wifes and 3T them is legal, but there aren't many.

LOL You claimed in your initial post the following

"Antony commission report clearly outlined why they lost because of appeasement politics."

So, it not me, its you who's having comprehension issues.

I can use your arguments albeit with a different community. Read the below paragraph

"Government is also not denying anything to Tribals and other backward castes but hey guess what, their women are the least educated and they dont even have access to the most basic thing aka proper sanitation, what do you think could be the reason behind this? Is it because government is holding them off or because their husband/parents or guardians not letting them? If Tribals and Dalits still remain SEBC despite favorable conditions and affirmative actions, it's their own fault." No

The Hindutva loons from 5000 BC should look within and start prioritizing and getting rid of their social evils rather than throwing muck at others.

Supreme court time and time again have clarified it has the right to decide over religious matters when there is a conflict with the constitution and it can interfere in Muslim personal law, Muslim or any community personal law is not above constitution of India.

Of Course, Supreme Court is indeed Supreme. I am referring to BJP and its hindutva cohorts.

Coming to cow slaughter ban, no it is not appeasement. It wasn't even an issue when the laws were enacted. On the contrary previous governments went soft over the ban, and only recently these laws are strictly being followed. Remember the furor when Yogi government banned illegal abattoirs. And yes, I guess this government is doing it for the appeasement, which is bad but hey it's karma.

It indeed is appeasement, it was a sentimental issue when the laws were being enacted. Just read about discussions and debates surrounding the Cow slaughter act before it got included. Though the constitution through its Directive Principles of State Policy prohibit the slaughter of cow while stating economic reasons but the intention to ban the Cow slaughter was religious. The economic reasons were stated to make the law look religion-neutral in the constitution. Congress brought this act to appease the Hindus. Infact the first ever attack on Parliament was done by Hindu extremists demanding a law banning cow slaughter across the country.

Source: https://scroll.in/article/814368/di...e-in-1966-and-was-carried-out-by-gau-rakshaks

 

[Chhatrapati]

Marrying at the age of 18 years is considered "Child marriage"?? Whether it is legal age or not is a different matter, Marriage at 18 is not considered Child marriage by any means. Try harder. Infact 18 is a legal age for marriage in many countries. LOL you supposedly post an excerpt from TOI but don't mention the link to the source.

In many countries marrying 13 yo girls is legal too. But we are talking about laws in India, don't deflect. Being ignorant about laws is not my problem.
Internet is fast, if you're not living under a rock, be free to check it.

Meher is certainly not given at the time of divorce??? You speak as if you have intimate details about when the Meher is given? As I said previously there is no hard and fast rule. Show me instances of when Meher is taken back by Husband's family during Talaaq proceedings. Did the Legislature create any law for alimony in this bill?

haha, so tell me what is a meher according to you? Parting gift?
And I posted the link, it clearly states wifes family was asked to give everything back during the divorce. Just wait for uniform civil code dear, soon marrying 4-5 women be illegal too.

The source clearly states

Abandoned women vastly outnumber victims of Triple Talaq; it's time Modi spoke up for them

Source: https://www.business-standard.com/a...me-modi-spoke-up-for-them-116121300251_1.html

If it doesn't state any particular number, then obviously it only implies that cases of instant 3T are minuscule when compared to number of women being abandoned.


I am eager to see the statement or excerpt where this "Antony commission" claims that muslims are SEBC because of appeasement politics.


That could termed as "not interfering into a personal law of a religious community" as promised in Constitution. Can the enactment of anti-Cow slaughter law termed as appeasement of Hindus?

Going back to whataboutery I see.

It doesn't matter if it's miniscule, hey there already have been 3 cases for instant tripple talaq, with cases registered so it's not that miniscule.

I don't why you keep asking this report, a simple google search will give you all the details. I am not going to spoon feed you, look it up. And might as well as remember the "temple run" of Rahul in the following state elections which was trying to win back Hindu votes. And congress leader Gulam Nabi Azad lamenting why congress leaders don't invite him for campaigns anymore.
Again, not gonna spoon feed you the information.

I hope now you figure out why muslims are still in SEBC, it's not that government stops them from getting educated, but a section in your community thinks educating/working women is bad.


What do you think it could be? Cow slaughter was banned because the congress where Sangh back then? I'll answer after I hear your point of view.