It is the ancestral land of all Indians irrespective of their religion, caste, creed or race. 
It is the ancestral home of the Hindus. All Indians are ancestral Hindus.
However, logic ends when you say it is our faith. Nobody is forcing you to go against your faith and eat beef, but when you say that all others have to follow the rules of your faith, then it is not secularism anymore, it is radicalism, it is fascism, it is fundamentalism, you may like it or not, but the mullahs also give similar logic and show similar attitude. And this attitude is the root cause of all the problems in the world.
Is it unsecular, radical, fascist, fundamentalist to ban the slaughter of tigers? How about lions? How about the black buck? What about elephants? Big animals, lots of meat to go around? Why not peacocks? Heard from some that the meat is pretty delish.
As Hindus, we have little cuase to protect these animals. Yet we do, for a variety of reasons. And you are branding us fascists for also wanting to protect the one animal we hold sacred? Of course we will protect it. This is not a personal right thing. Your personal right to eat something ends when it infringes on my sensibilities and sentiments. And I will ask through my elected leaders to legislate accordingly. As we have. This ban has come out via due process - legislative, executive, and judicial. Why are you complaining? Do you see anything illegal here?
With your stand, you lose all moral rights to condemn any such fundamentalism anywhere in the world. Surprisingly, right wing Hindus are most critical about the Islamic fundamentalism. Ask yourself, did you ever criticized them for breaking ancient sculptures, or for going after their minorities, etc.? Because you should not.
Please define how I am "going after my minorities"? Am I starving them? Am I killing them? Am I shooting, burning or blowing them up? They have broken our ancient sculptures. On our land. We have not touched theirs. Yet.
Btw, even with your religious justification, you are being unjustified to include bulls & bullocks in the banned list.
The bull has always been revered since Harappan times. The bull has always had an important place in ancient aryan mythology. The bull is also the father if the cow is the mother. We cannot have mothers if you keep eating our fathers. And those bulls we castrate, were not born that way. If we make them that way, and then use the same as an excuse to eat them, that is simply not ethical. We make them that way to control them, to make them tamer, to make them bigger. To selectively breed in many cases, as only those bulls with desirable traits are put to duties of covering the cows.
The buffalo was always the vehicle of Yama and the Asuras/Rakshasas. So there is nothing serious we have there. Milch or not.
Dogs and cats are not raised in large numbers like cattle, their numbers are far far less than cattle. Dogs & cats are small animals, they consume negligible resources compared to cattle, mostly human leftovers, unlike cattle. Dogs are killed by govt. in cities, and dogs kill cats, and they both get killed since birth on streets. Cattle are large animals with far better survival rate, it will be a problem. In fact, it is already a problem.
Dogs and cats breed indiscriminately. Cattle do not. A dog litter comprises of 5-6 pups. A cow gives birth to a single calf more often than not (average litter size 1.13 to 1.34).
The gestation period of a dog is only around 60 days. The gestation period of a cow is 285 days.
The average life expectancy of a dog is 12-14 years. The average life expectancy of a cow is around 15 years.
Dogs are rarely killed anmore thanks to Blue Crossm SPCA and PETA guys. They are neutered and let out again.
That's the same thing we do with bulls to bullocks.
As I said there are always ways. But the primary thing remains. There can be no place for the slaughter of cows on a Hindu land. Period. Everything else (my debating with you, rebutting you point for point, for example) is purely academic and secondary.
Sure, human beings are very adjustable, that's how they survived for so long, if not anything else, then they can beg and survive. But, why should they face such hardship and uncertainty for the sake of your faith, that too in a country which is not theocratic, at least not yet?
They do not need to beg to survive. They can study and work. Being a butcher is not the only profession in the world. Widen your horizons, your perspectives, and see that there are different ways to make a living. With free education provided by the government. And a meal as well at mid day. But for that you need to go to school first. Not scratch you balls with your friends all day .....
In short, everybody else must adjust, sacrifice and suffer for the sake of your faith. Would you do the same for others, say Jains? Oh, it's a Hindu (majority) nation, right? Fine, tell me how would you feel, how would you react if every other nation outside the borders of India, probably barring Nepal, force Hindus to live strictly as per their religious rules, and bans Hindu religious practices, and restrict Hindus' food preferences? It will be a tough world if everybody wants to have their way on others.
Bossy, here you lost the plot. Where am I banning anything of someone else's faith?
Is eating cows a art of the Muslim or Christian faith?
Please understand just because something is not taboo or disallowed, does not automatically make it divinely decreed and part of your faith.
Every land has its own rules, and those who choose to live there, as citizens, or visitors, must follow them.
This is our land. These are our rules.
Period.
.... just a carved stone slab.
What was purely a religious issue handled with a political agenda, has now become an issue of "Saving lives" and "Protecting all animals" with ample sugarcoating, mixed with a big dose of emotional dramatics claiming 'victim-hood' and 'sacrifice' in the last line! Really clever.
