Appease Unabashedly

The honorable(?) Home minister of India has come out with a new logic in an unabashed manner as to appease one particular community! Stooping to such a low level by the rulers just to please one religion, demonstrate the hypocritical functioning of the secular practices in this country.

Mr. Patil’s argument is, “If we are demanding the release of Sarabjeet Singh, how can we talk of hanging Afzal Guru!” Mr. Patil went on to add, “We can’t blame a community based on single incident”

Perhaps, one has to remind Mr. Patil that the cases of Afazal & Sarabjeet are not similar to draw a parallel. Afzal Guru is a convicted criminal who tried to blow away the Indian Parliament House that resulted in loss of lives of handful of policemen and other officials. Afzal Guru was tried and the Supreme Court of India had sentenced him the capital punishment.

The story of Sarabjeet is different. It is a case of mistaken identity and Sarabjeet has already undergone many a mental torture that he might not even wish to live again!Afzal is not a Pakistani and in no way they have to co-relate Afzal's issue with Srabjit. By saying so,
Hypothetically speaking, Even if the Pakistan took a stand of doing a barter (Afzal for Sarabjeet), Mr. Patil should have shown guts to proceed with the hanging of Afzal. This would have exposed the Pakistan of their proxy war against India. Also this would have proved us wrong whenever Mr. Patil made a comment that we can’t tolerate terrorism!

Can we release a terrorist like Afzal Guru and put crores of Indians at risk for the sake of saving one single citizen of India? If you are convinced in taking such a stand, what moral ethics do you have to blame the BJP for exchanging terrorists for innocent passengers?

Alas! We must be idiots to expect these from a minister who is loyal to the first family. Our beloved Prime Minister’s sleep gets disturbed when a man from a particular community is questioned for a crime occurred but is comfortable to sleep when hundreds of fellow Indians are massacred by terrorists belong to that particular community.

Mr. Patil should understand that all Muslims do not indulge in terrorism but all terrorist activities in India are initiated by Muslims. Mr. Patil, this is not the first incident to conceive an impression but this is happening repeatedly and you are sitting on every issue like a duck doing nothing.

Appeasement has never yielded results be it Ramayana or Mahabharata. Demons are demons and they understand only one language war! Wage a war against terrorism Mr. Patil. We are not asking you to wage a war on Muslims but on terrorism. Unless we start seeing the terrorists as terrorists and not as a person of particular community, we will keep on appeasing them at the cost of the country!

Irresponsibility is the name of Media

Nothing is impossible. This is pretty true when it pertains to the affairs of Indian politics. The happenings around persuade one to be more obsessed with the affairs of Indian politics.

Not long ago, I shared a joke in Sulekha-jokes column when two friends talk among themselves; one says that he would like to be the Prime Minister of India. The other guy shockingly asks, “Are you crazy?” for which the first one replies, “Why? Is that necessary?”

I never thought that this joke mentioned in a lighter vein would become a reality. Last evening, as I surf the TV channels, I found out an interesting SMS survey by a news channel asking Whether Mayawati will be the first Dalit Prime Minister of India?

At the outset, I am confused on the question itself. Since when onwards, we have started classifying the premier posts on the basis of castes? As far as I knew, I never came across a Prime Minister who was given a tag like Brahmin Prime Minister or so. Why the prefix of Dalit is to be added? Is being a Dalit is the prime qualification to be the Prime Minister irrespective of the fact whether they deserve this post or not? I thought PM post is a responsibility to lead a country and not a caste.

I am not questioning the capability of Mayawati per se for this post but I am against the tag of “Dalit” being added to the Prime Minister post. Even if she becomes one, will she be the PM for Dalits only and not for India.

The best lesson we learnt from the history is none has learnt a lesson from the history. Mr. K R Narayanan was insulted (or I would say so) when his nomination for the post of Premier was justified on the basis of his caste and not by his qualifications.

We were taught in our schools that British adapted “Divide and Rule” to spoil our country. I beg to differ. To be precise, the opposite of this is true. India was politically united only when British ruled us. How could have British or Moguls ruled us if we were united? Even when the British left us, we needed a Sardar Patel to unite 300-odd princely states to name a country called India.

We boasted “Unity in Diversity” but the emphasis was much on the diversity and not on the unity. Politicians took enough care that we, the Indians remained divided in the name of caste, region, religion, language etc., The media, which is supposed to correct the errors of the ruling parties are behaving hand-in-glove to all of their activities.

All I could say is, “Irresponsibility – thy name is Media”. Please try to shed this tag before you give superfluous tags to all others.

Indian politicians are notorious for their priorities or the lack of it whenever they respond to an issue. Dr. Anbumani (Ramdoss – this is his father’s name) is not exception. It is a well known fact that Ramdoss’s family is jealous of the charisma that Rajini has and the clout he has over the Tamilnadu people.

As the saying goes, “aatirakkaranukku buddi mattu” (angry man has no mind), Ramdoss perceives that the Rajini style (throwing cigarette and catching) is the reason for his popularity. If he brings a ban on smoking on cigarette he can curtail the popularity of Rajini. If he thought so, we can only pity him.

The entire Tamilnadu knew how Ramdoss came to limelight. His organization was labeled as “kaadu vetti katchi” (forest cutting party) as they used to fell down trees all over the highways of Tamilnadu and block the traffic just to highlight their issue. Now these environmentalists want to ban smoke on screen. If you really want to ban something on movies, then ban those almost-nude song & dance sequences

I am at fail to ascertain how to react to this. If Mr.Anbuman is so keen about the healthy conditions of India, he should have expressed his concern when medication to measles led to the death of four innocent lives in Tamilnadu.

Can Mr. Anbumani ask all the cigarette manufacturers to close their unit and the beedi units functioning in India because it causes ill-health?
Can Mr. Anbumani bring a ban on all liquor manufacturing units all over India?
Why doesn’t Mr. Anubmani do something to the smokes spitted by the Government run buses when inhaled causes more damage to lungs than a cigarette?

Mr. Anbumani, if you are really concerned about the healthy conditions of India, please do the following:

• Make a rule that all the doctors (fresh and experienced) should spend 3 years of their career service in primary health centers of Indian villages. (this includes you Mr. Anbumani)
• This practice should be renewed every 20 years.
• The license to practice should be ceased whenever a doctor defaults this.
• Stop playing politics with the Deans of Medical colleges
• Stop the malpractices in drug-handling at all govt run hospitals.
• Improve the condition of Govt hospitals.
• Construct public-convenience structures all over India.
• Stop Indians from defecating in public.

We thank your for our mis-perception that educated lots when enter politics will do good for us. You have proved us wrong.

The only consolation is even Bush, the most unpopular President of USA also behaves this way by his stupid comments on the recent price rise globally attributing to India.

Politicians are the same all over the globe.

What's wrong with that?

“What’s wrong in it?” – It is this simple question that was asked in the Parliament of India exposes the audacity of our politicians, the unabashed manner in which they perform the atrocities, flexing the muscles of the public sector and Government norms in the name of coalition, and above all it proves that our politicians are indeed worried about their personal interests than the interest of the nation. One wonders whether someone answered him or not for this question.

It all started with the 7 letters that were sent from the PMO questioning why the task (read favor) is not accomplished to Petroleum Ministry. Mr T R Baalu was hell-bent behind this task being accomplished. One might wonder, why Mr. Baalu, whose ministry is irrelevant to this is taking such a care, however as the saying goes, Blood is thicker than water, it is the parental care in Mr. Baalu had driven him to go for a overkill in this issue.

He is maneuvering the systems as to get cheaper gas for King Power Corporation and King Chemicals both are run by his sons. The worst part in this is one company does not exist at all while one is declared as a sick unit by BIFR. While the market rate is around $16 per mBtu, Mr. Baalu wants this gas to be supplied at $2 per mBtu to these companies.

ONGC and GAIL are in the picture and Mr. Baalu is flexing all his muscles to get the gas at such a rock-bottom price for his sons’ companies. For this, he has written to our Prime Minister many times (read threatened) and also paid visits to Mr Deora’s office. He had summoned Chairmen of both the companies and directed to work out a way as to supply the gas at cheaper rate.

The gas supply agreement was made when DMK was a part of coalition govt run by BJP and the agreement was made only with King Chemicals. The company, however, delayed getting transport contract and the agreement date elapsed. The company went to High Court of Madras reinstating gas link that went in company’s favor. Fearing a cut in the supply of gas (as to provide these companies), APM gas consumers approached the court that said the issue be resolved by Petroleum ministry. While BJP was blamed for taking revenge in cutting the gas-link, the papers showed that it is difficult to restore the link to a defaulter. As to supply gas at cheaper rate they worked on options that said, “Introduce a pro-rata cut on all consumers in that area” for which the ministry opposed. The other option was to relocate the power plant.

All these incidents indicate how the politicians in our country play with the systems. The rich is becoming richer at the cost of tax payers’ money. If the gas is to be supplied to the minister’s son at 8 times lower the market price and give them a business advantage, how to compensate the loss of the company? Why the tax-payer has to bear the burden for the mis-handling of affairs by these green-eyed monsters?

Adding insult to injury is the words Mr. Baalu uttered in the parliament. He said, “These shareholders (of King Chemicals) asked me to do something about them. A BIFR company has to be saved by the management. Accordingly, I put a word to my friend, the Petroleum Minister. What is wrong with that?”

Why can’t Mr. Baalu ask these shareholders to buy the gas at market price and do business on ethical standards?
Why can’t he simply tell the shareholders to resolve the issue with Ministry of Petroleum without involving much into it?
Will Mr. Baalu involve himself so personally if whoever goes to him with a problem?

Such incidents expose why the politicians do not want the public sector companies to be made public. They can’t get favors extended to them as they wanted even if it meant a loss to the company. They are interested in filling their pockets and draining the country out.

The irony is such scoundrels are ruling us and we are tolerating it. We claim we are the largest democracy but we could not remove such ministers from the cabinet despite knowing the fact that they are doing wrong at the cost of nation’s interest. There is nothing wrong with these politicians. The wrong lies with us, we do not protest, we elect such people, and we keep allowing such things happen. Mr. Baalu, I have an answer for your question, “We, the people of India are wrong”. You guys mint money as long as we are wrong!

United States of India?

As a daily routine, I peeled off the top layer in my daily calendar indicating that one more day has gone in 2008. “We are progressing towards future” – Perhaps, this is what one is supposed to think while doing this act. However, the news that flashed in the newspaper column makes one worry as it brought a worse feel of déjà vu.

The lawyers of Maharashtra had submitted a petition demanding that judges from other states should not be transferred to their state.

What is happening to India? The Eurpoean countries have formed a union and also have a common currency among them. The globe is shrinking to the size of the ball, courtesy, advanced technology and broad-mindedness among the people and their understandings. We, boasting ourselves as a sub-continent, claiming Unity-in-Diversity, keep ourselves dividing on the base of religion, region, caste and creed? Where are we heading to?

I, still, could not understand what they mean by this submission. They maintain that proper justice is not being made. What has justice to do with language? I simply cannot digest such news at all. At the outset, such petitions should be rejected in outright manner and should not be encouraged in future.

One can understand such gimmicks being played by the politicians but lawyers? They are supposed to be educated or learned ones. If law-makers have such attitude, what shall we expect from them in future? It is unfortunate that most of the law students aspiring a career in politics rather than in the judicial arena.

History makes it clear that Indians can never be united as every one of them is plagued by the disease EGO. EGO is nothing but Edging God Out of oneself. This is not understood by us despite the fact that India gives birth to the most successful spiritual leaders of the world. Courtesy, British, we were politically united and they were intelligent enough not to compartmentalize ourselves on the basis of languages.

It was the idea of the so-called learned men of India under the leadership of Mr. JM Nehru, our country is divided on the basis of languages. He was black-mailed by the fast unto death by Potti Sriramulu, who wanted a separate state for Telugu speaking Indians. That was the time; Mr. Annadurai demanded a separate country for Tamils.

Now, we are facing the repercussions for this deed. People are not ready to share water, resources and now it has come down to sharing of people also. We are not Indians but we are Maharashtrians, Biharis, Gujjus, Tamils, Kannadigas. We have already isolated our north-eastern states from the mainstream by such activities only. Now this has spread into all states.

Those who aspire a career in politics could not find a noble cause but such sensational issues and are hell-bent in dividing the country. The basic reason – we did not have a link language among us. We accept English a foreign language but are not ready to accept Hindi as our national language and politics is made out of this.

We do not see Indians in our brethren but their region. No longer the Pledge of the country is recited in schools where we claim, “All Indians are my brothers and sisters” The learned have no time to concentrate on such issues and the illiterate has nothing to lose in this. So, the scoundrels (read politicians) have started to divide our country as everyone of them want to rule a place even if it is a small one.

It is no longer the Republic of India but divided States of India.

Dont discard the punching bag

The sudden love and affection towards the Marathi Manoos knows no bounds. If the elections are around the corner, one does not even know what are they speaking or demanding. If it was the Chatt pooja in the month of February, it is the turn of reservation for employment. Raj Thackrey has demanded 80% reservation in employment for Marathis in private firms of Maharashtra.

Some suggestions to Raj Thackrey if he feels he is running out of issues for this upcoming election:

• Why Marathis have to work for others (read bow head to others)? All those non-Maharashtrians who are running a firm in Maharashtra has to sell out them to MNS at the rate MNS decides.
• The non-Maharashtrian river Tapti will be blocked and not be allowed to flow inside the state.
• The rivers Godavari and Krishna will not be allowed to flow into other states even if Maharashtra is drowned by its floods.
• Non-Marathis cannot buy any property in Maharashtra.
• Products produced in Maharashtra will not be sold to non-Marathis
• Non-Marathi trains will not be allowed to run through Maharashtra

Imagine Mr. Raj, all these things happen, what will be the status of Maharashtra? Are these things possible? Why have you demanded reservation only in employment? Why not in entrepreneurship? Are Marathis not good entrepreneurs? Can’t they run a firm? Do you want Marathis to be workers all the time? If all the non-Marathi entrepreneurs vacate the land and move out of the state, what will be the status of your state? How would you balance the immediate debacle? Did you ever think of this?

It is my money, my investment. I know how to produce and how to sell? All I have to do is to abide by the rules of India. However, to employ whom in my firm is my sole consent. If I have to make money, I will give importance to meritocracy because I need not cheat people in the name of religion, region or caste.

Imagine what all mentioned here happens, what will happen then? Whom will you blame for any debacle that happens? If you tax, you will be taxing Marathis, for whom you are shedding tears now? Can you run a government without taking tax from Marathis? Mr. Raj, you need a punching bag that needs to be punched often (even if it happens to be a dummy act) that would keep you alive in the politics arena. If you drive them out, your political career will be doomed. So, don’t go overboard or do a over-kill of this issue.

Enough is enough! The world is shrinking to size of a ball and you filthy politicians are trying to create a division among people in the name of religion, region and caste. Shame on you! Stop such cheap tactics. Just brainstorm with your colleagues on how to bring back Maharashtra to the top rank in industrialization. Votes will follow you!

Gods of Modern Days

The most scintillating news since last evening is the proposed “privilege motion” by our Rajya Sabha MP on a “glorified driver” of an aircraft. While there is not dearth of issues in our country that needs to be debated and discussed in our Parliament, I fail to understand why should we waste the tax payers’ money in discussing such issues that is caused by ego-clash between two persons?

The story is more popular than our epics by now. The MP was asked to alight from the flight he was supposed to travel because he came late. The MP did so but not before creating a scene and when he got down he explicitly told the public that he is not ordinary man and his powers will be demonstrated as to teach a lesson for those who stick to their guns in terms of duty and not obliging politicians – self-calimed-Gods!

There are versions of stories told in this episode. One says the pilot summoned the airport manager and the other says MP took him to the flight. The MP waiting for the delayed air-craft decided to take revenge on the same by delaying to board the flight despite getting the boarding pass for the same. When he was refused, his ego hurt him and he behaved in the usual manner our parliamentarians are notorious for. He barged into the cockpit, abused, and coined a new name for pilots – “glorified driver”. If we have to buy the argument that the MP took the airport manager, then this is because he wanted to display his strength by garnering people with him and force the pilot.

• Had he taken the boarding pass well on time, why then he delayed to board the flight? – Did he want to teach the Pilot to wait because the MP waited for long?
• Does not the MP know that if he had availed the boarding pass, he should own the responsibility of keeping the track of flight and enter as to avoid unnecessary security agonies?
• Does not the MP own a responsibility not to delay the flight further from his part?
• Would MP have allowed the flight to wait if a common man delayed to board the flight (due to the traffic jam created by his political brethren)?
• If a pilot is a glorified driver then what is he – a representative, self-glorified servant?
  

The MP is a rich person and all the party needs his support. He is from a minority group that gives him a special status. He owned a Satellite Channel that was a mouthpiece of CPM. When his nomination was questioned (stating him as an NRI), those seasoned politicians were silenced and all of us knew that is because he had all the powers – money, channel on his side.

These had made him to behave so. He thinks that he is above everything because he is an MP who can flex muscles with politicians. If he thinks that he is privileged, are the citizens of India under-privileged? It is a fact that the politicians think that they are above law and they can get away with anything.

Such things will continue until we develop a system of accountability for these representatives. The tax payers’ money is wasted and they do not gather and discuss important issues that can do a world of good to our country. A leader is supposed to lead by example. Alas! One should be an idiot to expect such qualities from the present day leaders of India.

Wrong Precedent

At last, the long pending activity of the present Government was accomplished. It was the most important activity that the entire nation was waiting for to be happened. You guessed it right, I am mentioning about the cabinet reshuffle.

Though this has brought some surprises, the worrying part is the wrong precedent set by the choice of minister - the inclusion of Mr. MS Gill in the cabinet. Not long ago, Mr. Gill was occupying the chair that is a Constitutional authority.

While the faith of the common public on democracy, Parliament, its elected members were fading out, the faith on this constitutional authority was established among the public courtesy, the efforts taken and the path shown by T N Seshan. Whether his successors were as good as him was not known, but they did not bring any disrepute to this authority with their act. Mr Gill, having delivered his services from that chair, if joins a political party, then it obviously raises many an eyebrows.

How can a judge, who gave a judgment to one particular case, fight for the accused in the same case in another court? Mr. Gill is precisely doing so or he is being asked to do so. That is why I am saying this is a wrong precedent.

What favor Mr. Gill had extended to oldest party of our country (that has no dearth of leaders), that he was rewarded him with this cabinet post? The Government owes an answer to the public for this question. If all these officers who are supposed to work for the public, join some party at later date means there is every potential of this officer behaving partial at some point of time or other during his tenure. Will someone throw light in this regard?

Another aspect is the surprise part. The entire India is surprised (?) by the news that Rahul Gandhi, the heir apparent is not included in the cabinet. It was told that Rahul wished to serve the party rather than being a part of the Government. What a sacrifice?

All of us knew that sooner or later, Rahul will be made the No.1 of the country’s oldest party that was turned into a family-run firm long back. With only places available for sycophants, what else one can expect from this party? Young blood were given chances – read it dynastic politics is being encouraged – Scindia, Jitin prasada. The real surprise is leaving out Sachin Pilot – son of Rajesh Pilot.

All the media expressed shock on Rahul not being included. How can you expect Rahul to settle for a cabinet rank while he has every right to be the PM of the country? With elections due in the recent future, Rahul would like to play safe. If something goes wrong, he can always claim he was not a part of it and if he were there he would not have allowed that to happen (déjà vu of Babri Masjid?). If at all Congress comes back, he can always become the PM and why should malign the name by becoming a Cabinet minister pre-matured manner?

"Secularism" - As it called in India

“Secularism” is the much discussed topic in India. I would wonder what it actually meant and what it meant. The Oxford Dictionary says, “Se-Kyu-lar” that means beyond religion or that is not bound by any religion. We can also say that secularism is an Antonym of Spirituality. This means it is something similar to Atheism.

Is it practiced in India with this meaning? I wonder whether any Indian had tried to understand the real meaning of Secularism. Is India a secular State? It was not; till the Emergency Days. It was, Courtesy, Indira Gandhi’s autocratic style of functioning, this phrase was thrust into the Preamble of the Indian Constitution.

Whether one likes it or not, it has become our practice to draw parallels with US practices. When an atheist parent from California objected to his kid reciting the Pledge of Allegiance, The US Supreme Court ducked it stating that the plaintiff lacked the standing to file such a case at the outset.

The US Supreme Court had ruled this case stating that phrase “under God” would remain in the Pledge of Allegiance. They also state that US is not a secular country (means a country that believes in religion and it wanted to set itself apart from the Godless Communists). In the forth coming Presidential elections, both the candidates refuse to claim themselves as secular. One is a devout Catholic and the other is born-again Christian with links to Evangelical sects.

See what happened in India? The Supreme Court had ruled that the students of Jehovah’s witnesses need not sing our National Anthem as they feel that Jana Gana Mana deifies their Motherland. The elected representatives of a particular community object to sing the “Vande Mataram” as their religion does not believe doing so. What an irony?

In India, anti-Hindu stance has become a pre-requisite to get a certificate of Secular credentials from the so-called educationists or the media. If 50 odd Hindus are burnt alive in a train bogie, none would make a noise but a reaction to the incident will be discussed, debated and trials after trials will be conducted for years to prove their secular credentials. Why can’t these personnel do the same to the Kashmiri Pundits who were met with a similar fate? These are rhetorical questions that remained unanswered all these days.

Let’s buy the argument that secular means equal to all religion, then why do we have different laws for different communities? Why can’t we have a uniform civil code? Why don’t some citizens sing our National Anthem?

Jainism, Buddhism and Sikhism are all a part of Hindu religion. In fact, Buddha is considered as one of the incarnations (Avatar) of Lord Sri Vishnu. But in India, they are declared as separate religion and are treated as minorities. Why? This is called as vote-bank secularism. By this principle one good day, we will have religion called Shirdi Sai religion, Puttaparthi Sai religion, Melmaravathur religion, etc., there is no dearth of spiritual leaders in Hinduism. Every one has choice to choose their leaders and follow their principles. It does not mean that they have formed a new religion.

How they are wooed by declaring themselves as minority? The sops given by the Govt. Only in India the majority is given a step-mother treatment. All political parties turn a blind eye to infiltration from Bangladesh. Why to make noise. They are the future vote-bank who would vote for the seculars.

Being a Hindu itself is a proof of secular to the core. Secular means not to be bound by a religion’s law. In Hinduism there is no law. There are no compulsions on the number of times one has to pray or the number of times to visit their worship spot. The success of its spiritual leaders and their principles adapted in modern management is a proof to this.

A party can join hands with Muslim League and issue fatwa on whom to vote and call itself Secular but a party speaks for Hindus is labeled as communal. Even the Election commission believes so. When Janta Dal had a split, the group that opposed BJP has got a name Secular Janta Dal. Can Mr. Lyngdoh explain on what basis this name was suggested? What does he try to imply to the people of India by christening the party so? This is the irony.

When a Moulvi was murdered in Kanyakumari 10 years back all of the secular leaders blamed the RSS and gave certificate of terrorism to Hindus. They did not mumble a word when later it was found that his own son killed him. Same is the case with Ishrat whose links to the terrorist groups are clear but all secular parties fought with each other and gave certificates of her innocence. What do they have to say now?

Media has grown multiple folds. All of them want to be in limelight. So they choose this easy stupid path of fake secularism.

Pope John Paul II had said that these seculars had made Sundays as entertainment days whereas this is for only Praying. Imagine how our media would have reacted had the same statement was made by our Sankaracharyas?

The reason is we are tolerant to the core. We are religious. We neither love our religion nor hate others. Other religions teach you to hate other religion than loving yours. They believe in conversion and say that your God will be pleased if you indulge in conversion. We read this, see such atrocities but still remain silent speak high of morals switch off the TV or switch channels to watch half-naked girls smooching.

The Govt banned Rushdie’s book “The Satanic verses of Quran” but published the book of Ambedkar wherein he cheaply criticized Shri Ram and Sita. What happened to the freedom of speech then?

Thank God these people have not labeled Gandhi as communal because he said, “Hey Ram” when he died. They are doing business on his name so they would not do so.

Why India need a Uniform Civil Code?

What does our Constitution say about this? In article 44, our constitution clearly specifies this: "The State shall endeavor to secure the citizen a uniform civil code through out the territory of India".

The need: The objective of this article is to effect an integration of India by bringing all communities into a common platform which is at present governed by personal laws which do not form the essence of any religion.

French said, Liberty Equality and Fraternity. In India none of us practice fraternity however none enjoys liberty and equality also.

The constitution is very clear that unless a uniform civil code is followed, integration cannot be imbibed. However, the so called secularists and saviors of secularism in India think otherwise. They say that this code will affect the religious freedom of minorities (here again they speak only of minorities -read Muslims and Christians).

This code does not say Muslims have to offer namaz at temples or conduct their nikkah in Hindus style. All this says is there should be a uniform civil code irrespective of all religions as far as social ethics are concerned.

Even the Hindu laws that were different in different parts of the country had a turbulent change courtesy geographically united India and Hindus accepted it. Almost all of the laws of Manusmriti are extinct in now a day’s system of living and we accepted it. When Child marriages were banned, Sati was banned, widow re-marriage was encouraged, and Hindus accepted it considering the change in time and took it in their stride. They never yelled or hit the roof stating that these laws were against their religion.

One accepts that in Arab countries you face "Loo" or heat wave or sand storm that should damage the soft skins of ladies and hence they were forced to wear burkha. Why in India? All the so-called social activists and women emancipators cried shame on Sati and child marriages but none had the guts to say that wearing burkha is a sin against women. Is this the equality you show to women?

Polygamy is allowed in Islam and sterilization is a taboo. Because their Sheriat say so! The rate of population growth of Muslims since 1947 is 165%. The day they outnumber Hindus even by one number, they would not hesitate to declare our country a sovereign of Islam. You may never enjoy Deepavali again nor any Hindu festivals.

Why they coolly forget that their Sheriat has strict rules for criminal laws. Here they would stick to Indian Constitution appealing court after court, seeking bail after bail instead of getting whipped in public or stoned to death. Why? Because these laws suits them?

TalaQ – This is another pain in the neck. By saying this thrice, they can get rid of their wives without providing any maintenance etc., they can argue they have stringent rules to follow talaq and dulu (wife divorcing husband) but is it followed.

Conical speakers are banned by pollution control board but till date no mosque has got rid of these conical speakers? Why? What action has been taken so far? Hindus have to do archanai in Tamil as the Gods in Tamilnadu understands only Tamil but Muslims need not to do so in Tamil as even Tamil Muslims understands Arabic and so their Allah of Tamilnadu Is that so? Secularism in India means Appease minorities at the cost of majorities' privileges.

Once again it is reiterated that this code is not biased to one religion but to bring in a level playing platform among the citizens of India.

Till 1935, the Muslims in India never had a common Sheriat for them but had followed different rules according to their practice. Khoja Muslims and Kutchi Memons are examples for this. As said earlier, the kutchi memons worshipped Hindu Gods and Ali is their tenth avatar instead of Kalki. They had the inheritance laws as per Hindus and also the marriage laws as per Hindus.

All these minorities had to accept the Sheriat laws. Then the sentiments of the minorities (among Muslims) were not respected why?

The reason for citing more reasons pertaining to Muslims are because the major opposition comes from them only. They claim that this law is poking nose into their religious practices. Let us look in this way, “Narabali” that is considered religious in Hindu practices is banned today. Shall we claim that the laws are poking their nose in Hindu religious practices and start doing this?

There are too many Muslim countries prevail in this world that follows sheriat laws. In that case, why the laws differ from one country to another?

On 23rd Nov’1948, in Parliament, a Muslim member gave an open challenge that India will never be the same if it tried to bring in Uniform Civil code and interfere with Muslim personal law. It’s a shame that we could not do anything on this till date!

Much was debated on this issue during 1948 in the Indian Parliament by Ambedkar, Anantasayam Iyengar, KM Munshiji, Alladi Krishnaswamy Iyer favoring UCC and all Muslims opposing it.

Even the inheritance laws, divorce laws and marriage laws cannot be defined by the religion. Unfortunately, in our country all our activities are bound by religion. Our politicians have flamed this by playing vote politics. This code is not against minorities but against the discrepancies. How this code is given a religious color? Let’s look into this.

The Congress which demands Supreme Court ruling in Ramjanmabhoomi issue had misused or abused the Parliament in changing the laws after Supreme Court favored otherwise in the notorious Shah bano case.

If a minority institution wants to start a school, they can get exemption from Govt and have reservations for their religion whereas Hindus do not have that privilege. They have to pay hefty taxes and have to follow Govt reservation rules and not special admission for Hindus. Now one state government wants to have reservations for Muslims separately.

If Muslims wished to visit Mecca, (Hajj pilgrimage) our Govt bears the cost and allow them to go on subsidized rates whereas if a Hindu has to go to Kashi or other pilgrimages no concession for him on the tickets he travel. Irony is repealing of law that those who travel abroad for Hajj were made to pay income tax by previous Government. Worse is the case that one wishes to visit Amaranth, we have to visit on the mercy of Muslims.

Courtesy, these discriminations, there is a vertical divide among the public of India based on their religions. It’s the blunder committed by previous Governments. By bringing this code, neither the majority public wins over the minorities nor are the minorities in danger. Unless this prejudice is erased, bringing this law is difficult.

The so called leaders of the country owes responsibility to explain this to public and a frequent and elaborate debate has to be held on this topic (which will never happen as this is against secularism?). Then only the minorities will get convinced on bringing this law. But for BJP (nowadays even BJP is not) no political party is in favor of this code.

Muslims in other countries accept uniform civil laws where they do not consider this as a defeat whereas in India it is. This is the service rendered by congressmen, other secular parties and our great media. It is a shame and pity that in a democratic and secular state people have different laws based on their religion. Is it secular to have different laws for different religion or it is secular to have a uniform law?

To make this debate on UCC healthy, Hindus should not treat this as a weapon against minorities and minorities should not feel that they are lost by bringing this law. Whether this can be possible or not, only time will tell us.