[Reader-list] India on a list of countries which have failed to protect its religious minorities adequately

[Murali V]

"You are one of those who state that it's wrong for Manmohan to say that
> Muslims have the first right on the resources of the country. He didn't say
> that others don't have a right too"

Oh yes the left overs is it....

" The Haj subsidies are supposedly within the Constitutional" please
enlighten me on this please.

"Post-Godhra violence was wrong and
 unjustifiable, howsoever Godhra as a crime may be?"

Why the post Godhra Violence is an affirmative statement, while the
Godhra incident is luke warm.

The law should be the law of the land and no religious bias should
come in. And please dont call it for heaven sake secularism.

Muslims or for that matter anybody will be on an equal footing
provided that there is no classification.

Regards,
V Murali

On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Rakesh Iyer<rakesh.rnbdj at gmail.com> wrote:
> Well Rajen ji
>
> Good points. But what is this rule of law? You people yourself contest and
> start asking for a Uniform Civil Code, thereby stating that the current laws
> are inadequate or incorrect to satisfy the current situation, and hence such
> a code is required. So also for POTA.
>
> And as for the implementation, most of the minority appeasement acts are not
> against the Constitution of India, whether it be the Sachar Committee Report
> or the demand for reconstruction of the Babri Masjid. Therefore, what
> exactly do you want?
>
> You are one of those who state that it's wrong for Manmohan to say that
> Muslims have the first right on the resources of the country. He didn't say
> that others don't have a right too. But you seem to think that statement
> does mean that. What do you want about those kind of statements, can you
> tell? And anyways, how does that statement correlate with functioning on the
> ground?
>
> The Haj subsidies are supposedly within the Constitutional directives and
> ideas. Do you support that, or do you oppose that? And why?
>
> Do you support the point that post-Godhra violence was wrong and
> unjustifiable, howsoever Godhra as a crime may be?
>
> You are good at misusing questions to avoid answers. My simple question is
> this: what should be the value system upon which the Indian law and
> Constitution must be based and what should be the Indian judiciary's values
> as well while giving their judgements: Hindutva? Secularism? Islam?
> Hinduism? Something else........
>
> Which rule of law should prevail: Hindutva rule of Law/Indian Penal
> Code/Shariat/Something else? And where would Muslims be placed as a section
> of the society in any such rule of law which you are talking about?
>
> As for "brownie points", I have learnt that from you. So you are my guru in
> that, I wholeheartedly acknowledge. Congrats for that, guruji. I would never
> be able to keep up with you in this, I agree.
>
> Regards
>
> Rakesh
>