True face of the lady who tried to enter Sabarimala Temple

[uttermost]

1 minute ago, batman2 said:

but as per current law, temples are under govt control while mosques and churches are not.

why ante? because its hindus who have to be secular while non hindus need not be, onous of secularism is on hindus. majority of hindus are ignorant fools who dont take much pride in their religion and cultural heritage though some of it is slowly changing and there is soem awakening in ppl due to the efforts of rss/bjp. however there is a propoganda to malign bjp/rss and the hindus are such ignorant fools taht they fall for such propoganda

its not about secularism.. lol.

hindus discriminated in their temples, whereas others did not. don't pretend like you don't know this.

otherwise no temple would've been taken off Hindu hands.

[chittimallu2]

2 minutes ago, batman2 said:

but as per current law, temples are under govt control while mosques and churches are not.

why ante? because its hindus who have to be secular while non hindus need not be, onous of secularism is on hindus. majority of hindus are ignorant fools who dont take much pride in their religion and cultural heritage though some of it is slowly changing and there is soem awakening in ppl due to the efforts of rss/bjp. however there is a propoganda to malign bjp/rss and the hindus are such ignorant fools taht they fall for such propoganda

naku antha political and bureaucratic  knowledge ledu so I cant comment...

If that is really true when why is it so? why only temples are under govt control and not others? @uttermost

[uttermost]

Just now, chittimallu2 said:

But it is a place of faith and belief... its not a museum or govt school building... 

which means, it has to be taken back by those who believe from the hands of the govt.

that's the only solution to this mess.

[chittimallu2]

1 minute ago, uttermost said:

its not about secularism.. lol.

hindus discriminated in their temples, whereas others did not. don't pretend like you don't know this.

otherwise no temple would've been taken off Hindu hands.

but women arent allowed in masjids, are they? 

[uttermost]

Just now, chittimallu2 said:

naku antha political and bureaucratic  knowledge ledu so I cant comment...

If that is really true when why is it so? why only temples are under govt control and not others? @uttermost

temples discriminated.. others didn't

[chittimallu2]

Just now, uttermost said:

which means, it has to be taken back by those who believe from the hands of the govt.

 that's the only solution to this mess.

or it can be like that and SC can take their heads out of their asses and differentiate between a set of rules of the deity which doesnt discriminate anyone vs discrimination (like in the case of dalits, which none of them like me are supportive of) 

[uttermost]

Just now, chittimallu2 said:

but women arent allowed in masjids, are they? 

govt doesn't want to step on minority freedoms.

recent haji ali dargah verdict however, bunch of muslim women litigated this and won the right to enter haji ali.  more will follow.

[batman2]

look at some media channels running debates that burning effigy of ravan is causing pollution lol. man how i wish bjp  shows them what facism really is

[Staysafebro]

13 minutes ago, alpachinao said:

https://m.economictimes.com/news/politics-and-nation/thanks-to-hinduism-india-doesnt-have-radical-islam-chinese-media/amp_articleshow/60295266.cms?utm_source=twitter_amp&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=socialsharebuttons&__twitter_impression=true

Also white supremacists. Imagine the British still in India, red indians kante ghoranga undedhi paristhithi. The only country in the world that is trying to fight two other religious hegemonies. 

[batman2]

9 minutes ago, uttermost said:

its not about secularism.. lol.

hindus discriminated in their temples, whereas others did not. don't pretend like you don't know this.

otherwise no temple would've been taken off Hindu hands.

avunu no discrimination in non hindu religions  

[chittimallu2]

3 minutes ago, uttermost said:

govt doesn't want to step on minority freedoms.

recent haji ali dargah verdict however, bunch of muslim women litigated this and won the right to enter haji ali.  more will follow.

get ready for intolreance and award wapasi gang in full swing in that case

[ARYA]

1 hour ago, JANASENA said:

Scamgress kooda chesedi ade

modi ki manmohan singh ki comparison aa  asalu tea lu ammukune labor gadini ni country PM sestee entha sedalam ga untundoo mana desam ippudu ala undi ani @psycopk thata septundu 

[batman2]

4 minutes ago, uttermost said:

govt doesn't want to step on minority freedoms.

recent haji ali dargah verdict however, bunch of muslim women litigated this and won the right to enter haji ali.  more will follow.

adhi antha pseudo sickular congress.

modi already bought law banning  triple talak?  how abt that???

[uttermost]

7 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

but women arent allowed in masjids, are they? 

it looks like SC bases its judgements on whether a particular practice (excluding women) is central to the religion to decide whether it contravenes individual rights of a person to indulge in it. like exclusion of dalits is not central to hinduism is what is morally right position to hold perhaps.

that's why its important to read SC judgement on this. I'm just typing away based on my assumptions.

Why was the Sabarimala's case so weak? couldn't all the Hindus who are out in full force now, put their mind together to argue that disallowing women is central to the idea of this particular temple?

i smell something political here. simple.

[uttermost]

2 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

get ready for intolreance and award wapasi gang in full swing in that case

No. women are now entering haji ali without any problem. like its nothing now