why ram madhav went back to RSS

[Raven_Rayes]

2 hours ago, telugu_fan said:

So we should scrap the anti-dowry law because according to you it doesn't work? go to india and try abusing someone ffrom sc/st and see, you will be in jail just based on complaint.

The law acts as a deterrent, so people don't go committing crimes without any fear of law. that is the basis of anything, even sati was abolished by law under the english and reform continued in parallel, with offenders punished and the section of population being reformed after a long time. 

Who is going to reform the Muslim personal law, they certainly aren't interested, as seen in triple talaq case only. And any change to first reform will be opposed by people like you (forget about traditional muslims) who will say big bad modi is making life hell for muslims .

People are being engaged for all the issues even now, whether they change or not is another affair all together.

if the muslims are not interested in reforming their law, what is the interest of the govt of India? unless it infringes on the rights of non-muslims?

all your claims are silly.

[Raven_Rayes]

4 hours ago, telugu_fan said:

Sheikh Abdullah told Nehru that people of kashmir need some time to integrate into India as you have fought a war so they brough article 370 which was temporary and was supposed to be removed as time went by.

nice joke. you conveniently forgot that India promised a referendum on the issue in kashmir, and reneged on its promise.

art 370 was temporary contingent on the referendum, which was never conducted. Kashmir is essentially a separate nation occupied by India now.

5 hours ago, telugu_fan said:

People often cross borders due to various reasons - sometimes there is domestic struggles, sometimes there are natural disasters and most of them go back once the situation stabilizes. But India found that Hindus coming from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan didn't want to go back as they feared persecution for being Hindus. So even if they went back their situation never changes with physical attacks or abduction of woman from their homes.

you also forget the basic fact that citizenship clause for both pakistan and India promises citizenship to whoever lives in the region for 10yrs or so.

and there are millions of people still waiting for their citizenship who moved in waves in 70s, 90s etc.

caa promises citizenship to few hundreds every year under that scheme. its a joke. a political stunt to appease Hindus who were afraid of losing citizenship due to NRC

[telugu_fan]

16 minutes ago, Raven_Rayes said:

if the muslims are not interested in reforming their law, what is the interest of the govt of India? unless it infringes on the rights of non-muslims?

all your claims are silly.

For govt of India, this is going to be an issue, with no population control for starters, people doing namaz on the streets, insisting on sharia when it suits them, so the common civil law should in ideal conditions treat all citizens to the same laws.

It not like muslim personal law came into existing from time immemorial. it came in between and has to change with the changing times. There are enough cases of putting up illegal occupations justified in the name of religion or inheritance being governed based on sharia on the recommendation of all india muslim personal law board.

We still have to see what will be in the draft bill of UCC, untill them everything else is speculation on what might happen.

[telugu_fan]

39 minutes ago, Raven_Rayes said:

nice joke. you conveniently forgot that India promised a referendum on the issue in kashmir, and reneged on its promise.

art 370 was temporary contingent on the referendum, which was never conducted. Kashmir is essentially a separate nation occupied by India now.

you also forget the basic fact that citizenship clause for both pakistan and India promises citizenship to whoever lives in the region for 10yrs or so.

and there are millions of people still waiting for their citizenship who moved in waves in 70s, 90s etc.

caa promises citizenship to few hundreds every year under that scheme. its a joke. a political stunt to appease Hindus who were afraid of losing citizenship due to NRC

Do you have any references to back your claims?

For referendum to occur pakistan will have to withdraw their forces and india can retain a portion of their forces. Has Pakistan backed out of their region of Kashmir for referendum to take place?

When was kashmir an independent country and when it was occupied?

CAA provides citizenship to people who are in the country by Dec2014 in one swoop, not few hundreds you claim and replaces the 10 year period with 7 year period of staying in the country.

When Hindus don't have any citizenship till now and no basic rights how and why will they be afraid to loose something they don't have?

[Raven_Rayes]

8 minutes ago, telugu_fan said:

Do you have any references to back your claims?

do you, outside of sanghi outlets?

9 minutes ago, telugu_fan said:

For referendum to occur pakistan will have to withdraw their forces and india can retain a portion of their forces. Has Pakistan backed out of their region of Kashmir for referendum to take place?

why do India get to maintain a portion of their forces? kashmir is not a part of India, ever.

15 minutes ago, telugu_fan said:

CAA provides citizenship to people who are in the country by Dec2014 in one swoop, not few hundreds you claim and replaces the 10 year period with 7 year period of staying in the country.

amit shah himself claimed otherwise in the parliament. what he claims on his political rallies are irrelevant.

16 minutes ago, telugu_fan said:

When Hindus don't have any citizenship till now and no basic rights how and why will they be afraid to loose something they don't have?

first they are not going to get any citizenship. its just a political stunt to identify the muslims who've lived here for a couple generations, and target them politically.

[Raven_Rayes]

22 minutes ago, telugu_fan said:

For govt of India, this is going to be an issue, with no population control for starters, people doing namaz on the streets, insisting on sharia when it suits them, so the common civil law should in ideal conditions treat all citizens to the same laws.

does it include people building small temples obstructing public space in every city?

23 minutes ago, telugu_fan said:

It not like muslim personal law came into existing from time immemorial. it came in between and has to change with the changing times. There are enough cases of putting up illegal occupations justified in the name of religion or inheritance being governed based on sharia on the recommendation of all india muslim personal law board.

it doesn't matter if it exist from time immemorial or yesterday. It matters whether the ruled agreed to the rules.

[Bulbul_sitara]

41 minutes ago, Raven_Rayes said:

do you, outside of sanghi outlets?

why do India get to maintain a portion of their forces? kashmir is not a part of India, ever.

amit shah himself claimed otherwise in the parliament. what he claims on his political rallies are irrelevant.

first they are not going to get any citizenship. its just a political stunt to identify the muslims who've lived here for a couple generations, and target them politically.

Only asking you to know about kashmir..to start with.

[Bulbul_sitara]

42 minutes ago, Raven_Rayes said:

does it include people building small temples obstructing public space in every city?

it doesn't matter if it exist from time immemorial or yesterday. It matters whether the ruled agreed to the rules.

Why do you only consider temples...arent masjids/dargha were built on the road....pakaki velli edchuko...

[Raven_Rayes]

2 minutes ago, Bulbul_sitara said:

Why do you only consider temples...arent masjids/dargha were built on the road....pakaki velli edchuko...

the same reason, the guy I was responding to, considers only masjids.

doesn't mean I'm muslim btw.

[telugu_fan]

1 hour ago, Raven_Rayes said:

do you, outside of sanghi outlets?

why do India get to maintain a portion of their forces? kashmir is not a part of India, ever.

amit shah himself claimed otherwise in the parliament. what he claims on his political rallies are irrelevant.

first they are not going to get any citizenship. its just a political stunt to identify the muslims who've lived here for a couple generations, and target them politically.

Raven_reyes,

You made the claim that art. 370 is linked to referendum, not me. it would make sense to provide references to the claims you made.

I don't know where you studied your history, Kashmir became part of India when the then Maharaja Hari Singh signed instrument of accession to India. It was only then India sent her forces, so Kashmir as a whole belongs to India pakistan claims not withstanding over Kashmir and Gilgit baltistan.

The CAA only made a major change of 7 years instead of the 10 years that you need to reside in the country to be considered for citizenship. remember that people won't become citizens automatically the process starts. Even if CAA isn't implemented, they can give citizenship under old rules.

How will giving citizenship to Non-muslims living as refugees in India, target muslims politically that too having aadhar, voter id and passports with local documents. can you explain how?

[Raven_Rayes]

1 minute ago, telugu_fan said:

Raven_reyes,

You made the claim that art. 370 is linked to referendum, not me. it would make sense to provide references to the claims you made.

I don't know where you studied your history, Kashmir became part of India when the then Maharaja Hari Singh signed instrument of accession to India. It was only then India sent her forces, so Kashmir as a whole belongs to India pakistan claims not withstanding over Kashmir and Gilgit baltistan.

The CAA only made a major change of 7 years instead of the 10 years that you need to reside in the country to be considered for citizenship. remember that people won't become citizens automatically the process starts. Even if CAA isn't implemented, they can give citizenship under old rules.

How will giving citizenship to Non-muslims living as refugees in India, target muslims politically that too having aadhar, voter id and passports with local documents. can you explain how?

i will explain after I sleep and wake up tomorrow.

I didn't make any such claim about art370.. I said India occupies kashmir as an alien nation suppressing a native one. just because Indians approve of that monstrosity doesn't mean its right, even legally.

kashmir doesn't belong to India. lmao.

[telugu_fan]

1 hour ago, Raven_Rayes said:

does it include people building small temples obstructing public space in every city?

it doesn't matter if it exist from time immemorial or yesterday. It matters whether the ruled agreed to the rules.

Yes it does, since you lack knowledge, Modi in his tenure as Gujarat tenure demolished temples during road widening , only heriatge and historical sites are spared i guess.

The issue was of illegal mazaars, one most recently came on the Delhi flyover.

https://lawstreet.co/speak-legal/illegal-construction-of-mazar-on-flyover

the local pir is saying that mazar existed since 1982 but the flyover was completed in 2010. so when and how did a bodyless mazaar come in. Same thing for Afzal khan mazaar in Maha which was not demolished even after court orders where they built a house around it for people to come and stay.

of course these won't be tackled explicitly in UCC, but will expect all citizens to have the same rights rather than forming a mob and try to stop any development from going forward.

The rulers change the rules based on changing conditions, i am asking what study was done to set up muslim personal law board. Do you know as you keep harping about. It came into existance after the Shah bano case where the govt went against a court order and apparently democracy was in safe hands and everything was okay.

[telugu_fan]

2 hours ago, Raven_Rayes said:

nice joke. you conveniently forgot that India promised a referendum on the issue in kashmir, and reneged on its promise.

art 370 was temporary contingent on the referendum, which was never conducted. Kashmir is essentially a separate nation occupied by India now.

you also forget the basic fact that citizenship clause for both pakistan and India promises citizenship to whoever lives in the region for 10yrs or so.

and there are millions of people still waiting for their citizenship who moved in waves in 70s, 90s etc.

caa promises citizenship to few hundreds every year under that scheme. its a joke. a political stunt to appease Hindus who were afraid of losing citizenship due to NRC

 

4 minutes ago, Raven_Rayes said:

i will explain after I sleep and wake up tomorrow.

I didn't make any such claim about art370.. I said India occupies kashmir as an alien nation suppressing a native one. just because Indians approve of that monstrosity doesn't mean its right, even legally.

kashmir doesn't belong to India. lmao.

isn't the above bolded your statement,

And no Kashmir wasn't a separate or alien nation, it had a king just like Junagadh or Hyderabad or Travencore, Your words will not stand in any court legally either or Pakistan would have tried that shtick already. 

[Raven_Rayes]

6 hours ago, telugu_fan said:

 

isn't the above bolded your statement,

And no Kashmir wasn't a separate or alien nation, it had a king just like Junagadh or Hyderabad or Travencore, Your words will not stand in any court legally either or Pakistan would have tried that shtick already. 

okay. it seems I did make that statement. I was sleepy and forgot about it. but no big deal, a slightly different version of the same can be easily defended.

[Raven_Rayes]

6 hours ago, telugu_fan said:

Yes it does, since you lack knowledge, Modi in his tenure as Gujarat tenure demolished temples during road widening , only heriatge and historical sites are spared i guess.

The issue was of illegal mazaars, one most recently came on the Delhi flyover.

https://lawstreet.co/speak-legal/illegal-construction-of-mazar-on-flyover

the local pir is saying that mazar existed since 1982 but the flyover was completed in 2010. so when and how did a bodyless mazaar come in. Same thing for Afzal khan mazaar in Maha which was not demolished even after court orders where they built a house around it for people to come and stay.

of course these won't be tackled explicitly in UCC, but will expect all citizens to have the same rights rather than forming a mob and try to stop any development from going forward.

The rulers change the rules based on changing conditions, i am asking what study was done to set up muslim personal law board. Do you know as you keep harping about. It came into existance after the Shah bano case where the govt went against a court order and apparently democracy was in safe hands and everything was okay.

Hindus currently follow the Hindu civil code that was descendant of the Hindu personal law, not 'the law' whatever that means.

you ask a lot of silly questions. why should there have been a study before mplb was set up, I wonder?

are you really saying that mplb didn't exist before the shah bano case? lmao. how can you make such a basic error in facts that take less than a minute to search on the internet? there's a wiki on aimplb.. pls read that and get back.

I don't understand what the benefits of UCC will be, except fomenting dissatisfaction among population who want to follow their own religious codes, both Hindus and Muslims.

according to you the only use of UCC is to help govts bulldoze temples/masjids for 'development', is it? Seems pointless. Its not like govts aren't doing it already.

why shouldn't people organize themselves around laws that they are comfortable with? I don't understand the case for UCC really. both for Hindus and Muslims. Do you expect Muslims to fully live under a common code that prohibits certain practices that are allowed in their religion? Do you think its fair?