India is Paying the Price For VD Savarkar’s Advocacy of Rape

[Joe Shearer]

Savarkar and Jinnah who advocated the Two Nation Theory were actually ahead of their time as compared to romanticists like Gandhi and Nehru. Of course, it's easier for me to judge as I have lived their future India. Savarkar was against the against the caste system as well and he wanted Hindus to be united. He wasn't regressive in the sense that he didn't want Hindus to go back to just learning the Vedas and Shastras but he wanted Hindus to modernize and take up the mantle for progressiveness just like the Western world and these views are similar to Nehru's as well. He was a man who was actually well read in history as well.

I disagree with you totally. Nothing personal, but you are talking the language of exclusiveness and religious bigotry. His wide reading in history was worth nothing. It resulted in forming distorted views of society, and regressive ideas about how to relate to other faiths.

Sorry, I can sense your need to defend him, for reasons unknown to me, but you are wasting your time trying to tell me about his good qualities.

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

I disagree with you totally. Nothing personal, but you are talking the language of exclusiveness and religious bigotry. His wide reading in history was worth nothing. It resulted in forming distorted views of society, and regressive ideas about how to relate to other faiths.

Sorry, I can sense your need to defend him, for reasons unknown to me, but you are wasting your time trying to tell me about his good qualities.

By looking at some of your comments, I'm sure you would have been one of the 'Moderates' of the Congress if you would have been born during the Independence era.

The 'Moderates' wanted to completely correct the flaws in our society before calling out for Independence.

In reality, we need a combination of both the 'Moderates' and 'Extremists'. We needed both Tilak and Agarkar (both quarreled a lot). We needed both Bhagat Singh and Gandhi.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

Okay.

So Savarkar was a bad Hindu.

So Modi is the good Hindu?

No?

Okay. How about Hindus who vote for him?

These words should be written in letters of gold...

Aptly describes what is going on in Bharat against Muslims.


"Savarkar’s supporters feel that when they commit crimes such as violence against women, they are doing sanctified work for Hinduism. They are working to enhance the glory of the country. That is why they neither feel repentant nor apologetic."

Hinduism in a nutshell.

The way of life that promotes violation of women. Let that sink in.

And then they ask why were temples broken in the Mughal rule?

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

Hinduism in a nutshell.

The way of life that promotes violation of women. Let that sink in.

And then they ask why were temples broken in the Mughal rule?

If you support evidence that temples were destroyed because Hindus raped women, then I might agree with you.

 

[Joe Shearer]

By looking at some of your comments, I'm sure you would have been one of the 'Moderates' of the Congress if you would have been born during the Independence era.

The 'Moderates' wanted to completely correct the flaws in our society before calling out for Independence.

In reality, we need a combination of both the 'Moderates' and 'Extremists'. We needed both Tilak and Agarkar (both quarreled a lot). We needed both Bhagat Singh and Gandhi.

As of today, I am a secular liberal democrat who hates the Congress, the BJP and the Communists.

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

As of today, I am a secular liberal democrat who hates the Congress, the BJP and the Communists.

Who do you support then? We need some government to function.

 

[AfrazulMandal]

If you support evidence that temples were destroyed because Hindus raped women, then I might agree with you.

Temples had devadasis.

Look up the Kashi Vishwanath temple demolition.

Most temples were infamous for hoarding wealth, corruption and criminal activities.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Okay.

So Savarkar was a bad Hindu.

So Modi is the good Hindu?

No?

Okay. How about Hindus who vote for him?


Hinduism in a nutshell.

The way of life that promotes violation of women. Let that sink in.

And then they ask why were temples broken in the Mughal rule?

That is peculiarly stupid - it is called a 'non sequitur', 'it does not follow'. The open talk about advocating the violation of women today cannot have caused the destruction of temples 800 years ago (more temples were broken in the Sultanate than in the Mughal Imperium).

 

[AfrazulMandal]

That is peculiarly stupid - it is called a 'non sequitur', 'it does not follow'. The open talk about advocating the violation of women today cannot have caused the destruction of temples 800 years ago (more temples were broken in the Sultanate than in the Mughal Imperium).

I have explained some of the possible reasons in a later post.

 

[aryadravida]

I don't remember exactly but it's written in Geeta or Ramayan that if women don't respond to your sexual advances then force them and rape them.
Let me find the exact verse and I will post here

@waz @Eagle @AgNoStiC MuSliM am I allowed to post hadees to prove a few things?

 

[Joe Shearer]

Who do you support then? We need some government to function.

Anyone who is not Islamophobic, or a Sikh hater, or anti-Buddhist, or against Hindus, or Christians, or Jains; anyone who is not part of a corrupt, money-making organisation; anyone who does not support bloodshed in the cause of furthering class warfare in the pursuit of capturing the state through violence. Is this too hard a rope to unbind?

I have explained some of the possible reasons in a later post.

If it was about devadasis, that is even more feeble; as is the appeal to the accumulated wealth of temples.

There were reasons of state why temples were destroyed; it is better to be frank and forthright and to quote them than to hide behind these moralistic shields.

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

Temples had devadasis.

Look up the Kashi Vishwanath temple demolition.

Most temples were infamous for hoarding wealth, corruption and criminal activities.

By that logic, should mosques be leveled down because of hate speeches?
Also, would be helpful if you send in some links. I'm hearing about devadasis for the first time.

Regardless, I'm sure that's not why the temples were destroyed.

Anyone who is not Islamophobic, or a Sikh hater, or anti-Buddhist, or against Hindus, or Christians, or Jains; anyone who is not part of a corrupt, money-making organisation; anyone who does not support bloodshed in the cause of furthering class warfare in the pursuit of capturing the state through violence. Is this too hard a rope to unbind?

Everyone has their inherent biases which they have no control over. No person in this world is perfect. Lord Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi might have been close to perfect people.

 

[Joe Shearer]

By that logic, should mosques be leveled down because of hate speeches?
Also, would be helpful if you send in some links. I'm hearing about devadasis for the first time.

Regardless, I'm sure that's not why the temples were destroyed.

I say this with kindness: you should not get into a discussion on the justification for Hindu militancy without knowing more about the Hindu religions (yes, religions; think about it).

By that logic, should mosques be leveled down because of hate speeches?
Also, would be helpful if you send in some links. I'm hearing about devadasis for the first time.

Regardless, I'm sure that's not why the temples were destroyed.


Everyone has their inherent biases which they have no control over. No person in this world is perfect. Lord Buddha and Mahatma Gandhi might have been close to perfect people.

I am sorry, that is silly. There are very many whom I know who fit these characteristics, and I personally feel I do, too.

 

[TheGreatMaratha]

I say this with kindness: you should not get into a discussion on the justification for Hindu militancy without knowing more about the Hindu religions (yes, religions; think about it).

I think we should always preserve our own culture. Of course, some parts which are not applicable in 21st century should be wholly discarded. Culture is one of the most important asset to any country.

 

[Joe Shearer]

I think we should always preserve our own culture. Of course, some parts which are not applicable in 21st century should be wholly discarded. Culture is one of the most important asset to any country.

I agree; the point being?