India : Muslim family forced to leave theatre for not standing during national anthem

[Nilgiri]

athukkum melai boss...Manvanthathruthi aka sankranthi aka moksha vimukthi aka utkarash aka dragon ball aka sitharam villas aka saheli aka apagarbasarpa etc..
Dasavatharam padathula kamal pala vesathula vara maari vanthittirukaanga..

yenna seeyu mudiyum boss.

 

[mooppan]

Nice Try .Sullu helodannu nillisu Nasrani.

Tikka muchkond hogoley...

 

[ssethii]

Not at any cost.

As has already been pointed out, there is the right of the individual, and there is the countervailing right of the institution, private or public. And there are local laws. There is no prescriptive right to break laws in expressing oneself freely.

This is close mindedness to say the least. You cannot make such laws which restrict personal freedom.

 

[LaBong]

The next time that family goes out wit the kid, they might do well to remember that humiliation

Better still the kid will remember and learn the do's and don't s and grow up to be someone who Respects India so that he does not have to end up like his Dad.

Finally the responsibility of protecting the kid and the family lies with the Dad, and it was he who put his family in danger when he chose confrontation over simple gesture of Respect.

So you mean just because the dad acted like asshole, rest of us should act like even more assholes. The kid would have learned to respect the law if he was escorted out by the authorities which would have meant his dad broke laws. Now he will just feel his family is victim of mob justice.

 

[Mamsalaphala]

Tikka muchkond hogoley...

Slither away snake.

 

[Joe Shearer]

This is close mindedness to say the least. You cannot make such laws which restrict personal freedom.

Cannot? A sovereign nation's law-givers can make any laws that they wish to, subject to constitutional review.

You might like to leave these questions to the safe hands of those used to exercising it. And to exercising judicial review and striking down what should not be legislated. Don't worry about these aspects, and don't bother to sit in judgement over Indian legislation.

 

[Mamsalaphala]

So you mean just because the dad acted like asshole, rest of us should act like even more assholes. The kid would have learned to respect the law if he was escorted out by the authorities which would have meant his dad broke laws. Now he will just feel his family is victim of mob justice.

Tough Luck. You can pray that he do not turn into a terrorist

But considering his fathers attitude, he will be brought up to always feel like the victim.

 

[LaBong]

This is close mindedness to say the least. You cannot make such laws which restrict personal freedom.

But private institutions can have their own rules of admission, whether or not the rules infringe upon personal liberty is another debate.

Like if I open a hall and declare only hindus are allowed, that will be against the constitution and unlawful. However if I have a rule that you must stand when national anthem is being played when you are inside a premises owned by me, that might not be going against the fundamental rights.

In any case if someone doesn't want to stand why national anthem is being played and he knows about the rule and think it's invalid, he should go to court to make the rule void instead of indulging into shenanigans.

 

[Hyperion]

Anyone showing disrespect to the national anthem of their country need to be booked under the law. I hate radicals, in all forms, Hindu ones, Muslim ones and specially stupid ones such as this particular family.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Or even better, the management should have had a quiet word with the adults when appropriate and explained the situation and provide clear signs explaining the expected behavior from future patrons.

Shouldn't the adults in the family have taken that into account when deciding to behave like arseholes?

The adults in the family chose to not stand up during the anthem (for whatever reason - I don't know their side of the story). It is everyone ranting, raving and confronting them that chose to behave like 'arseholes'.

 

[ssethii]

Cannot? A sovereign nation's law-givers can make any laws that they wish to, subject to constitutional review.

You might like to leave these questions to the safe hands of those used to exercising it. And to exercising judicial review and striking down what should not be legislated. Don't worry about these aspects, and don't bother to sit in judgement over Indian legislation.

So you even get hurt debating about it on an open forum. I would never in my senses like to visit such a country. This is intolerance at it's peak.

 

[AgNoStiC MuSliM]

Anyone showing disrespect to the national anthem of their country need to be booked under the law. I hate radicals, in all forms, Hindu ones, Muslim ones and specially stupid ones such as this particular family.

Your position on this issue is itself 'radicalism' and extremist.

 

[Nilgiri]

The adults in the family chose to not stand up during the anthem (for whatever reason - I don't know their side of the story). It is everyone ranting, raving and confronting them that chose to behave like 'arseholes'.

Both sides were arseholes if you ask me. You dont walk into a theatre with lots of other people there and stay sat down, expecting nothing to happen when a national anthem is playing.

If you are going to be highly discourteous on purpose (and break the law at the same time too), you invite people to be the same to you.

That said, the other side should not have acted the way they did, but as Joe shearer said, called the authorities/cinema management.

 

[Hyperion]

Laws derived from constitution need to be obeyed. There are no if's and but's about it. If you don't enforce them, then you get laskhar's and jamat's running amuck in your backyard. Therefore, I, having a harsh stance against the 'few' radicals, in essence brings the wider population in conformity. My form of 'constitutional' radicalism, in essence is a blessing in disguise.... you, however, are entitled to your own pov, law permitting.

Your position on this issue is itself 'radicalism' and extremist.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Or even better, the management should have had a quiet word with the adults when appropriate and explained the situation and provide clear signs explaining the expected behavior from future patrons.

The adults in the family chose to not stand up during the anthem (for whatever reason - I don't know their side of the story). It is everyone ranting, raving and confronting them that chose to behave like 'arseholes'.

Frankly, I think the management should have been brought in at the outset. And I agree that the audience reaction was over the top. But that doesn't let the adults off the hook.

I have a possible answer. There has been considerable discussion in India about the national hymn, which personifies the country as a goddess, and there are many observant Muslims who therefore refuse to acknowledge it or to respond to it. It is as a result restricted in its playing.

The national anthem is completely different. That is what is played at public functions, and there is nothing even a shade objectionable - except perhaps to a Pakistani, as it mentions the Sindh in its catalogue of geographic features or locations.

I suspect that this was an excessively smart set of adults who were under the mistaken impression that it is illegitimate to rise for the national anthem, having mixed it up in their minds with the national hymn.

But, as you said, you have not heard their side of the story. It really doesn't matter what their side of the story is. If they have problems with the respect to be shown to the anthem, they need to stay away from functions where it is to be played. It's as simple as that.