Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Did I not just define secularism for you. There is nothing called "pseudo secularism"..you either are or are not. Simply put France has taken the notion of an UCC to its logical extreme..that the public sphere will be religion neutral..so Sikhs can't wear turbans to school (oh yeah)..my air hostess on Air France- a devout Catholic couldn't stop cribbing about the crosses underneath the blouse thing..so on and so forth..after all the point of secularism is to move towards a religion neutral political and public space.
Obviously one can always aspire to be as good as the USSR in those terms.
That is a good start..find any lacuna in the wording that has led to it not being implemented? There is none whatsoever at all...its quite explicit and thus my assertion that it is our politics that has led to us willfully ignoring it..were we to institute an UCC parallel to the sort in France I would probably burst with joy..it is MY DREAM!
LOL. That is an asinine interpretation of secularism. Cannot believe a person who in some other thread was rooting for absolute freedom of expression is now advocating what people should wear when it is no business of the state. Oh the irony of it.
Nope it is not ignored certainly. The definition has hovered around "Cow" meat and not beef per se which is mostly carabeef (buffalo meat) in India.
Not happening. India will remain Hindu and not emulate France any day sooner.
Congress Party triggered inflation destroying common man’s savings
You do NOT START from any particular place FIRST..the UCC is to be uniformly implemented across the nation. Why is it that everyone must try to fit such noble aspirations to their petty agendas?
Did I not just define secularism for you. There is nothing called "pseudo secularism"..you either are or are not. Simply put France has taken the notion of an UCC to its logical extreme..that the public sphere will be religion neutral..so Sikhs can't wear turbans to school (oh yeah)..my air hostess on Air France- a devout Catholic couldn't stop cribbing about the crosses underneath the blouse thing..so on and so forth..after all the point of secularism is to move towards a religion neutral political and public space.
Obviously one can always aspire to be as good as the USSR in those terms.
It will never happen....
1. Hindu themselves will not be able to follow uniform law...I just pointed how Gujarati hindus want to marry more than one by Maitri Karar.
2. I bet 90% do not know that in India we have different civil codes. Just to say that, I dont know any problem arised recently in my state just because of different civil code ( not talking about personal problem of a family)
Our current system is best....leave it like that...
This was understood when they started having massive fiscal deficits and were financing their pet welfare schemes via money printing.
False conflation again, freedom of speech and expression has nothing to do with an UCC. They're more than free over there to say ANYTHING...they just cannot wear anything that identifies them by their faith in a public space. Which btw, ironically is exactly what an UCC ought to be. It maters not to me whether India is Hindu or not, my interest in such affairs is solely academic after all it will not alter my life one jot.
Set up banks in rural areas they said..forgot that they'd break the nation's back they did..idiocy breeds misery.
LOL. How dumb is that. Circumscribing the very definition of freedom of expression, dressing being one form of expression, and then still claiming to be upholder of freedom of expression. Yeah what next? Everyone should look same and have same hair cut? So much for being upholder of liberty. Which brings us back to why this argument started. If India has to remain Hindu people who stick out as sore thumbs will be watched.
LOL. How dumb is that. Circumscribing the very definition of freedom of expression, dressing being one form of expression, and then still claiming to be upholder of freedom of expression. Yeah what next? Everyone should look same and have same hair cut? So much for being upholder of liberty. Which brings us back to why this argument started. If India has to remain Hindu people who stick out as sore thumbs will be watched.
Was not banking done via post office in rural areas?
You need to look up what freedom of expression means in the international charter dear. Oh but your liberty is well guarded..we have simply taken away that which divides in the service of the nation rather than some fictional god up in heaven..what could be more patriotic than that?
Unfortunately or fortunately I don't stick out as a sore thumb..pretty much similar on the surface to any other 22 year old in Delhi.
Unfortunately or fortunately I don't stick out as a sore thumb..pretty much similar on the surface to any other 22 year old in Delhi
LOL. Now you are sounding like an atheist mullah. "We have simply taken away that which divides in the service of the nation" Your god being "no god." Like state of Pakistan being not-India. LOL.
Now let me frame that sentence the Hindutva way "We have simply taken away beef eating which divides in the service of the nation.
See.
It is not facial features one was talking about but rather disruptive tendencies. Say drunken brawl or say instigating trouble via flaunting beef in a temple or any such dumb things that "perhaps" a strongly opinionated person might indulge in.
Uniform Civil Code must be implemented. Period.
Although rest assured my devotion to this nation is absolute..WHATEVER its laws demand of me I will do as I have done so far whether my likes or dislikes and sentiments demand the same of me or not. That is after all the primary criterion of being a loyal citizen and a criterion most dear to me
For most of us this nation and this land goes beyond "law" and legalese. But good to see you law abiding.