Your rhetorical demagoguery may work like a charm with the semi-educated mass that forms your party's loyal support base. It just doesn't happen to cut it with anyone else.
My rhetorical demagoguery works as a charm ? One could say you were perhaps describing yourself .I don't have to live up to or live down your expectations of me.I also am under no obligation to declare / accept what you think may or may not be part of my belief system except to declare resolutely as a citizen of this land my absolute faith and trust in the Indian constitution and the institutions engendered by it entrusted with upholding it and safe guarding it . Only that should matter as far as establishing ones credentials go , for in its absence , this debate doesn't hold any merit.
About the report, without reading it you are in no position to have a debate about constitutional rights vis-a-vis religion. I know you think that clever-sounding arguments made on the spur are good enough to deal with anything, but unless you know what exactly our constitution says about religious rights, you are ignorant about the matter - your knowledge of dubious texts notwithstanding. Do not engage with me by throwing laymen questions about legal issues and expect to be taken seriously.
The texts you refer to as dubious happen to be held sacred by millions .F y.i. I'm agnostic .
While you may hold the view that all wisdom today is original and the result of the struggle largely in the western world of establishing a secular democratic state over the church and later over monarchy with indivudual human rights receiving paramount status enshrined in the constitutions of such states with the independent judiciary being the guarantor of such rights , you're by and large right and that's your prerogative .
It certainly doesn't construe that what we've inherited vide our culture ,tradition and that of the texts (of any religion) is redundant just because they're ancient and which to you may seem anachronistic .It's in the realms of personal belief in a representative , liberal , democratic and might I add a secular state much before the latter was incorporated as an amendment to our constitution to have the preamble read as such .
As I remarked before , you seem to be under the impression that the certification or lack of it by the US Congress on religious freedom in India seems to be a touchstone to you .Not many share in India share your yardsticks except perhaps organizations which have such oxmoronic names as Catholic Secular Forums who depose before the Congress thereby laying more faith in such institutions than your own .
You seem another card holding member of such esteemed organizations .
This is a fora for laymen and specialists alike .So, if you seem to labour under the impression that any special knowledge of a subject renders you superior to the rest and gives you a sense of entitlement in choosing your opponents and the views to contest you're in the wrong fora.Your command over the said subject matter would perhaps serve you in better stead were you to engage in its practise in a court of law to upholding those very principles whose debasement you seem to be lamenting out here .
As for what
@Levina wrote and my response to it, it has a context that you are clearly unaware of. In 1995, the Supreme Court in
Dr. Ramesh Yeshwant Prabhoo pronounced as
obiter dictum that Hindutva is not a religion but a way of life, something that has become an albatross around our collective necks, and the basis for many false claims. So while I am impressed by your elementary knowledge of debating tactics and logical fallacies, it was totally misplaced.
Unaware not uninformed coz you just now bring it up.
We were debating Hinduism not Hindutva .Shifting goal posts again .If the courts pronouncement of Hindutva as a way of life is your mote in the eye to the orbiter dicta , (notwithstanding that it's an observation not legally binding as a legal precedent ) the very same constitution you seem to have little faith in , guaranteed by our judiciary offers you a solution - you can file a review petition in the SC .
As for your conclusion about being a Hindu-baiter, I am non-religious and bait all religions equally. It just so happens that the idiocy in front of me at the moment is Hindu by description.
Do not conflate Hinduism for Hindutva - the former is as much a personal belief system as a way of life , has , is and will always be so - without having any court pronounce on it ,the latter a politico religious ideology , the courts orbiter dicta notwithstanding .
It is really easy to throw arguments at people, bit unless you show the ability to read detailed reports and critique them on merit, you deserve no further response. I hope we are clear on that.
I do not lay stock in reports by foreign legislative bodies on the state of affairs of my nation for I have full faith in the institutions of our land .Those that seek to question the legitimacy of our institutions on the basis of such reports are unnecessarily giving a handle to such nations to wield unnecessary political influence in our internal affairs apart from undermining the trust and sanctity such state institutions as ours ought to receive - something I'm vehemently opposed to.
Whether you choose to respond to my posts or not is your prerogative but impressively crafted posts with half truths , misinformed summations , needless conflations ,general whataboutery and constant Shifting of goal posts will be contested in a public fora.Deal with it .
