Religious differences break out again

[Killswitch]

Thank god I'm not religious.It distorts peoples thinking far too often.

 

[miss]

Why?

Why you choose the neutral escapist past rather than have the courage to face the truth?

Will a Muslim country back down from such a dispute in its own territory?

Why do you want to hurt the sentiments of thousands of Hindus who have only India as a country of refuge for their religion?

ok, india will be broken if you break only mosque.. you want that.
india has hindu and muslims and we should learn to live with each other.
islamic countries are a gone case. they are barbaric, jahil and have no sense of humaneness. do you want to become like them? there they forcibly convert (and say its not allowed in islam), they break others' religionus structures ( and say its not allowed in islam) they kill everyone around them (and say its not allowed in islam).. then i dont know why they cal themselves islamic.

 

[Nair saab]

It only shows how weak and spineless the Hindu community has grown to tolerate such nonsense inside their own country. Do you think a Malaysia or Kuwait or even a 60% majority Brunei will tolerate anything against Islam? Not once will that happen.

But only you guys have become so weak today that you don't wish to retaliate.

And instead, this government has the shame to criticize retaliation in Burma that the Buddhists are doing after years of being fed up first.

What has happened to the spirit of this country?

We can React ... We can react Hard... & end this Bull&hit Islamic Jehad in 1 week... if given a Free Hand...

But then every part of country is against us... Media , Government, Police,Administration,Court , political parties , NGO's & even the Secular Blind Hindus...

with all these against us we r just a crowd... if we do more people among us starts blaming us that we crossed the limit...

i curse my Hindu blood which doesnt boil for my Hindu brothers & Sisters & my Religion... why is that it that a Hindu can cry a river for Non-Hindus while no sympathy for people of our own kind...

Now we r secondary citizens in our own country... we have to take the permission of Muslims if we have to decorate our Temples or to ring a & do a pooja in it... India is a Anti-Hindu country ... as well as death bed for all the Dharmic religion ...

 

[Nair saab]

The bits you say about it being there before 1969 may be true but it also seems to me that the temple there was built much after the Charminar which itself was built to mark the end of a plague affecting Hyderabad. MIM itself is taking advantage of this situation for their own political gains. Why give it a ready made issue to whip up sentiments so that it can win elections?

There doesn't seem to be any reason why the temple cannot be relocated away from the Charminar. Apart from a few bruised egos it doesn't hurt anyone. If this isn't nipped in the bud the wound will continue to foster. This isn't good for the residents of Hyderabad nor for the the country.

The ASI meanwhile should enforce their own rules and do what is necessary to preserve the city's iconic building.

Y dont u relocate the Charminar itself We Hindus from all over India will fund to build a Charminar in the A&& of Akbaruddin Owaisi...

if the location which i have mentioned is acceptable then we r ready to fund for a even bigger one a 6 Minar what say

 

[Spring Onion]

Come in Hyderabad i will let u meet Hundreds of oldies born in 1930's & 40's who has worshiped in these Temples perior to 1960 ... thats goes all of MIM propaganda which says Temple was constructed after 1969...

Go through these paras

Trust denies expansion of Bhagyalakshmi temple - Times Of India

"Old timers say the existing temple structure was erected along the eastern side of the iconic Charminar and its doors opened to devotees from around the area in the late 1960s. While the temple took a physical form only 50-odd years ago, folklore has it that a holy stone (more like a milestone) had been laid at the same site several years ago, most likely during the Quli Qutub Shah period. Laced with 'haldi' and 'kumkum', the stone soon came to be 'idolized' as a symbol of prosperity by Hyderabadis.


Academician Anand Raj Varma said communal tension over the temple had also evoked in the past after the stone was replaced with an idol of Lakshmi and a temporary shed built to give it the feel of a temple. "Even then, tension prevailed in the area. But it was way milder than what we are seeing now," Varma adds.

Many contradict the popular version of the age-old narrative and maintain that the temple had no existence of any sorts, until just a few decades back. Claims about it being as old as the Charminar too are completely 'baseless', they insist. "It was unnecessarily erected by some locals. There was nothing at the site before that," argues historian Narender Luther.

 

[tvsram1992]

Excellent coordination by police to prevent violence , Many Hindus rushing up to Bhagyalakshmi Temple on the eve of Diwali .

 

[Fireurimagination]

You seem to be under an illusion that I give a damn about religious places.

How would you go about solving this problem? Destroy the Charminar instead?

LOL How about both structures existing in harmony and obeying the law of the land/courts? Nah..too much to ask from violence prone, Hindu hating, illiterate, sad excuse for human beings

 

[sexy gun]

Go through these paras

Trust denies expansion of Bhagyalakshmi temple - Times Of India

"Old timers say the existing temple structure was erected along the eastern side of the iconic Charminar and its doors opened to devotees from around the area in the late 1960s. While the temple took a physical form only 50-odd years ago, folklore has it that a holy stone (more like a milestone) had been laid at the same site several years ago, most likely during the Quli Qutub Shah period. Laced with 'haldi' and 'kumkum', the stone soon came to be 'idolized' as a symbol of prosperity by Hyderabadis.


Academician Anand Raj Varma said communal tension over the temple had also evoked in the past after the stone was replaced with an idol of Lakshmi and a temporary shed built to give it the feel of a temple. "Even then, tension prevailed in the area. But it was way milder than what we are seeing now," Varma adds.

Many contradict the popular version of the age-old narrative and maintain that the temple had no existence of any sorts, until just a few decades back. Claims about it being as old as the Charminar too are completely 'baseless', they insist. "It was unnecessarily erected by some locals. There was nothing at the site before that," argues historian Narender Luther.

quoting toiLET news now eh ?

 

[scrumpy]

LOL How about both structures existing in harmony and obeying the law of the land/courts? Nah..too much to ask from violence prone, Hindu hating, illiterate, sad excuse for human beings

Tomorrow if someone builds a temple on the road opposite your house blocking access to your house are you OK with it? Building a temple is an old trick to illegally settle on land. Allowing a temple to be built in violation of the rule of the land is not something which should be condoned in the name of religious sentiments. It is the same religious appeasement you talk about. Why this hypocrisy?

Nobody should be above the law. Not a temple, not a mosque neither a church or gurudwara.

quoting toiLET news now eh ?

Do you have another source?

 

[Spring Onion]

quoting toiLET news now eh ?

1. So ToI is a toilet paper you accept. Good

2. Not quoting TOI but read carefully who is quoted here.

I am pasting once again for your information.



Academician Anand Raj Varma said communal tension over the temple had also evoked in the past after the stone was replaced with an idol of Lakshmi and a temporary shed built to give it the feel of a temple. "Even then, tension prevailed in the area. But it was way milder than what we are seeing now," Varma adds.

"It was unnecessarily erected by some locals. There was nothing at the site before that," argues historian Narender Luther.

-------------------------------


So if you have any proof for your claim about the existance of the temple since the time of Charminar then come up with it. Otherwise you are just supporting saffron extremists for illegal expansion of something which was NOT at all a temple in the first place.


Above all your religious biase is an attempt to deprive India of putting Charminar on UNESCO's world heritage list.

Good luck

 

[sexy gun]

1. So ToI is a toilet paper you accept. Good

2. Not quoting TOI but read carefully who is quoted here.

I am pasting once again for your information.



Academician Anand Raj Varma said communal tension over the temple had also evoked in the past after the stone was replaced with an idol of Lakshmi and a temporary shed built to give it the feel of a temple. "Even then, tension prevailed in the area. But it was way milder than what we are seeing now," Varma adds.

"It was unnecessarily erected by some locals. There was nothing at the site before that," argues historian Narender Luther.

-------------------------------


So if you have any proof for your claim about the existance of the temple since the time of Charminar then come up with it. Otherwise you are just supporting saffron extremists for illegal expansion of something which was NOT at all a temple in the first place.


Above all your religious biase is an attempt to deprive India of putting Charminar on UNESCO's world heritage list.

Good luck

okay u also stop quoting ToI. It quotes people out of context I accept !!

 

[Spring Onion]

okay u also stop quoting ToI. It quotes people out of context I accept !!

Its quote/unquote rule which is used you cant do out of context in this case Since it can drag you to the court.


in the above the paper had clearly followed the rule and attributed the statements to the mentioned persons in quotes.


You lost the argument and you also dont have proofs for your claim. you are on a wrong side in this case.

 

[SamantK]

To Pakistani ignorants here, read about Jagan reddy and MIM's withdrawal from congress... Nothing but using the opportunity to switch sides.. Another leader piggybacking on sickularism to benefit his own cause.

 

[Fireurimagination]

Tomorrow if someone builds a temple on the road opposite your house blocking access to your house are you OK with it? Building a temple is an old trick to illegally settle on land. Allowing a temple to be built in violation of the rule of the land is not something which should be condoned in the name of religious sentiments. It is the same religious appeasement you talk about. Why this hypocrisy?

Nobody should be above the law. Not a temple, not a mosque neither a church or gurudwara.



Do you have another source?

So do you suggest all mandirs and masjids be demolished and why not let the courts decide on the same, why time and again it's hooliganism?

 

[Spring Onion]

To Pakistani ignorants here, read about Jagan reddy and MIM's withdrawal from congress... Nothing but using the opportunity to switch sides.. Another leader piggybacking on sickularism to benefit his own cause.

The Indian ignornats should read about the politics of saffron and should not side with the liars, should not defend the illegal expansion of a illegal structure at the expense of own heritage.