Thats what i have said. India was a term coined by west to identity this region. But that wasnt any Nation or a country that u say it is. Read my post carefully.
India does want land as well as invades foreign countries thats true in the case of Rep of india, examples r of 1962 war with china and 1948,1965 and 1971 wars with Pakistan.
According to yr some hindu scriptures that is the sin. To name one it is uppanishads and bhagwat purana (if im corret.)
Sir, What is a Country? A country is a region that is identified as a distinct entity in political geography. And what was our Distinct Entity? I guess you know that already.
Regarding your invading countries :
1948- Did India send its people first to attack on Kashmir?
1962- Again Did India initiated the attack?
1965- Did India started Operation Gibraltar?
1971- Congress gave the piece of land Mr. Jinnah wanted, yet your hatred never changed. Millitant attacks from Bangladesh did we do that?
and thirdly, no sir, no hindu scriptures says that, neither upanishads or Bhagwat puran. Hinduism isnt bounded by any books or faiths. It is mainly based on Karma and Dharma. I hope I cleared your doubt.
Regarding religions i will do on a thread on it, will be looking for your comment on that. Other than that I too agreethank you.
it is of course unjustifiable when there has been no violence involved, but at this point i don't know what to say about the western establishment, especially british, pushing male homosexuality as something to be fashionably adopted in schools and college.
i must point out that in a modern progressive experiment society - the ussr, male homosexuals caught for public acts were imprisoned for seven years.
that custom i find unnecessary, quasi-violent and actually contradictory to the cleansing ways of islam... the custom is said to be pre-islami abrahamic but maybe it is simply a arabic pagan custom included for the political purpose of drawing pagan arabs to the fold of islam.
good question.
the kaaba ( the piece of rock you mention ) is a empty cubic building of stone blocks... it has nothing inside... the building has been rebuilt a few times in varying materials but originally it is said to have been built by prophet abraham ( ibrahim ) and his son ishmael ( ismail ), before the establishment of islam, it was used by the pagan arabs of makkah as a temple to three goddesses - allat, uzza and mannat, the idols of whom were inside.
in the rituals of the hajj, the kaaba serves as more a focal point, a device, in remembrance of god and not the object of worship itself and is not considered to have any magical powers... also, the kaaba is in two ways used to affirm the communtarian aspect of islam - (a). when the hajis circumambulate ( circle ) the kaaba seven times, they do so as a single mass, (b). all praying muslims in the world turn to one direction to pray ( the qibla ).
though the chaddar is not technically part of islam and more a cultural thing, i agree to your point and extend that historically there should have been no beggar or deprived person in a muslim-governed society and it is to the discredit of especially south asian muslims that they spent money and put effort into superstitions rather than create a society of economic comfort.
all things must evolve and i see modern socialism/communism as the furtherance of all progressive ideologies in history, including islam... some on this forum and many offline would tell you that "islam is perfect" but that is a immature declaration... modern socialism creates societies that provide far more political, economic and social facilities than the basic tenets of islam but i acknowledge the first practical codification of socialistic laws were through islam.
nevertheless, i am socialist and i reject existence of any other human future but socialist/communist.
i get your point but i think we can agree that all the older religions should have long been reshaped into a basic globally agreeable form, stripped of all ritualism, superstitions and negative aspects, such that they are a set of teachings and laws that provided freedoms and rights and the worship needs of people concentrated on a simplifying single unitary god... but this didn't happen.
in india, the "uniform civil code" would be a form of this progressive model for the immediate term.
no religions is perfect, the fact is while with time certain religions became tolerant while a few couldnt. I will post more on it later.