gorah_pindu Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Btw' date=' i dunno if you've dealt with Iranians ( Vancouver has a huge iranian community) but they are positively the exception to the rule. Their women(atleast here) are much more 'i will do what i want' mentality and most iranian parents i've seen are rather like normal indian parents- ie, they'd be upset that their daughter/son is being promiscuous but they'd never threaten killing them or their mate.[/quote'] There are suprisingly liberal trends in Iranian society. For instance, Iranians cant simply brush over their 2000 year pre-Islamic past, and instead many are proud of it. Another example - the Shia community in Iran has introduced some progressive laws that the Wahabis in Saudi Arabia would never consider. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Another example - the Shia community in Iran has introduced some progressive laws that the Wahabis in Saudi Arabia would never consider. Forget wahabi jerks in Saudi, some Iranian laws are more liberal than most of the west- for eg,did you know that marijuana is legal in Iran ? Who'd have expected that of a muslim country eh ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorah_pindu Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Sufis smoked it, so did some Christian sects. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 You should know why classifying people by some glorified past is wrong, and how applying it to a community of humans with the same flaws as anyone else is stupid.All i am doing is commenting on the mainstream culture of a particular society. Never said that it should be so or that all are so. But that is the mainstream culture of the sikh society. What would be termed as 'vile' behavior if a Muslim, Christian or Hindu did it - you are all so quick to call 'proud' and 'fierce' when it is done by a Sikh - thats what I see here - pure hypocricy.Because of the context associated with it, obviously. Sikhs are perfect examples of chivalrous yet defensive mentality. Besides, the mainstream bearing of the sikh community is not there in muslim or hindu communities in the first place! I guess you are all too scared of another outbreak of militant behavior to judge them by the same standards you would anyone else, or just dont want to acknolwedge that there are problems in a community you glorify and idolize.Nobody said that Sikh community doesnt have problems or that they had a very dangerous episode with fundamentalism...but it still doesnt change the fact that sikh society is a proud, chivalrous and at the same time quite humble & friendly society in the mainstream. It is neither racism or discrimination to notice cultural differences between various cultures. You can always say that not everyone is encapsulated by it but i don't make such generalizations anyways- i know there is no rule outside of physics & chemistry that can collectively valid for all human beings. But that still doesnt change the fact how mainstream society is in a particular culture. To deny that is to be politically correct at the expense of truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Sufis smoked it' date=' so did some Christian sects.[/quote'] I know..but it is officially legal in Iran. They are more progressive than BC that way! :cantstop: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorah_pindu Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Sikhs are perfect examples of chivalrous yet defensive mentality. Is chivalrous what you would call the riots over the Sacha Saud thing, or the banning of that play in the UK, or the bombing of the Jo Bo So Nihal cinema, etc? Moral of the story - dont hold anyone up like heros, lest you be dissapointed by the inevitable truth. There are such things as Sikh criminals and gangsters - there are such things as currupt Sikh politicians - indeed the entire spectrum is as present there, just as it is in any other community. but it still doesnt change the fact that sikh society is a proud, chivalrous and at the same time quite humble & friendly society in the mainstream. Perhaps you simply havent encountered the number of extreamists online that I have, which is why you have such a fairy tale opinion of this section of humanity, which is as plagued with problems as the rest. Maybe after you have encountered Khalistani fanatics who rant on about Hindus being an 'inferior race', Punjabi culture being superior to the rest of India, etc, and all the other **** ive heard over the years, you will be less quick to paint everyone with the same brush. Maybe after you have seen Sikh friends act jelous or agressive or intolerant, you will realise they are the same as anyone else. It is neither racism or discrimination to notice cultural differences between various cultures. To deny that is to be politically correct at the expense of truth. This argument dosent sway me, seeing as I think you as the one who is being generous at the expense of truth. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorah_pindu Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 I know..but it is officially legal in Iran. They are more progressive than BC that way! :cantstop: It might as well be legal in Britian - something like 60% of the population has tried it :wink_smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhondy Posted June 10, 2007 Author Share Posted June 10, 2007 You have been populating the wrong internet forums, mate. IMO, it is as racist to deny a community its credit for what it stands for and has achieved over decades, with due diligence and adherence to values. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Is chivalrous what you would call the riots over the Sacha Saud thing, or the banning of that play in the UK, or the bombing of the Jo Bo So Nihal cinema, etc? Moral of the story - dont hold anyone up like heros, lest you be dissapointed by the inevitable truth. There are such things as Sikh criminals and gangsters - there are such things as currupt Sikh politicians - indeed the entire spectrum is as present there, just as it is in any other community. These aspects are present in every society. the criminals,the terrorists, etc. But it still doesnt change the mainstream attributes to the society ! Yes, Sikhs have a very chivalrous bearing- the community does fit the definition. Maybe after you have seen Sikh friends act jelous or agressive or intolerant, you will realise they are the same as anyone else. Human beings are all same everywhere. But they still follow/shape themselves by their cultural influences mostly. Sikhs most definitely do have a disproportionately high claim to chivalry and bravery- please look at the medals of honour given out by the Indian Armed Forces and see how much more the Sikh honour-list is compared to the rest. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhondy Posted June 10, 2007 Author Share Posted June 10, 2007 By extension, I suppose it is racist to say: 1. African Americans are great athletes (>90% of US track and field Olympians are African Americans) 2. Pathans are a warrior tribe the British had great trouble in taming, and the Americans are finding that out again in Afghanistan, just as the Russians did. 3. Closer to home, Marwaris and Gujaratis make great businessmen, but mediocre sportsmen. 4. Bengalis have a great cultural heritage and contribute disproportionately to art and literature. 5. Gurkhas are fierce warriors and were chosen by the English for their valour. Yup, we are all silly racists, engaging in sterotyping. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorah_pindu Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Mainstream society? Those were all examples of mainstream society. Just not the part of it you want to acknolwedge. From now on, I guess we should steriotype everyone else too then - i.e. Christians are all beneviolent charitable people (in the mainstream). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Those were all examples of mainstream society. Just not the part of it you want to acknolwedge. No, extremism/racism is not part of the mainstream Sikh society. Those elements may be much more pronounced in the west (because a lot of khaalistaani sikhs did finally give up and move to the west or started from the west) but in India, what you describe is most definitely not mainstream behaviour. And please do not judge a community from internet forums. I think by refusing to accept valid attributes about different societies, you are denigrating the truth for being politically correct. This is the biggest problem i have with western liberal mind- they think that to acknowledge diversity in culture is to propagate racism or steriotypes. That simply isnt true but then again, India has never been burdened with racism like the west has and still is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dhondy Posted June 10, 2007 Author Share Posted June 10, 2007 Judging Sikhs by Khalistanis hitting the keyboard in a Montreal haven, are we? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorah_pindu Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Except im not refusing to accept them - rather im tempering your opinion with the cold water of reality. Sure - cultures can be 'catagorised' - I can say for example that Scandanavia is 'liberal' (in the mainstream as you would put it) - so the issue isnt that im not acknolwedging that communities can be charecterised, but rather im saying your charecterisation is wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorah_pindu Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Judging Sikhs by Khalistanis hitting the keyboard in a Montreal haven' date=' are we?[/quote'] Another fine contribution to the debate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Dhondy , Ravi and Bheem , With all due respect , I fail to understand how this thread is different from the thread I started about Blasphemy law . Islam is a common denominator in both the threads .I was told to desist from bringing up discussions about religious flavour. Even , this thread actually boils to down to religious discussion because one of the tenets of Abrahamic faiths is "Conversion" and these guys are dutifully following their religion. Moreover banning discussion on religion is not sufficient because there are religions which claim to be complete way of life and particualrly politics is big part of these religions so if u want complete ban politics too must be shunned.. blashphemy may be religion for someone but since it's part of constitution of more or less every islamcic countries so for those who bear the brunt of this law, it's also a matter of constititon politics.. my 2 cents Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Judging Sikhs by Khalistanis hitting the keyboard in a Montreal haven' date=' are we?[/quote'] Well if i were to judge 25 million Sikhs by the quarter-million odd in Vancouver, then i'd say Sikhs are worse than Al-Qaeda. Vancouver is a huge bastion for ex-khaalisthaanis. There are Surrey neighbourhoods where the dood is from Amritsar or Jallandhar but you are better off introducing yourself as a Pakistani than Indian. Not to mention, the whole Air India bombing incident. But in India, its literally the other way round- hardly any sikh extremists or superiorists and my conclusion based on Sikh community in Vancouver goes totally against the grain of sikh community in total. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gorah_pindu Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 That simply isnt true but then again' date=' India has never been burdened with racism like the west has and still is.[/quote'] Is that why so many Indians talk bakwaas about northeasterners and black people? :sad_smile: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CC1981 Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Except im not refusing to accept them - rather im tempering your opinion with the cold water of reality. Sure - cultures can be 'catagorised' - I can say for example that Scandanavia is 'liberal' (in the mainstream as you would put it) - so the issue isnt that im not acknolwedging that communities can be charecterised' date=' but rather im saying your charecterisation is wrong.[/quote'] Err..no, its not wrong if you go by the total sikh community ( which is still based mostly in India). I think your charectarization draws too heavily from British Sikh community or overseas sikh community- which does have a significant presence of khaalisthaani sentiments, particularly with those who still have problem integrating into the western society. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest dada_rocks Posted June 10, 2007 Share Posted June 10, 2007 Some of the things which is worth noting are , -- The girl is just 18.. Its not the age when people are moved by/inspired by faith. -- How come the girl get so ready refuge in Birmingham ? almost like it was all planned ? -- If the family is fleeing , are they fleeing with the girl ? -- Why wouldnt the girl want to talk with her parents ? obviously she is been told what to do by someone... I am not sure what alibi they have put forward this time but general mdous ope***** of mullah brigade is since the girl is now a muslim it would be inapprorpiate for her to meet her kafir parents. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts