Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Malcolm Merlyn

Should Allow All Women In Sabarimala Temple, Kerala Tells Supreme Court

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, Stradlater said:

Mulo : Civilians enjoyed far much prosperity and safety in Medieval Europe.

 

I debunk all his claims one by one.

 

Mulo(throwing a hissy fit): But but they had better property rights.

 

Me: :phehe: 

He is a village idiot. Perfect definition of internet warrior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Muloghonto wants us to stop being inward and respect Medieval European ideals of providing security and safety to their civilians. 

But at the same time he would quitely brush off genocides committed by imperialistic powers from Americas to the Far East for money and Territory. The so called 'modern' Europeans literally wiped out ethnic groups and races in their greed for more power and resources.

Sorry buddy it's hard to admire People who had no regard for other countries' denizens. At least the uncivilized Indians didn't go invading, raping and pillaging other Nations' cities.

I'm happy and proud of my ancestors the way they were even if they didn't learn some petty obscure honour code from Japanese or some other far off country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Getting back to the Subject, an amazing debate between Sai Deeoak and a young brilliant liberal lawyer on the same subject, Sai comes out more convincing, but some of the arguments from the liberal is also valid and fair. Ultimately it comes down to the tradition also sometimes and not a black and white case of discrimination, but you can't use it to defend casteism, where the constitutional morality shows it is wrong in any case. 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/20/2018 at 10:57 AM, Muloghonto said:

Ofcourse it will, if the government treats them all equally and does not let them interfere in the government. That is the more standard and common definition of 'secularism'. The indian style is psuedo-secularism (ultimate pandering, on paper, to all religions by the govt.):it is definitely violating the seperation of church and state axiom of secularism. 

Now you are contradicting yourself by asking govt to involve in majority religion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Stradlater said:

Mulo : Civilians enjoyed far much prosperity and safety in Medieval Europe.

 

I debunk all his claims one by one.

 

Mulo(throwing a hissy fit): But but they had better property rights.

 

Me: :phehe: 

Property ka ghanta kuch karna when you are dead.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/19/2018 at 10:22 AM, Nikhil_cric said:

This is completely unrelated.Iask you this - which liberal democracy has allowed - women to worship with men in mosques by superseding religion ? Or superrseeded the Catholic church to allow women as cardinals? Religious institutions have the right to exclusion and segregation for religious services and that is why they are religions. Interference with that , unless absolutely necessary, makes a state less secular and not more. 

This this this and this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, rkt.india said:

Now you are contradicting yourself by asking govt to involve in majority religion.

there is no contradiction. Secularism means EQUAL treatment of all religion and seperation of religious influence in government. Ie, government can do whatever it wants, so long as it treats all religions equally and doesn't let religion influence it, its secular. how is that a contrdiction ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/21/2018 at 4:21 AM, Stradlater said:

Muloghonto wants us to stop being inward and respect Medieval European ideals of providing security and safety to their civilians. 

But at the same time he would quitely brush off genocides committed by imperialistic powers from Americas to the Far East for money and Territory. The so called 'modern' Europeans literally wiped out ethnic groups and races in their greed for more power and resources.

Sorry buddy it's hard to admire People who had no regard for other countries' denizens. At least the uncivilized Indians didn't go invading, raping and pillaging other Nations' cities.

I'm happy and proud of my ancestors the way they were even if they didn't learn some petty obscure honour code from Japanese or some other far off country.

It not about admiration, but about understanding, you idiot.

Understand why Europe in 500 years has done more development for the world than rest of human history put together. 
Its because they were better at compiling and maintaining knowledge, creating wealth due to property rights, etc. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

It not about admiration, but about understanding, you idiot.

Understand why Europe in 500 years has done more development for the world than rest of human history put together. 
Its because they were better at compiling and maintaining knowledge, creating wealth due to property rights, etc. 

Genocides se darr nahi lagta saheb, property rights se lagta hai.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stradlater said:

Genocides se darr nahi lagta saheb, property rights se lagta hai.

LOL.

Your mentality is a good window into why we live in an European world and a bunch of people who just 2000 years ago were mostly bashing rocks together and living in caves have invented more in the last 500 years than your or my 'mahaan purkhos' have in their entire history of existence. 

 

PS: Indians are no less guilty of genocides themselves. That they 'never left' India is more due to our inability to project power west of the indus (and nobody really crosses the Himalayas or the Indo-Burmese borders with armies in history), than our 'good intent'. 
We genocided each other plenty. 

 

 

Edited by Muloghonto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/21/2018 at 4:21 AM, Stradlater said:

Muloghonto wants us to stop being inward and respect Medieval European ideals of providing security and safety to their civilians. 

But at the same time he would quitely brush off genocides committed by imperialistic powers from Americas to the Far East for money and Territory. The so called 'modern' Europeans literally wiped out ethnic groups and races in their greed for more power and resources.

Sorry buddy it's hard to admire People who had no regard for other countries' denizens. At least the uncivilized Indians didn't go invading, raping and pillaging other Nations' cities.

I'm happy and proud of my ancestors the way they were even if they didn't learn some petty obscure honour code from Japanese or some other far off country.

Honor code is pretty universal world-wide. I am simply pointing out, that when you talk about preserving honor or how honorable our ancestors were, they were NOTHING compared to the Japanese, who are the ultimate champions of behaving honorably.

Its your ignorance of Japanese history that is why you don't know this. 
Some indians praise the 'honorable sacrifices' of the Rajputs against the muslim onslaughts - compare that to the PERSONAL HONOR code that the Japanese took to far higher levels - you commit ritual suicide (only if you are a warrior), if you fail at your task. 

So next time, don't talk about honor of our ancestors as some sort of a shield against accepting modernity. The Japanese, who were MAI-BAAPS of Rajputs, jaats - heck everyone on this planet as far as honor goes, did it and still preserved their culture.


Thus showing that all the nonsense you and coffee_rules type spout, re: 'western idea' is nothing more than insecure nonsense. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

Indians genocided each other? GENOCIDE!!

Man this guy keeps on outshining himself.

shows how little you know of Indian history that isnt 'standard marxist school-book history' or 'RSS right wing white-washing history'.

I will name a city: Dharanikota. Read about it (though i doubt you will find translations of Pallava copper-plate inscriptions online via Wiki). Genocided. man,woman and child. monks and priests forced to rape each other. Recorded proudly by the Pallavas themselves.


If that isn't genocide, i don't know what is ?

 

Would you like more examples ? Are you ready to shatter the myth inside your head that Indians are not genocidal ar$eholes like pretty much every single society of species homo sapiens ? 

Edited by Muloghonto

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

GENOCIDE LMAO!!!!!!!

So when muslims show up and annihilate entire cities and kill every man woman and child, its genocide. When hindus do the same, such as Pallava genocide of Dharanikota,its 'genocide !!! LMAO!!'. 

Standard sanghi denial because of inferiority complex.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Stradlater said:

LOL one "alleged" case and all Hindus become genocidal. Wah!!

LOL LOL LOL

Classic strawman. 

Nobody said ALL hindus. 'All' doesnt apply to ANY group for anything. Not all mongols were genociders, neither are/were ALL europeans genociders. 

It simply shows that genocide is there and present in ALL societies, from ALL parties.


And as i asked - would you like more examples or are you not ready to shatter your idiotic belief that somehow hindus are 'better than the rest and while evil Euros, Arabs and Mongols genocide, hindus dont' ?!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

Honor code is pretty universal world-wide. I am simply pointing out, that when you talk about preserving honor or how honorable our ancestors were, they were NOTHING compared to the Japanese, who are the ultimate champions of behaving honorably.

Its your ignorance of Japanese history that is why you don't know this. 
Some indians praise the 'honorable sacrifices' of the Rajputs against the muslim onslaughts - compare that to the PERSONAL HONOR code that the Japanese took to far higher levels - you commit ritual suicide (only if you are a warrior), if you fail at your task. 

So next time, don't talk about honor of our ancestors as some sort of a shield against accepting modernity. The Japanese, who were MAI-BAAPS of Rajputs, jaats - heck everyone on this planet as far as honor goes, did it and still preserved their culture.


Thus showing that all the nonsense you and coffee_rules type spout, re: 'western idea' is nothing more than insecure nonsense. 

Japanese were not very honorable when it came to the conquered women of other countries like korea and china.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 9/23/2018 at 8:36 AM, beetle said:

Japanese were not very honorable when it came to the conquered women of other countries like korea and china.

 

Read about their war in Manchuria and Nanking massacre where according to various scholarly estimates more than 100K people were brutally killed.

But nah let's bash and call Hindus genocidal maniacs because of one alleged incident in Pallava kingdom.

Edited by Stradlater

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, beetle said:

Japanese were not very honorable when it came to the conquered women of other countries like korea and china.

 

nobody prior to modern times ever showed any honor towards foreigners. Our own behaviour towards 'mlechcha' or dalits were similar. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, Stradlater said:

Read about their war in Manchuria and Nanking massacre where according to various scholarly estimates more than 100K people were brutally killed.

But nah let's bash Rajputs and call Hindus genocidal maniacs because of one alleged incident in Pallava kingdom.

I gave you ONE example. I can give many. Heres another: marathas and bargi raids where entire villages in Bihar, Bengal and Orissa were murdered & looted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 minutes ago, Muloghonto said:

I gave you ONE example. I can give many. Heres another: marathas and bargi raids where entire villages in Bihar, Bengal and Orissa were murdered & looted. 

I can give thousand examples of atrocities committed by Japanese on their citizens as well as on people of different countries. The honour code matters zilch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

I can give thousand examples of atrocities committed by Japanese on their citizens as well as on people of different countries. The honour code matters zilch.

same goes for everyone. Doesnt change the fact that they held themselves to a higher code of personal honor than any other society on the planet. We can all give examples of attrocities by every society. Find me examples of societies who commit the most painful suicide routinely after failing at their job, like the Japanese samurais did for centuries. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, beetle said:

Doesn't excuse what they did.

They can't be called honorable when they are no better than the dishonourable.

Then no culture has honor in it. The way of the world has always been to be nice to your own and a$$hole to outsiders. If you bring in how culture xyz treats outsiders, before modern times, then nobody has honor and everyone is a giant d!ck. 


By that benchmark, i am pointing out that the Bushido code Japanese behaved more honorably than any other culture. My point is not to say only the Japanese have honor. My point is to say that they are one of the proudest cultures in the world, they had a honor code that was more hardcore than anywhere else in the world (show me anywhere else where bodyguards routinely cut open their bellies for failing to protect their lord/lady from abduction/rape/murder, like the Japanese did). And yet, they adopted westernism, while preserving their culture. My point was to show that if Japan can still retain its culture while becoming modern and western, anyone can.

This means the standard knee-jerk response of the chaddis to lambast anything they dont like as 'western values' and prop up every single desi value as some sort of 'self-respect' is just inferiority complex BS.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Muloghonto said:

same goes for everyone. Doesnt change the fact that they held themselves to a higher code of personal honor than any other society on the planet. We can all give examples of attrocities by every society. Find me examples of societies who commit the most painful suicide routinely after failing at their job, like the Japanese samurais did for centuries. 

Sorry.

I accept defeat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The opinions of the bench are quite interesting. All the male justices (Nariman, Chandrachud, Khanwilkar, Misra) called it discriminatory and said it violated rights of hindu women, the lone female justice Malhotra also brought in some sense:

 

It is not for courts to determine which religious practices are to be struck down except in issues of social evil like 'Sati'

Right to equality conflicts with right to worship of devotees of Lord Ayyappa

Notions of rationality cannot be brought into matters of religion

Religious practices can't solely be tested on the basis of the right to equality. It's up to the worshippers, not the court to decide what's religion's essential practice

Issue in this case not limited to Sabarimala only. It'll have far reaching implications for other places of worships

 

The last statement is the most worrying part, not all sections of society are ready for the up to date views of the courts and it could have some heavier reactions which need to be absorbed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The opinions of the bench are quite interesting. All the male justices (Nariman, Chandrachud, Khanwilkar, Misra) called it discriminatory and said it violated rights of hindu women, the lone female justice Malhotra also brought in some sense:
 
It is not for courts to determine which religious practices are to be struck down except in issues of social evil like 'Sati'
Right to equality conflicts with right to worship of devotees of Lord Ayyappa
Notions of rationality cannot be brought into matters of religion
Religious practices can't solely be tested on the basis of the right to equality. It's up to the worshippers, not the court to decide what's religion's essential practice
Issue in this case not limited to Sabarimala only. It'll have far reaching implications for other places of worships
 
The last statement is the most worrying part, not all sections of society are ready for the up to date views of the courts and it could have some heavier reactions which need to be absorbed. 
The woman justice actually makes sense
Lol
Chandrachud is a egoistic nutcase though.
Know him personally

Sent from my SM-A710F using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, coffee_rules said:

SC verdict tomorrow!  Have a sinking feeling since today's verdict on Adultery law is seen as a loss for Feminists, tomorrow will be in their favor. :fear: 

Why do you feel  the ' adultery' verdict is a loss for feminists?

You really do not understand the issue at all.

Infact it is a victory for feminists because women now get treated as equal and not as the property of husband.

 

Seriously man....how difficult is is to understand.:facepalm:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These 4-5 Judges are setting rules for a country of Billion plus people as if it's their Baap ki Jagir and everyone must obey them. 

 

Yeh toh dadagiri ho gayi ki Bhai Hum Decide karenge ki tumko apna religion kaise practice Karna chahiye. 

Edited by rageaddict

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, beetle said:

Why do you feel  the ' adultery' verdict is a loss for feminists?

You really do not understand the issue at all.

Infact it is a victory for feminists because women now get treated as equal and not as the property of husband.

 

Seriously man....how difficult is is to understand.:facepalm:

A very intelligent friend I once met at a conference stated: I'm a feminist because I stand for gender equality, not any other meaning or interpretation out there. CR probably refers to the latter when he refers to feminists while you hopefully subscribe to the former. 

 

Equality though has its interpretations as well across spheres in society (e.g. religion) as is clear from the verdicts I mentioned above. 

Edited by Clarke

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, beetle said:

Why do you feel  the ' adultery' verdict is a loss for feminists?

You really do not understand the issue at all.

Infact it is a victory for feminists because women now get treated as equal and not as the property of husband.

 

Seriously man....how difficult is is to understand.:facepalm:

Tell this to your DCW chairperson who is tweeting that it is against women, people will have a free will to commit adultery and sanctity of marriage will be lost.

Edited by coffee_rules

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Stradlater said:

Should allow shorts in Temple premises.

 

I dont mind that personally bcos of mostly hot and humid climate of India. I say anything should go, shorts or bikinis or whatever that makes it comfortable and easier.

 

But then, when I actually think over it a bit and introspect, it all comes down to the same point - the whole idea of temples and traditions becomes useless. Why are we in need to convert these places in tourist spots. Might as well just go to beach and other places for fun. My personal opinion is I enjoy/participate in these traditions, rituals and festivals etc is actually because it is done/followed in certain way. If it was about my freedom, convenience n stuff than I would rather do something else. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, coffee_rules said:

Tell this to your DCW chairperson who is tweeting that it is against women, people will have a free will to commit adultery and sanctity of marriage will be lost.

Wtf do you mean by your dcw chairperson!!!

I don't even know who it is ....

Whoever it is doesn't understand either sexism or equality/ feminism.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A very poor decision by the Supreme Court. Hindus should campaign to take temples away from the control of the government . The government should not have any say in the manner of worship and Hindus should stop giving even a penny to temples like sabarimala which goes to government coffers. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

Guest, sign in to access all features.

×