Jump to content

Muloghonto

Members L2
  • Content count

    7,572
  • Runs

    113,000 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    4
  • Time Online

    91d 15h 29m 57s

Everything posted by Muloghonto

  1. You stupid yokel, i have probably spent longer living in USA and Canada than you've been alive. I have also visited your little rock down under and it felt like stepping back into the 60s/worse than deep south of the US. I never said that its the greatest country on the earth. But if money was not an issue, i'd rather live in India than in OZ. And so too would practically any minority.
  2. Muloghonto

    Its disturbing to see Muslims being targeted : Tapsee Pannu

    youtube is not a source. And there is nothing contradictory about the idea that if it wasn't for Pakistan sponsoring terrorist camps in Pakistan Occupied Kashmir, security in the region would be a lot better.
  3. Every society legally protects rapists, because of the nature of the crime. Do you want me to start posting examples of how your justice system lets rapists walk away scot-free ? As for greater reporting, you have zero evidence to claim that it is getting worse or better or if there are more/less without posting evidence. When your government used to steal babies because of race until just a couple of decades ago, you don't get to tell us our society is corrupt before punishing those racist family-breaking low-lifes. As someone who's been to Australia, i'd take being a minority in India any day of the week than being one in your racist $hytehole of a nation that is the collective embarassment of the entire western world.
  4. Muloghonto

    I AM FROM INDIA | Social Experiment in Pakistan

    Most Hindus are not vegetarians. Outside of the Hindi + Gujju belt, vegetarianism drops dramatically. Good luck finding more than 1-5% veggies in entire eastern india, Kerala, Telengana, Karnataka, etc. Even in hindi belt, the # of veggies are not a big majority, they are a slim majority. The 'vegetarian hindu' is probably the biggest misconception of hinduism outsiders have.
  5. Muloghonto

    Its disturbing to see Muslims being targeted : Tapsee Pannu

    the economic issue is NOT raised as a domestic one, neither is it a domestic one. Simple reality is, a region with service based economy will suffer gravely due to security risk, which is what Pakistan has created for Kashmir.
  6. Muloghonto

    Its disturbing to see Muslims being targeted : Tapsee Pannu

    employment rate in Kashmir will always be low if Pakistan keeps formenting terrorism there. Kashmir valley & Jammu are densely populated regions, which rely on service sector to generate revenue. With terrorism & instability, its always the service/manufacturing sectors that take a nosedive. So if you wish Kashmiri employment to rise, petition Pakistan to stop formenting terrorism in Kashmir by training & funding terrorists. As for oppression, i am sorry but thats nonsense. Most Kashmiris in history have shown up to vote - which is a direct endorsement of the nation they are in. Most Kashmiris also enjoy privilege - economic an social- that rest of India does not.
  7. Muloghonto

    Its disturbing to see Muslims being targeted : Tapsee Pannu

    you are mistaken. We have an 'out of sight/out of mind' mentality towards past problems, especially when they are not our own. The only reason the Kashmiri seperatists have not had much takers in the west is because of politics of the Cold War (where the west did not want to push India decisively in the Soviet camp) and then the western atipathy towards Islam currently. However, if the western ultra-progressives become the majority (which is likely in the future), then they will take a 'whats done is done, it cannot be changed, but what can be changed, is that a bunch of people over there want independence and you are oppressing them'. India cannot afford to sit around and do nothing, we HAVE to start altering the religious demographics of Kashmir.
  8. yes but take out farmers and you end up with more people who work office jobs than unorganized sector. Office job is not just a tech job, it includes police, it includes every single government worker, down to the mail-man etc. the unorganized sector is basically small business sector, which is not a big employer in india.
  9. secularism has always been non-religious, with Indian secularism being the only exception. Secularism = seperation of church and state. Ie, the state machinery is not beholden to any religious ideal for making its laws or running its business. In multi-religious nations, it means making the government machinery atheist. The only exception are religious holidays, mostly due to practical reasons (and that everyone loves a paid day off, so nobody is gonna uproot a paid day off).
  10. a social trend, is a social trend because of majoritarian governing dynamics, not what a few minority exception cases are doing. I can show stats from around the world, showing direct correlation in rising education & economic levels with decline in arranged marriages. Be it USA, Sweden, Germany,UK, India or China - greater economic & educational progress equals to less arranged marriages. Ergo, arranged marriages are predominantly for jaahils. A few educated luminaries who cannot buck the social trends in developing nations or a few old timers in developed nations do not override the governing principle, determined by majoritarian dynamics. Arranged marriages in India are steadily declining. And it matches the trend of every other nation out there that shows economic and education progress. Ergo, arranged marriages are on their way out. And i'd be extremely surprised to see arranged marriages done by more than a tiny fraction of the population in India, if (or when) India gets to a stage where it has near-western levels of income and education. You may call it 'westernism' but it is not. Even deeply eastern cultures like Japan, Taiwan and South Korea has shown the annihilation of arranged marriages once they too reached 1st world education and economic levels.
  11. Restaurant or big shops are run by a tiny fraction of Indian men. Bulk majority of Indian men work as farmers. And then the next biggest segment of employment are those who sit in offices and work - both private and public sector.
  12. Species homo sapiens has remained more or less the same for the last 150,000-300,000 years. So its quite possible that Valmiki or some random dude 3000 years ago was just as smart as a nobel lauriate today. But what is NOT in question, is that my grade 8 child has more knowledge than Valmiki ever did. Or that every single one of us here who has a degree in technology has greater knowledge than the sum total of Hindu (or ancient Greek/Chinese etc) civilization till pre-modern times. Do you take life lessons from a jaahil, illierate 'angutha-chaap' ?? Do you let a person who cannot read or write, has never been to school, to correct YOUR viewpoint about the universe ? If the answer is no, then the same should apply to the likes of Valmiki or Vyas or Mohammed or any such ancient writer, who's KNOWLEDGE of the universe is less than that of children today. Hinduism is not a revealed faith. its a realized one. Its always relied on realizations of its sages, which is basically knowledge applied to spirituality based on knowledge of the universe. And that makes Valmiki, Vyaas and all of them inferior to the average grade 9 child today. Hence, they are not fit to be followed. PS: There isnt a modern engineer alive who 'doesnt understand' how the cave temples of Ajanta and Ellora or the pyramids were built. And if you really want to make a point about 'ancient technology', try using one that ACTUALLY awes the engineers the world around- Angkor Wat.
  13. Yep. Me. And anyone who has enough sense to not take moral lessons from 'rishis and philosophers' who knew less about phenomenal universe/reality than children in middle school these days. In face of technological progress and progress in deciphering the phenomenal universe, its a matter of time before every old philosophy becomes antiquated and inferior. What is cutting edge modernism today,assuming development of tech & discoveries of the universe keep pace, will seem as ignorant nonsense 500 years from now, as the religious texts do now.
  14. It *is* inferior as it relies on several presuppositions to make the marriage work. There is a reason why in free societies, arranged marriages are not the norm but love marriages are. The average Indian housewife *is* oppressed, because in simple economic terms, the person who has zero income, in a non-welfare state, has zero power. So the housewife *is* inferior in power to the husband. That is objective and empiric. It has worked well for our country, just like it did in the past for the west (or does now for the Arabs) is because of poor, illiterate society, its easy to foster presupposed ideologies about marriage and then force people to stick to it. But the moment people get educated, can think on their own,have the power of choice- be it in career, life path or mate- the model of arranged marriage breaks down and is replaced by mutual consent dating-marriage, ie, love-marriage. Since India is fast developing, this is why the arranged marriage model is being abandoned by many in India and the growth of love marriage will continue. You are the one dictating here it seems, where you are hell bent on keeping the woman at home. My point is simple - both husband and wife should earn enough to support themselves and contribute to the family and both should share in ALL the household work. Whether it means the husband is stay-at-home-running-a-business and wife goes to office 9-5 or husband goes to office 9-5 and wife stays at home running a business, is irrelevant. Right now, i am a freelance coder with several ongoing contracts- i can work from home, i can work from a beach in Aruba so long as i have internet. Whereas my wife is in management for a multinational firm. So for the past couple of years, its me who is staying at home and doing some of the housework. But this doesn't mean that on some of the days of the week, my wife just comes home, relaxes with a beer and lets me do the running around. When its her turn to cook and clean, she does it. And in a couple of years when i get bored of freelancing and get myself an office gig, we will both end up doing pretty much the same stuff on different days (when its my turn or hers). Sad reality is Indian men simply do not have the work ethic to be as efficient as Europeans or North Americans in running their home and its the Indian men who need to grow the hell up and be more than 'paying guests' at home. You see this attitude run amok here, where people will make fun of me for doing laundry when its my turn to do so. This is the main thing that needs to change amongst Indian men. Its not your wife's job to cook, clean and take care of the kids. Its BOTH PARENTS job to do so. High time Indian men started acting that way.
  15. @beetle Why is option 2) about woman's independence ?! If in-laws are gonna help (or daycare is involved), its nearly equally impacting (and responsibility) of the husband too. You are operating from the notion that a kid is primarily a woman's responsibility. Beyond breast-feeding age, it is equally both parent's responsibility. As such, having a friend/in-laws/babysitters/daycare etc. are considerations that both take in equally. Why would you choose option a) anyways ? Option a) is what is wrong with Indian society- the option needs to be quite simply ' we both work outside and for our home'. Its fairly simple and one day Indians will realize it when value of manpower in India rises and we don't have dime-a-dozen Dhonis and such to facilitate the 'paying guest' mentality at home.
  16. Behna, you are preaching to the choir. In India, most working women have in-laws involved is because the men don't do jack at home. Simple fact is, i realized when i immigrated at 17, is Indian men are not brought up to be anything more than 'paying guests' at home. Some adapt to the reality of the west, where you gotta do a crap ton of housework to have a decent place. But in reality, most i've encountered, back at home or here, do nothing to help out at home. They consider 'i change light bulbs when it breaks down, unclog the drain and bring home the $$' as doing their part at home. In truth, its not just the Indians, Arabs are the same way too, so are the Africans. It gets worse in the west, because most households need 2 incomes and therefore, the woman now is wonder-woman. Imagine doing what you do, plus a 9-5 job (ie, you are out of house at 8 and returning at 6). And then these guys whine about how their 'love is dying/wife is ignoring them/life is boring' yadda yadda. True independence works both ways and honestly, in the long term, a marriage sees everything from both sides. Both should bring home $$ and both should take care of the home when they are home. If both have a 9-5 job, thats when having in-laws or daycare comes in handy. But in the weekday evenings, both should take part in the whole 'cooking,cleaning, dealing with kids' aspect.
  17. Sure. But atleast the men within this outdated arranged-marriage system have far greater power, because they earn all the money. As i said, i am yet to find an arranged marriage where the man hasn't used the 'my money, my rules' argument atleast once. This makes it inferior in my eyes as there can be no true equality without financial independence of both parties. I didnt say women are inferior and docile. I said that is what men who get into arranged marriage look for and the women who are not inferior,docile and oppressed end up either having a very unhappy marriage or set on fire by the inlaws. What is needed, is for indian women to join the workforce and for indian men to share the household chores 50-50.
  18. Not at all, we are simply calling out the philosophy of the epics as dated and inferior to the times we live in now. thats all.
  19. Which western country has what crimes higher than India, except homicide in the US ?!? Remember, rape is a crime that is massively under-reported outside of the west due to social stigma.
  20. Big difference between choosing to spend more time with children and being a housewife. This is not nowadays stuff, this is ALWAYS the stuff. This is why Indians, arabs and virtually all the world that sticks to the 'housewife + working husband' model prefer docile and obidient wives. Because it ALWAYS comes down to 'my money, my rules'. Seen it in every single arranged marriage that i got to know the couple well.
  21. Forget just party, Bhisma should simply have been 'you know what, my vow was stupid and my dad is dead, the pandavas are not the sons of Pandu anyways, so auto-disqualified to succeed on the throne. Dhritarashtra's sons are a bunch of cun7s, so screw you all, i am taking over the throne. I am trained by the Gods in every art and nobody can beat me in battle'. Hastinapur would've had a 'happily ever after' story minus the war and deaths.
  22. Didn't you say Krishna was a God ? Gods are now held to the same benchmark as common men ? Hiding the sun and pretending it is normal, *IS* deceit. Then releasing the sun as soon as the enemy is coming out in the open, *IS* deceit. A deceitful strategy to win is justified, but it is still deceit. You are pretending that a deceitful strategy is not deceit because a God did it, whereas i am not saying the strategy is invalid - it IS valid, but it is also deceptive and thus wrong. I subscribe to the morality of 'anything goes' in war. That means i accept deceit and treachery to win wars. However, i dont pretend that it is NOT deceit or treachery simply because a God did it. Irrelevant. A deceit is a deceit. A lie is a lie. Doesn't matter if its on the battlefield or on an exam, doesn't matter if its you or Krishna or Jesus who commits it. If i am in no position to judge what is right and what is wrong, then neither are you. Ergo, you are also in no position to negate my opinion that Krishna committed deceit. Nothing is being manufactured here. Krishna hid the sun, withheld info from the commanders (that the sun hadn't set but he's hid it) when they declared the day done. That is deceit by withholding information - same thing as perjury really in a court of law (where deliberately witholding info is considered a criminal act). These are the bare facts. Says who ? Says where in the scriptures ? Quote it please. There is no one way of getting boons in Hinduism. Sometimes you do a lot of penance to get boons, sometimes you do that and don't get boons. And sometimes a God just pops by, is impressed by you and gives you a boon. this is utter nonsense. Please quote the mahabharata part or any of the vedas or such where it says that in Swargaloka every devata owns every article/nobobdy owns any article. You just pulled it out of your rear end. There is zero evidece that Indra could've taken it away if Karna had decieded not to give it as alms. The owner of anything has the power to give it away to anyone. In this case,Karna was the owner of the Kavach-kundala and he had full power to give it away, which he did. Indeed. And its Brahmhastra, which means its up to Brahmna to deciede how to give it and who to give it or when to give it. Other Gods don't get to mess with that, just like other Gods don't get to mess with when Surya gives his kavach-kundala to whom. And in this case, he didn't just give it to anyone but gave it to his own son. Perfectly legitimate. Whoptee-freaking-doo. Doesn't change the fact that Indra flat-out lied and took false identity to get it from Karna. Ofcourse i do. I have full right to critique any religion, any philosophy, etc. within the purview of the net-neutrality acts worldwide. A given site can have its own rules, but nowhere in the manifesto of this website does it say that one does not have the right to criticize a particular religion or philosophy. My freedom does indeed give me the right to say whatever i wish about any idea or any person who is not alive today. Same goes for you. Your personal space does not extend to social arenas. He can have his freedom taken away. But he still has every single fundamental right as a free citizen. You could be a mass-murderer, but you still have right to not be raped. Right to not be starved, have your hair pulled out, eyes gouged (all falling under a human beings right to not be tortured). Fighting a criminal does NOT give you the right to get your acts of cruelty, deceit or torture be deemed as kindness, truth and benevolence. You can argue legitimately that to fight fire with fire you need to commit heinous acts against criminals. Thats fine. Which is why i didn't say Krishna shouldn't have been deceitful or shouldn't have perjured himself. What he did was necessary. But it doesn't make his actions honest either. Again, just because you are guilty of murder, does it mean i can rape you ? Yes/no response please. I don't care how he is described. Read the various tales of krishna in the mahabharata itself. An all-knowing, all-powerful God avatar does not act like a naughty little kid stealing cream or clothes of women bathing in the river. It doesn't change the fact that Krishna was deceitful during Kurukshetra by hiding the sun. Your religion is no different from other religions where the claims (as in the epithets used for the Gods) simply does not measure up to the actions expected from an allknowing, all-powerful being. So let me get this straight - an all-knowing, all-powerful being (God-Avatar), is displaying remorse and regret for his action. Doesn't matter if it is in the capacity of a husband, brother, king, son, whatever. Please reconcile the idea of regret and remorse with all-powerful and all-knowing. Incorrect. He failed as a king in this regard. The duty of a king is to uphold justice. No proof was presented against Sita, yet he caved to the macho pressures of seeing her as unclean. According to you he is equal of Vishnu, simply Vishnu in flesh and blood. He could've used his divine power to determine the truth. But nope, he did no such thing. He simply bent under the pressure of allegation with zero proof. A good king does not set the example of declaring someone as guilty without evidence. False. Their actions do not reconcile with this view. If they were Gods, then they'd know everything, see every single possible scenario, have infinite power and wisdom. And such a being does not display remorse- which is a fundamental admission of error. An all-powerful, all-knowing being is, by definition, incapable of error. That in the Ramayana it CLEARLY says that Ram was remorseful for banishing Sita, is decisive, incontrovertible proof that he is not equal of Vishnu with infinite power and infinite knowledge. Otherwise, please reconcile the idea of an infinitely powerful, all-knowing being committing an error and having remorse. I will wait.
  23. I don't think Bhisma ever took it upon himself to fight all Adharma in all corners of the planet. What Kamsa, Jarasandaha, etc were doing was probably seen by him as none of his business. Just like today, if i hate rapists & rape ( which i do), doesn't mean its my responsibility to go hunt down rapists or i am being a bad person. Perfectly fine. Bhisma's vow was to defend and uphold the throne of Hastinapur and whomever sat on it. Ergo, he was honorbound to STFU and ignore it due to his own oath. IMO Bhisma's story is the best example of the english saying 'the road to hell is paved with good intentions' and how Mahabharata would not be a story if it wasn't for Bhisma. He was a demi-God, was trained by the Gods themselves in every art imaginable- warfare, rulership, etc. Had he not taken the vow to foresake the throne to cure his father's love-sickness, or had he taken on personal dishonor by breaking his oath and seizing the throne (which is rightfully his anyways) from a blind Dhritarashtra/weak Pandu, game over, no story to be told - the 'perfect king, trained by the Gods, ruled happily ever after' and Mahabharata would be a 30 page short story. Bhisma's story demonstrates the buddhist axiom of 'sometimes one needs to do a little evil for the greater good'. In a way, its a warning against personal honor - for its Bhisma's sense of personal honor that ultimately caused untold deaths, misery and practically a world-war. To me, no personal honor is worth that price. I'd happily live with the title of 'oath breaker' if it meant peace and prosperity for my citizens and no war.
  24. Traditions 'asmaan se tapak ke nahi ayi'...traditions are invented....Social systems are ultimately driven by necessities and technologies at hand, nothing more. In the last 500 years, the rate of evolution of technology has been greater than the previous 100,000 years put together. Hence 'traditions' cannot keep pace with rate of technological evolution and are dying out. Our traditions all stem from farming culture. Go tell a nomadic culture like the Mongols that women cannot hunt or ride a horse and should stay inside their tents only, they will laugh at you as a moron. Because their traditions are not due to farming culture's evolution. Traditions are there to serve a purpose - to lubricate the social system that has arisen. But once technology makes a certain social system redundant, its time to chuck that tradition in the dustbin- just like our ancestors chucked the traditions of hunter-gatherer ancestors of theirs in the dustbin when they adopted farming, so too should we as we are leaving that world behind.
  25. Someone should tell these morons to go to a strip club and see that every freaking stripper is wearing skin-color underwear/stockings. Because in dim lighting of strip clubs, the skin-color underwear projects the 'naked' look, which is why skin-color undies/stockings are so popular in those establishments. Its completely moronic to say 'skin color undies so boys don't stare'. Wear skin color undies and boys will go 'is she not wearing underwear ?!' and then stare 10 times as hard to make sure.....

Guest, sign in to access all features.

×