Ayodhya : Supreme Court Orders Mediation to Settle Dispute, Panel of 3 Mediators Appointed

[someone]

12 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

I believe there was absolutely no problem upon Triple Talaq, and Muslims accepted the Court Ruling. 

 

But the bill, which was announced by BJP, it is totally wrong, and it is the sole problem in this issue while it is against logic. 

 

Please, so called secular parties doing everything to protect their mullahs interests. They don't care about women's right and already, some of the leaders have said they will completely remove the bill itself if they come in power.

 

And there is the Shah Bono case on understand all this too well.

Edited March 10, 2019 by someone

[Alam_dar]

1 hour ago, someone said:

Please, so called secular parties doing everything to protect their mullahs interests. They don't care about women's right and already, some of the leaders have said they will completely remove the bill itself if they come in power.

 

And there is the Shah Bono case on understand all this too well.

I followed this Triple Talaq case closely. And I am confident to say either BJP leaders are totally unable to understand the issue, or they are simply playing politics on this issue. 

 

Triple Talaq case could absolutely in no way come under the Criminal offence, while husband is not deserting the wife without alimony and maintenance, or taking away any other right from her. 

 

Divorce is itself a right of husband. Only problem was the procedure of giving divorce, which was needed to be corrected, while husbands gave 3 Talaqs at one occasion in anger. 

 

Muslim women were protesting against this procedure, while they wanted to find a way  for a happy return home  to their husbands, which the triple Talaq stopped. It is very important to understand this point. Muslim women want to maintain their families and didn't want Triple Talaq to destroy their family. 

 

But the bill by BJP ministers actually stopped completely the path of happy return back to their husbands, and it was even bigger hurdle  for Muslim women to maintain their family. 

 

The legalization by the Parliament should only be this that in "Nikah Nama" it has to introduce a new clause that Husbands are not allowed to pronounce 3 Talaqs in one sitting. 

 

I highly doubt that BJP ministers have any idea about this issue. 

 

 

 

[mishra]

^  Current proposal for TT as illegal is just wateing it down. TT should be Made criminal so that people will have to follow standard divorce procedure as per law. 

 

If Muslims do want Tripple Talaq as religious stuff why dont they put following in prenuptial contract

1. Kids go to the women

2. Monthly maintenance @inflation per child must go to Woman

3. Monthly maintenance to the woman @inflation comparable to allmost 30-40% of his earning

4. Asset divided in half.

 

Now don’t tell that modifying contract as per above is anti religion .  And go on and go ahead give additional stuff other then above to women along with Tripple Talaq. I for one will definitely support that type of TT.

 

Edited March 10, 2019 by mishra

[Mariyam]

14 hours ago, someone said:

That's bacha talk. These judges didn't want to hear what atrocities Babur did. So when they choose to ignore these past crimes, and history, how can they make the right decision? Additional in that case, why do we have justice for Dalits for past crimes in our country?

 

The past is relevant and that's the key argument in this whole case. Yet that past makes certain communities get offended, and thus we just keep ignoring the past.

Why is this relevant to the case of ownership of the land? Babur was not answerable to the Constitution of India. The action of those who demolished the Babri Masjid are.

 

The past maybe relevant, as you say, but it has no bearing on this case. 

 

The more you think about this case, the more it is a glorified title deed case. 

[Muloghonto]

20 hours ago, Alam_dar said:

What is this? 

Why didn't you continued the discussion about the Aryan Invasion theory in the thread where I presented the LATEST Research Paper? 

I wished you brought your Arguments and Proofs in that thread, instead of coming up with you personal attacks against me in the non-related thread. 

 

We are here in a discussion forum. The first rule of discussion is to learn how to say welcome to the differing opinions. Why then to get personal and come up with the conspiracy theories? 

 

Why this so much biased attitude and hatred against the Secularists and Communists? They have full right to present their opinion with their evidences, while you have full right to differ with them. But why to try to snatch away the right from others to even express their opinions? 

 

In fact, I even didn't still present their arguments, but I asked 2 very simple questions, which were based only upon the "Common Sense" and "Logic" and showing the Double Standards in the behaviour. 

 

Instead of directly answering these 2 simple questions, we get to hear only the personal hatred against the groups. Why? 

 

Is it really so difficult to hear the criticism and differing opinions? 

 

Unfortunately, this is the same intolerant behaviour which is shown by the Muslim where they could not hear any question and criticism against their religion.

We are not muzzling you like Muslims do- that would be akin to banning you. We are simply informing you that your opinion is unqualified, under-educated and steeped in Pakistani bias. Ie, YOUR opinion is garbage. When both the right wing fundamentalists like Tibarn or Surajmal and left-leaning centrists like Muloghonto are saying the same damn thing to you, you should sit up and take notice. 

[mishra]

2 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Why is this relevant to the case of ownership of the land? Babur was not answerable to the Constitution of India. The action of those who demolished the Babri Masjid are.

 

The past maybe relevant, as you say, but it has no bearing on this case. 

 

The more you think about this case, the more it is a glorified title deed case. 

Maryam ji. Is Muslim Waqf Boar officially owner of all such Historic Mosques? Who actually owns them? Shouldnt it be Government, Some National Heritage/Acheological  type department?

 

ABove question is out of curosity, If they arent, then probably via this case they want to somehow cement ownership and earnings from various other such age old Historic mosques

Edited March 11, 2019 by mishra

[Alam_dar]

11 hours ago, mishra said:

^  Current proposal for TT as illegal is just wateing it down. TT should be Made criminal so that people will have to follow standard divorce procedure as per law. 

 

If Muslims do want Tripple Talaq as religious stuff why dont they put following in prenuptial contract

1. Kids go to the women

2. Monthly maintenance @inflation per child must go to Woman

3. Monthly maintenance to the woman @inflation comparable to allmost 30-40% of his earning

4. Asset divided in half.

 

Now don’t tell that modifying contract as per above is anti religion .  And go on and go ahead give additional stuff other then above to women along with Tripple Talaq. I for one will definitely support that type of TT.

 

Mishra Sahib, these issues are relate to the discussion of "Personal Law" or "No Personal Law" (i.e. uniform civil code). 

 

As far as the issue of Triple Talaq is concerned, then it is not a criminal offence, and giving divorce is a basic human right. 

 

According to the Muslim women of India, the Triple Talaq in one sitting in anger is a cause that they could not make a happy return to their homes, to their husband and thus the family is destroyed. It is to avoid this situation only. 

 

Thus Indian Parliament could only make this bill that triple Talaq does not occur, and pre-condition should be introduced in the pact of Nikah Nama that husbands have no right to give triple Talaqs in one sitting. 

[Alam_dar]

3 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Why is this relevant to the case of ownership of the land? Babur was not answerable to the Constitution of India. The action of those who demolished the Babri Masjid are.

 

The past maybe relevant, as you say, but it has no bearing on this case. 

 

The more you think about this case, the more it is a glorified title deed case. 

I see this problem that Supreme Court (or perhaps the high court) does not seem to be of this opinion, while SC ordered the Archaeology Institute of India to find out if there was really a Hindu temple present there before the construction of the mosque. 

 

Thus court is indeed going into the past. 

 

Ideally, Muslims would have said if it is proven WITHOUT DOUBTS that indeed Babur demolished the original temple and built a mosque upon it, then they will voluntarily shift the mosque from that place. 

 

Trying to make this a Title Deed Case will not bring harmony in the society. But Muslim leaders should let the Court decide if it could decide with 100% surety that earlier temple existed there or not. 

 

Note: 

 

Actually, I wonder if this site was so important, why then we don't see any ancient Hindu Text (which is written before the construction of this mosque) about it's being the birthplace of Ram? There are Hindu Texts written after the construction of mosque which claim this, but not before the construction of the mosque). 

 

Edited March 11, 2019 by Alam_dar

[mishra]

1 hour ago, Alam_dar said:

Mishra Sahib, these issues are relate to the discussion of "Personal Law" or "No Personal Law" (i.e. uniform civil code). 

 

As far as the issue of Triple Talaq is concerned, then it is not a criminal offence, and giving divorce is a basic human right. 

 

According to the Muslim women of India, the Triple Talaq in one sitting in anger is a cause that they could not make a happy return to their homes, to their husband and thus the family is destroyed. It is to avoid this situation only. 

 

Thus Indian Parliament could only make this bill that triple Talaq does not occur, and pre-condition should be introduced in the pact of Nikah Nama that husbands have no right to give triple Talaqs in one sitting. 

Alam bhai. You missed the point that women is not getting fair deal. I am saying that keep the si called fundamental right of Religious doctrine/procedure. Just put above as part of what women gets if a man voluntarily chooses to excecise his right to TT.

My question to Muslim experts is, Is putting some fairness like above, I mentioned as part of pre nuptial contract is right or wrong as per their  religion?

[mishra]

Btw^ If something like above is put in, Even i will vote for a that to go into uniform civil code

[Alam_dar]

1 hour ago, mishra said:

Alam bhai. You missed the point that women is not getting fair deal. I am saying that keep the si called fundamental right of Religious doctrine/procedure. Just put above as part of what women gets if a man voluntarily chooses to excecise his right to TT.

My question to Muslim experts is, Is putting some fairness like above, I mentioned as part of pre nuptial contract is right or wrong as per their  religion?

I am all for uniform civil rights in India, while I does not consider contract (like marriage) between two parties as "personal" thing. 

 

Supreme court has already over-ruled Muslim personal laws,  and introduced the alimony and maintenance laws and the right to child and property laws according to the Indian law for the Muslim women. These are the issues where "conflict" is present between the two parties. 

 

As far as triple talaq is concerned, then it is not an issue of "conflict", but women wanting to go back to their husbands and maintaining their family. I am afraid that it could not come under the criminal offence. At maximum, state could say that officially no divorce has taken place (like Uniform Indian civil code says if any Hindu says 3 times Talaq to his wife, then it is Nothing. Neither divorce takes place, nor the hindu husband is punished). 

 

Edited March 11, 2019 by Alam_dar

[mishra]

1 hour ago, Alam_dar said:

I am all for uniform civil rights in India, while I does not consider contract (like marriage) between two parties as "personal" thing. 

 

Supreme court has already over-ruled Muslim personal laws,  and introduced the alimony and maintenance laws and the right to child and property laws according to the Indian law for the Muslim women. These are the issues where "conflict" is present between the two parties. 

 

As far as triple talaq is concerned, then it is not an issue of "conflict", but women wanting to go back to their husbands and maintaining their family. I am afraid that it could not come under the criminal offence. At maximum, state could say that officially no divorce has taken place (like Uniform Indian civil code says if any Hindu says 3 times Talaq to his wife, then it is Nothing. Neither divorce takes place, nor the hindu husband is punished). 

 

Currently, law doesnt have enough potection for divorced women. As society is changing, Its evolving. As i said, I mimimum guideline needs to be set if Muslim want to continue with TT. This Ruppee 10,000 contract or INR 1laakh contract is simple bulls hit and absolutely unfair. Unless its made criminal, Community will continue practicing it. Deterrence is needed.

Like we have in case of dowry, Its non bailable offence for whole family . Its still practised but slowly people are getting out of it. Atleast now they have stopped burning the brides post marriage in accidental stove fire. In soft for, they used to send the bride back to her home an she ended up social ridicule and brides family was in tremendous pressure. By making it criminal government acheived fair treatment to its women population.

 

So, if Community and family and priests are at risk of going into prison then and then only TT will be eradicated in next 20-30 years. High handed it may sound but serious deterrence is needed. Dont assume policy makers are Chewt$ya. They know how social issue are to be tackled

Edited March 11, 2019 by mishra

[Alam_dar]

23 minutes ago, mishra said:

Currently, law doesnt have enough potection for divorced women. As society is changing, Its evolving. As i said, I mimimum guideline needs to be set if Muslim want to continue with TT. This Ruppee 10,000 contract or INR 1laakh contract is simple bulls hit and absolutely unfair. Unless its made criminal, Community will continue practicing it. Deterrence is needed.

Like we have in case of dowry, Its non bailable offence for whole family . Its still practised but slowly people are getting out of it. Atleast now they have stopped burning the brides post marriage in accidental stove fire. In soft for, they used to send the bride back to her home an she ended up social ridicule and brides family was in tremendous pressure. By making it criminal government acheived fair treatment to its women population.

 

So, if Community and family and priests are at risk of going into prison then and then only TT will be eradicated in next 20-30 years. High handed it may sound but serious deterrence is needed. Dont assume policy makers are Chewt$ya. They know how social issue are to be tackled

 

Please try to understand this basic difference:

(1) Dowry, or burning the bride, or pressurizing the bride for dowry.... all these are "Physical Criminal Acts". 

(2) While giving divorce is a basic human right and not a physical criminal act. Only thing is the procedure of divorce, and that has already been corrected by the supreme court i.e. no divorce will take place even Muslim husband pronounces 3 Talaqs in one sitting. 

(3) According to supreme court, this Haq-Mehr thing of 1 lac or 10 thousand is now not any more a BASIC insurance for the Muslim women, but the basic insurance for the Muslim wife is alimony and maintenance, just like any Hindu woman will get according to the civil code of India. Same is about the custody of the child, which will happen according to the civil code, and not according to the personal law of Muslims. 

 

(4) It will be absolutely not wise from the ministers of BJP to make Triple Talaq a criminal offence, while it is against the husband's right who is not deserting the wife, but giving all the rights according to the civil code of India. 

The purpose of ending the Triple Talaq is only "happy return of wife to her husband and uniting a family". By making it a criminal offence, BJP is killing the total purpose of this ban. 

 

 

[mishra]

^ Similar high handed approach was/is followed in case of another Social evil, where Indian preferred son ahead of daughter. Government has made it illegal to determine sex of the child and if found indulging, whole medical facility (despite acute shortage) faces closure and arrest of practicing professionals.

 

Both dowry and sex determination are prime examples of how high handed approach , as unfair as it sounds works to eradicate social evils. During my child hood days, I used to hear stories where marriage used to get cancelled during the wedding, how brides were sent home to meet additional dowry demands, How parents of brides used to sell their assets just to ensure their daughter is not troubled, and how unreasonable the dowry amount used to be compared to family earnings.

 

So, any sane Muslim person , should and must give government a free hand, because the current contractual obligation in TT is as good as exploitation of the females. Muslims must not forget that these female victims are Muslim too.

Edited March 11, 2019 by mishra

[Alam_dar]

23 minutes ago, mishra said:

Currently, law doesnt have enough potection for divorced women. As society is changing, Its evolving. As i said, I mimimum guideline needs to be set if Muslim want to continue with TT. This Ruppee 10,000 contract or INR 1laakh contract is simple bulls hit and absolutely unfair. Unless its made criminal, Community will continue practicing it. Deterrence is needed.

Like we have in case of dowry, Its non bailable offence for whole family . Its still practised but slowly people are getting out of it. Atleast now they have stopped burning the brides post marriage in accidental stove fire. In soft for, they used to send the bride back to her home an she ended up social ridicule and brides family was in tremendous pressure. By making it criminal government acheived fair treatment to its women population.

 

So, if Community and family and priests are at risk of going into prison then and then only TT will be eradicated in next 20-30 years. High handed it may sound but serious deterrence is needed. Dont assume policy makers are Chewt$ya. They know how social issue are to be tackled

 

Please try to understand this basic difference:

(1) Dowry, or burning the bride, or pressurizing the bride for dowry.... all these are "Physical Criminal Acts". 

(2) While giving divorce

[mishra]

51 minutes ago, Alam_dar said:

 

Please try to understand this basic difference:

(1) Dowry, or burning the bride, or pressurizing the bride for dowry.... all these are "Physical Criminal Acts". 

(2) While giving divorce is a basic human right and not a physical criminal act. Only thing is the procedure of divorce, and that has already been corrected by the supreme court i.e. no divorce will take place even Muslim husband pronounces 3 Talaqs in one sitting. 

(3) According to supreme court, this Haq-Mehr thing of 1 lac or 10 thousand is now not any more a BASIC insurance for the Muslim women, but the basic insurance for the Muslim wife is alimony and maintenance, just like any Hindu woman will get according to the civil code of India. Same is about the custody of the child, which will happen according to the civil code, and not according to the personal law of Muslims. 

 

(4) It will be absolutely not wise from the ministers of BJP to make Triple Talaq a criminal offence, while it is against the husband's right who is not deserting the wife, but giving all the rights according to the civil code of India. 

The purpose of ending the Triple Talaq is only "happy return of wife to her husband and uniting a family". By making it a criminal offence, BJP is killing the total purpose of this ban. 

 

 

Bhai, How do you proove that divorce, sending women back to her home, or beating her in court of law because of dowry. The grooms family will hire a lawyer and that will easily win it. And they allmost win it all the time because of lack of evidence.

 

But by making it non bailable criminal offence. It made sure that there is prison first then onus is on you prove you haven't committed the crime of asking dowry

 

Same will happen in case of TT. Risk of Prison first is only deterrence.

Edited March 11, 2019 by mishra

[Tibarn]

On 3/9/2019 at 10:14 AM, Alam_dar said:

A book is not a PROOF, but it represents only a different point of view. 

If a book is enough, then you take this book as proof that Hindu sacred texts allowed eating beef (LINK to the Book). 

First, a book is indeed a form of proof, assuming one actually reads it and it provides reliable documentation for its assertions.

 

If you incapable of reading a simple book, I can give a dozen: verses of Sanskrit, historical instances, as well circumstantial evidence which directly refutes what you claimed in your post.

 

Not only that, the same book you plugged here, despite the fact that you haven't read that one either, is refuted by the very book you were assigned to read. 

 

 

 

On 3/9/2019 at 10:14 AM, Alam_dar said:

 

And rest, I still stand on my point that beef/meat is not eaten as reaction to Hindu religion. It is an old culture. 

 I specifically asked you to prove that beef was part of so-called old culture in Hinduism or that Dalits ate beef for centuries or that Dalits especially ate beef. Provide proof.  

 

The rest of your post is clear obfuscation by you, in an attempt to defelct from addressing what you originally said. I am not interested in your opinion on or what you think about this or that. You are free to post that or whatever else without quoting me. Back up your assertions, or, once again, bother someone else. 

 

It is clear, you were talking out of your read-end and now are trying to deflect from supporting what you said. 

Edited March 11, 2019 by Tibarn

[Tibarn]

On 3/9/2019 at 8:00 PM, surajmal said:

Have been meaning pen a post on this mode of action. But it sounds so politically incorrect that I haven't got around to it. Maybe it's the remnants of dhimmi in me...

You should post it, but it seems there is an influx of dhimmis on ICF recently, so they may start whinging about it after you write it. 

 

I find some of what Agniveer does as a good starting point, which isn't a coincidence, considering they seem to be derived from Arya Samaj themselves. 

[Tibarn]

For anyone, except Dar, who wants to see support for what I stated originally, just ask and I will provide it when this thread dies down, otherwise this other fellow is just wasting my time and derailing another thread.  

 

 

Also 10 upvotes for anyone who can answer this question:

 

Explain the cognitive dissonance between holding both of these beliefs:

1) Dalits are historically oppressed in Hindu civilization

2) Dalits ate beef for centuries

 

Whoever answers only has to get in the ballpark of the correct answer, they don't need to be fully correct. 

Edited March 11, 2019 by Tibarn

[someone]

10 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Why is this relevant to the case of ownership of the land? Babur was not answerable to the Constitution of India. The action of those who demolished the Babri Masjid are.

 

The past maybe relevant, as you say, but it has no bearing on this case. 

 

The more you think about this case, the more it is a glorified title deed case. 

The crux of this issue is history. Today, Dalits are getting justice based on the past crimes done in our country. There are also countries like Israel, USA where past crimes are now being corrected.

 

Similarly, this Babri  is the symbol of tyranny. Yet, if courts don't take history into account, then whats the significance and relevance of the place being Lord Ram birthplace itself? They are foolish and wrong if they make judgement based from India 1947. That latter is the key point as one side only wants to show incomplete picture by analyzing it from 1947, while I along with many others wants the complete picture which consists of history to make the judgement. But that means dealing with secular "India" biggest taboo subject, Muslim atrocities...

Edited March 11, 2019 by someone