I have just one question to ask anyone opposing the Citizenship Amendment Act!

[mishra]

For those who hasnt got time or whose internet have been hijacked by Congress and anti CAA goons. Few thought provoking questions/statements/facts made. Not exact words, but with similar meaning.

1.On 7th July 1947, Gandhiji said, Not just citizenship, India has moral, ethical responsibility, duty of care, and may go to war with Pakistan on religious persecution of people living in newly created Pakistan.

2. As soon as Pakistan was declared Islamic republic, it automatically means, a declaration that ever non Muslim in that land as unequal and Jimmi. hence religiously persecuted.

3. He asks why is it allways young women who are charged with blasphemy laws? Why is it young non Muslim women who allways convert to Islam? Why not older women or others?

4. He says, Muslim league which was responsible fort partition, rebranded itself in Communism. i.e. they are people with Same set of divisive ideologies, just new name. In 1949, same communisties  in Aligarh station harrassed Khan Abdul Gaffar Khan.

 

5. Vande Matram is Sajada-e-Mohabbat and not Ibadat, Hence singing Vande Matram is not anti Islamic. Infact it was Ravindra Nath Tagore who was first to oppose Vande Matram. Muslim bodies came to know about it lot later. He makes revelation that even Jinnah used to sing it before idea of Pakistan was born.

6.. Sanatan Dharma clearly means everyone living between Himalaya and Indian Ocean, with whatever mode of worship is a Hindu. Ignorance leads to fear, Fear leads to hatred. CAA, NRC is nothing new, Its being proposed again and again since 1971 and 1985. he puts various names commisions reposrts and statement of Parliamentarian including Kapil Sibbal.

Edited January 15, 2020 by mishra

[cowboysfan]

i dont think anybody cares about hindus or muslim immigrants with this bill,they are worried the state will use this bill to make them stateless if they cant prove citizenship  and they have a good case with BJPs horrendous track record.

[randomGuy]

20 minutes ago, cowboysfan said:

i dont think anybody cares about hindus or muslim immigrants with this bill,they are worried the state will use this bill to make them stateless if they cant prove citizenship  and they have a good case with BJPs horrendous track record.

Any solutions?

[cowboysfan]

15 minutes ago, randomGuy said:

Any solutions?

obvious ones but none of which the BJP will implement.they could have done this properly,this was actually a Congress idea.BJP just had to bring religion into it and they messed up like everything they do,they are incapable of doing anything properly from GST  to 370 to this.

[randomGuy]

28 minutes ago, cowboysfan said:

obvious ones but none of which the BJP will implement.they could have done this properly,this was actually a Congress idea.BJP just had to bring religion into it and they messed up like everything they do,they are incapable of doing anything properly from GST  to 370 to this.

How? To be sure, We are talking about giving citizenship to religious minorities of neighbors who came to India due to persecution. If it was a Congress idea, why wasn't it being implemented, 

1. Migrants Minorities living like s hit in India without citizenship.

2. No accountability of Pakistan like country who treat minorities like so. Now it's getting more focus. Rather than hidden under the carpet even by earlier Indian govt.

Edited January 15, 2020 by randomGuy

[Laaloo]

40 minutes ago, cowboysfan said:

obvious ones but none of which the BJP will implement.they could have done this properly,this was actually a Congress idea.BJP just had to bring religion into it and they messed up like everything they do,they are incapable of doing anything properly from GST  to 370 to this.

How would you have done 370 differently?

[cowboysfan]

17 minutes ago, Laaloo said:

How would you have done 370 differently?

for one thing i would not make the locals hate us more,indefinite curfews and lack of internet and phones is not the answer.i fail to see and endgame which is going to get a positive result for us with the present course of action.

[Laaloo]

14 minutes ago, cowboysfan said:

for one thing i would not make the locals hate us more,indefinite curfews and lack of internet and phones is not the answer.i fail to see and endgame which is going to get a positive result for us with the present course of action.

Well they have already hate us. What difference would it have made? These are the same locals who have shielded and created a safe passage for terrorists to escape.

 

lack of internet and phones for some time is not a big deal. You already see what fake outrage and fake propaganda against CAA, NRC has done in the rest of the country.

[coffee_rules]

1 hour ago, cowboysfan said:

for one thing i would not make the locals hate us more,indefinite curfews and lack of internet and phones is not the answer.i fail to see and endgame which is going to get a positive result for us with the present course of action.

How come we hear hardly any terror attacks or stone throwing incidents or school burning. People are going to work, students to schools. Lock up the so-called leaders who were coordinating these events using whatsapp, internet and now we see peace in the region since Aug 5. This is still better than how China is controlling the Ughirs! Get used to the new normalcy. The old normalcy where Dalits were persecuted, women had no rights because of A370 is gone.

[EnterTheVoid]

Pretty simple reasons why people oppose the CAA:

 

1. Should a secular country grant citizenship to people on the basis of religion?

2. Is secular India mainly a homeland for Hindus?

 

[coffee_rules]

3 hours ago, EnterTheVoid said:

Pretty simple reasons why people oppose the CAA:

 

1. Should a secular country grant citizenship to people on the basis of religion?

2. Is secular India mainly a homeland for Hindus?

 

India was never secular. Secular only means separation of church and state . Again a western idea lapped up by Indians. It was not there in the preamble when constitution was formed in 1951. Added by unconstitutional ways during emergency. If India was secular, there wouldn’t be personal laws for Muslims. No wakf boards and Haj subsidies, also, no control of Hindu temples. India is plural based on Dharmic principles mentioned by even Ambedkar who didn’t add secularism for a reason. They made sure of Hindu reform like eradication of untouchability, but made Muslims more regressive by personal laws and no UCC.

 

CAA is about granting citizenship to persecuted minorities in Islamic countries formed by partition. It is not based on religion as you make it out to be.

[mishra]

3 hours ago, EnterTheVoid said:

Pretty simple reasons why people oppose the CAA:

 

1. Should a secular country grant citizenship to people on the basis of religion?

2. Is secular India mainly a homeland for Hindus?

 

Where does it says Nepali Hindus or Srilankan Hindus are part of CAA. Again, its basis is fullfilling promise of Mahatma Gandhi and Nehuru to people of undivided India that if newly formed Islamic republics persecute them,  New India has moral, ethical and legal responsibility to protect them. Watch above video or read my post.on 7th July 1947, Mahatma Gandhi even said, India has moral  ethical responsibility to wage war with Pakistan in event there is religious persecution.

 

Your second question is also answered in that video. Infact reason to why you might ask these two questions is also answereD in the Video which is, As a Islamic person, you behave and think certain way. You cant get out of mentality that non Muslims, specially Hindus will behave beyond your mentality of not treating people of other religion as equal partner to nation

 

[someone]

5 hours ago, EnterTheVoid said:

Pretty simple reasons why people oppose the CAA:

 

1. Should a secular country grant citizenship to people on the basis of religion?

2. Is secular India mainly a homeland for Hindus?

 

Mr confused Hindu, why do we have reservation? We already do categorise based on castes and religion. Also, we have the separate Muslim laws. By true secular definition, we ought to have UCC?

 

CAA is about providing legal status to the religious oppressed in 3 Muslim states. Its not about Hindus, there are Sikhs, Christians, Parsis etc. 

[Alam_dar]

On 1/14/2020 at 7:20 AM, Yoda-esque said:

Yes that's why my car plate says " in God we trust"....

Sent from my Pixel 3a XL using Tapatalk
 

This is going to change soon too, as it has already been changed in western Europe completely. 

[Vilander]

On 1/14/2020 at 7:56 AM, sandeep said:

have nothing against providing asylum, and fast-track asylum for minorities from Pak/BD.  But what the BJP has done, is politically weaponize that legislation, and market it by deploying dog-whistles of prejudice.  And now to pretend that their intent is innocent and that all they are doing is giving fair treatment to refugees is bullsh**.  It is quite clear to anybody with an objective view, that their goal isn't just to give refugees a path to citizenship - its to stir up social polarization.  And just like I have zero tolerance for those who commit violence, vandalism in the name of protest, I have zero tolerance for that kind of nonsense in the name of politics or social justice.  Whether its of the commie left-wing flavor, or the Bhakt right-wing flavor.  Both are stupid, both are expensive and harmful to the  country.  

Indian hindus should not give a fleeting *. India should only take it what makes it stronger. simple Muslim illegal immigrants should not be welcome, its pretty easy to understand.   BJP goal is to make sure there is NRC and illegal BD immigrants are asked to leave, whilst doing that geneuin minority refugees from pak/bd should not be impacted so this CAA.

[Vilander]

On 1/17/2020 at 5:08 AM, EnterTheVoid said:

Pretty simple reasons why people oppose the CAA:

 

1. Should a secular country grant citizenship to people on the basis of religion?

2. Is secular India mainly a homeland for Hindus?

 

Pretty simple reason why CAA will stay

 

1, India should only grant citizenship for people who deserve it

2, India is where Hindus are safe and will remain so in future.

[Vilander]

from persecution i should add.

[Vilander]

On 1/17/2020 at 10:17 AM, someone said:

Mr confused Hindu, why do we have reservation? We already do categorise based on castes and religion. Also, we have the separate Muslim laws. By true secular definition, we ought to have UCC?

 

CAA is about providing legal status to the religious oppressed in 3 Muslim states. Its not about Hindus, there are Sikhs, Christians, Parsis etc. 

he has no *ing idea what CAA says but opposes it to make sure he looks progressive.

[sandeep]

6 hours ago, Vilander said:

Indian hindus should not give a fleeting *. India should only take it what makes it stronger. simple Muslim illegal immigrants should not be welcome, its pretty easy to understand.   BJP goal is to make sure there is NRC and illegal BD immigrants are asked to leave, whilst doing that geneuin minority refugees from pak/bd should not be impacted so this CAA.

yeah, because India is a rich switzerland with a big problem with "illegal immigrants".

[mishra]

39 minutes ago, sandeep said:

yeah, because India is a rich switzerland with a big problem with "illegal immigrants".

Poverty is relative. You are speaking as if  immigrant/refugee has means to hire private jet from Dhaka to enter via sking resort of swiss alps. During my college days, One Bangladeshi Muslim immigrant ended up in our college hostel.  We fed him, gave him some spare food from hostel mess and let him go. College is in asaam. All possession that man had was a lungi and Baniyan on his body