Jump to content
Gollum

What right do celebs like Kohli have to lecture commoners about protecting environment?

Recommended Posts

24 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

I was responding to gollum who takes these matters too seriously and added you to have a laugh at it. the joke is we have too many holidays. I did not have the same number of holidays in USA where it was always work. why do you play spoil sport :bike:

Apologies. I misunderstood.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Mariyam said:

@Gollum

 

The Bombay HC order on ritual sacrifice on Bakri Id.

 

https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/animal-slaughter-not-allowed-in-private-premises-bombay-hc/story-T3OFLxCMAndBEeivihxYKJ.html 

https://www.theleaflet.in/bombay-hc-bans-slaughtering-of-animals-inside-individual-flats-on-bakra-eid/# (You can read the order in this link).

 

Do you want to hazard a guess as to who pleaded for the ban of ritual slaughter in residential/private areas? Which housing society initially approached the courts?

 

There are similar prohibitory orders on use of loudspeakers for Azaan from the Bombay HC.

 

In my view these are Civic issues and not religious issues. I would never see a (very rightful at that) ban on loudspeakers for azaan as infringement of my religious rights. Lets draw a distinction here.

 

Now that this is out of the way, my response was about celebrities commenting on such issues. There is *nothing* to indicate that these celebrities 'target' only the Hindu faith. From Bollywood to Social activists to well known cops all battled for Shah Bano for over three decades. Many others have spoken against ritual sacrifice and also against blocking roads for Friday namaz. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You have some serious misgivings about Indian judiciary. We are not even operating at the same level of mutual respect or understanding of reality if you think that the judiciary is biased against Hindus and is "hell bent on eradicating Hindu traditions/festivals".

Each of the instances that you put up, must be viewed case by case, with a detailed look at the antecedent court rulings. Only then I can tell you if there is any such trend.

I am not aware of the details of most of the cases that you cite, but if the ruling is unfair, it can always be challenged.

 

Also, *most* of the High court/Supreme court judges are men/women of extremely high integrity who put aside their personal biases when passing a judgement. I know of a judge who didn't take a single holiday during his tenure as a HC judge, missed his daughter's muhurat hour and could only make it to the reception. Anecdotal, but I share because is extremely sad to see everyone here just pass comments on the integrity/motive of people associated with the justice dispensing system. 

 

Believe it or not, there is no ulterior motive. As a judicial system, we are overburdened with a back log of cases. Do you think the Judiciary has the time or the resources to 'scheme' in the sense you think it does?

 

 

 

This is not an one-off case. Most of the reform bills are introduced in legislatures were only of Hindu festivals/rituals. This has changed of late, only because of a BJP govt at the centre. The appeasement culture is ingrained in our politics, even with BJP at the helm. This leads to an imbalance in exec orders of the government. The cracker ban passed is by government exec orders through NGT, a parliament act passed in 2010 as per UN recommendations, it is not even by the judiciary and is enforced by the police. It can be objected in court, but the courts deny it based on the NGT act or at least they can ask the centre to discuss modifying the act in the parliament to not include crackers in the environment affecting condition.  There is no scientific proof of Diwali crackers causing large scale permanent air pollution unlike stubble burning etc.

 

 As Gollum has listed, there is no restrictions on Muslim rituals like the Muharram procession etc., but Ganpati/Durga processions were forcibly disrupted, even by the UP govt recently.  Also, even with the HC orders there have been illegal slaughter of goats in residential areas with predominant Muslim population. These are not enforced as police will not bother to enter there, but Hindus are soft-target for the police and there is no retaliation if the police do excess policing. 

 

As far as judiciary, India has the most corrupt judiciary. cases get heard based on a priority and gets pushed based on some influence. That's what the backlog is long and also there is a constant need of fast-track courts. The judges might be unbiased, the administration of courts is highly corrupt. Some of the judgements are also skewed towards minorities. Like the judge in Bihar wanted the girl who insulted Islam, to distribute Quran. Despite rise in number of Love-Jihad cases, they turn a blind eye. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Gollum said:

Cracker ban check (Hindus in Pak/BD are being allowed to celebrate freely)

Jallikattu ban check

Temple bali ban check

Holi water balloon ban check

Temple elephant ban check

I think they have even put 1000 restrictions when it came to dahi handi festival

Courts decide how we worship inside temples

Durga idols immersion ban in Bengal on Muharram check (ok but at least there the HC slammed TMC govt and allowed immersion)

In a village in Bengal, Muslims have ensured no Durga Puja celebration by Hindus, judiciary/admin refuse to intervene LINK


 

 

7 hours ago, Mariyam said:

my view these are Civic issues and not religious issues. I would never see a (very rightful at that) ban on loudspeakers for azaan as infringement of my religious rights. Lets draw a distinction here.

 

7 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Each of the instances that you put up, must be viewed case by case, with a detailed look at the antecedent court rulings. Only then I can tell you if there is any such trend.

I am not aware of the details of most of the cases that you cite, but if the ruling is unfair, it can always be challenged.


 

@Mariyam

 

you have a strong argument, I totally want to believe you, it must be easy for you to list a bunch of similar rulings against Other religions practices as well right, come on get the list out let’s get back at this Gollum guy.

Edited by Vilander
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Mariyam said:

Apologies. I misunderstood.

 

This is what happens in any online medium. Online media gives a viewpoint which is not accessible in person (That is two people from different cities sharing some info or a joke like you and me) but it also has some disadvantages. It doesn't convey the tone and body language of the people who are conversing. That is misunderstanding. Twitter goes the extra mile by promoting disharmony among groups. That's way more dangerous than just misunderstanding. But twitter also shows the hypocrisy of celebs like Kohli who don't practice what they preach and preach is all they do on twitter. :rcb: should hire Harbhajan to slap Kohli on field :whack3:. We should see if he cries like Sreesanth or not. The nation wants to know

Sreesanth Opens Up To Arnab Goswami | Nation Wants To Know ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Mariyam said:

@Gollum

 

The Bombay HC order on ritual sacrifice on Bakri Id.

 

https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/animal-slaughter-not-allowed-in-private-premises-bombay-hc/story-T3OFLxCMAndBEeivihxYKJ.html 

https://www.theleaflet.in/bombay-hc-bans-slaughtering-of-animals-inside-individual-flats-on-bakra-eid/# (You can read the order in this link).

 

Do you want to hazard a guess as to who pleaded for the ban of ritual slaughter in residential/private areas? Which housing society initially approached the courts?

 

There are similar prohibitory orders on use of loudspeakers for Azaan from the Bombay HC.

 

In my view these are Civic issues and not religious issues. I would never see a (very rightful at that) ban on loudspeakers for azaan as infringement of my religious rights. Lets draw a distinction here.

 

Now that this is out of the way, my response was about celebrities commenting on such issues. There is *nothing* to indicate that these celebrities 'target' only the Hindu faith. From Bollywood to Social activists to well known cops all battled for Shah Bano for over three decades. Many others have spoken against ritual sacrifice and also against blocking roads for Friday namaz. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

You have some serious misgivings about Indian judiciary. We are not even operating at the same level of mutual respect or understanding of reality if you think that the judiciary is biased against Hindus and is "hell bent on eradicating Hindu traditions/festivals".

Each of the instances that you put up, must be viewed case by case, with a detailed look at the antecedent court rulings. Only then I can tell you if there is any such trend.

I am not aware of the details of most of the cases that you cite, but if the ruling is unfair, it can always be challenged.

 

Also, *most* of the High court/Supreme court judges are men/women of extremely high integrity who put aside their personal biases when passing a judgement. I know of a judge who didn't take a single holiday during his tenure as a HC judge, missed his daughter's muhurat hour and could only make it to the reception. Anecdotal, but I share because is extremely sad to see everyone here just pass comments on the integrity/motive of people associated with the justice dispensing system. 

 

Believe it or not, there is no ulterior motive. As a judicial system, we are overburdened with a back log of cases. Do you think the Judiciary has the time or the resources to 'scheme' in the sense you think it does?

 

 

All I see is high court/legal/judiciary/supreme court/prohibition/judge etc. Ok we get it. you're a lawyer with mylord status. Such a showoff :rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, zen said:

Climate change is a serious issue. Everyone should join hands to make a positive difference. While guys like Kohli can move to Switzerland, it is the common man, who is probably busy criticizing others, that may end up in the soup:
 

 

 

On 11/15/2020 at 2:20 PM, Real McCoy said:

Here's from one of the first to promote the "save this" propaganda

 

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Real McCoy said:

 

 

 

Making $$$ from green projects is not an issue. Everyone has a right to make a living. Even Presidents & Prime Ministers are on salaries and perks. A guy with oil wells may fight against green technologies. 

 

The larger point is that, at the end of the day, rich people have nothing much to worry about relatively speaking. If the water level rises at coastal cities, they can move inward. If air pollution is an issue and gasoline powered vehicles banned, they can ditch Hummers and ride Teslas. To battle food crisis, they can buy a few farms to create food for themselves. If they get sick, they can avail the best facilities. If a country (say India) becomes inhospitable, they can move to a different country. 

 

It is the common folks who are more at the peril. The voices for change should be coming from them. The common men should be the champions of such movements (if not for others, at least for themselves) - ideally esp. at this stage, they should not need an Al Gore or a Kohli to deliver the message (but no harm if they do as everyone should be on board). That these celebrities, despite their hypocricises, continue to champion such a cause signals the failure of the common man to stand up for themselves to protect the ecosystem whose destruction would hurt them the most.  

 

Edited by zen
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, zen said:

 

Making $$$ from green projects is not an issue. Everyone has a right to make a living. Even Presidents & Prime Ministers are on salaries and perks. A guy with oil wells may fight against green technologies. 

 

The larger point is that, at the end of the day, rich people have nothing much to worry about relatively speaking. If the water level rises at coastal cities, they can move inward. If air pollution is an issue and gasoline powered vehicles banned, they can ditch Hummers and ride Teslas. To battle food crisis, they can buy a few farms to create food for themselves. If they get sick, they can avail the best facilities. If a country (say India) becomes inhospitable, they can move to a different country. 

 

It is the common folks who are more at the peril. The voices for change should be coming from them. The common men should be the champions of such movements (if not for others, at least for themselves) - ideally esp. at this stage, they should not need an Al Gore or a Kohli to deliver the message (but no harm if they do as everyone should be on board). That these celebrities, despite their hypocricises, continue to champion such a cause signals the failure of the common man to stand up for themselves to protect the ecosystem whose destruction would hurt them the most.  

 

global warming is a hoax to perpetrate higher tax on carbon used. those poor people live on carbon based fuels to heat up their homes, cook food, travel in vehicles to their jobs. Its not just a tax on the poor but also turning the middle class into poor class. Once more poor people are found in a country, the elite can rule the country with a marxist stanglehold and destroy the economy. Its definitely won't work for a growing economy like India and Kohli is a willing agent for the elite who throw money to him like a man throws a dog some biscuits. He will sell his own parents for money. It was evident when he didn't thank his dad who died to fulfill his dreams but his wife for bringing bollywood riches and fame :facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/16/2020 at 11:00 PM, Mariyam said:

@Gollum

 

The Bombay HC order on ritual sacrifice on Bakri Id.

 

https://www.hindustantimes.com/cities/animal-slaughter-not-allowed-in-private-premises-bombay-hc/story-T3OFLxCMAndBEeivihxYKJ.html 

https://www.theleaflet.in/bombay-hc-bans-slaughtering-of-animals-inside-individual-flats-on-bakra-eid/# (You can read the order in this link).

 

Do you want to hazard a guess as to who pleaded for the ban of ritual slaughter in residential/private areas? Which housing society initially approached the courts?

I only brought that up to contrast with animal slaughter ban in Hindu temples.

 

LINK

A division bench was hearing a PIL signed in 2018, seeking whether the animal sacrifice in state temples is a secular act and whether prohibiting the practice would infringe the fundamental right to follow and propagate religion. 

Quote

The Tripura High Court has banned sacrifice of animals and birds in temples with immediate effect and directed the state government to earmark land for opening shelter home for rearing livestock donated by devotees at these temples.

“No person including the state shall be allowed to sacrifice any animal or bird within the precincts of any one of the temples within the State of Tripura,” the order read.

A division bench comprising of Chief Justice Sanjay Karol and Justice Arindam Lodh was hearing a PIL, signed in 2018, seeking whether the animal sacrifice in state temples is a secular act and whether prohibiting the practice would infringe the fundamental right to follow and propagate religion.

The bench also ordered the District Magistrate and Collectors of Gomati and West Tripura to ensure implementation of the orders at Tripureshwari Temple and Chaturdas Devata Bari Temple and directed to provide soft copies of recording from CCTV cameras installed at both temples at the end of every month to concerned authorities.

The court’s direction came in response to one of the points mentioned in the petition seeking whether putting a stop to the animal sacrifice, which has been prevalent for at least 500 years in  Tripureshwari Devi Temple in Tripura’s Gomati district, can be construed as an essential and integral part of religion and if a religious practice based on ritual, custom, tenet or tradition, can be allowed to continue notwithstanding provisions of the Prevention of Cruelty to Animals Act, 1960.

As per state provisions, one goat is sacrificed every day under patronage of the district administration at Mata Tripurasundari Devi Temple and “substantial number of animals”: are sacrificed as “bali” (offering to the Goddess) on special occasions like Diwali. Mata Tripureshwari is considered to be one of 51 Hindu ‘Shakti Peethas’ and animal sacrifice is not an essential and integral part of the Hindu religion.

The petitioner argued that slaughtering animals in the name of sacrifice to a goddess is a practice in the nature of social evil and is against the Constitutional mandate and spirit. He also reasoned that the practice is cruelty against animals.

Meanwhile, the counsel for the state said that practice of animal sacrifice is a “long accepted procedure of Hindu rituals of the Tantrik method of worship of the Dash Maha Vidya (ten forms of the Goddess of the Hindus).”

 

More in this thread which is now locked

Quote

 

In my view these are Civic issues and not religious issues. 

HC said bali isn't essential part of Hinduism. How is it not a religious issue? For Tantra/Shakti based temples pashubali is core part (and it isn't like the meat is wasted), there are multiple sects and schools of thought in my religion. I may not like this practice, many Hindus may not like this, but how is it wrong? Has no goat ever been slaughtered for food in independent India's history? Diktat also says animals have fundamental right to life LINK :hysterical:, did milords write this part before or after finishing their mutton korma? 

Quote

 

You have some serious misgivings about Indian judiciary. We are not even operating at the same level of mutual respect or understanding of reality if you think that the judiciary is biased against Hindus and is "hell bent on eradicating Hindu traditions/festivals".

Where does mutual respect come here?

Quote

Also, *most* of the High court/Supreme court judges are men/women of extremely high integrity who put aside their personal biases when passing a judgement. I know of a judge who didn't take a single holiday during his tenure as a HC judge, missed his daughter's muhurat hour and could only make it to the reception. Anecdotal, but I share because is extremely sad to see everyone here just pass comments on the integrity/motive of people associated with the justice dispensing system. 

Sure, but same could be said about most professions The judges may be of high integrity but nothing wrong in pointing out their judicial activism, overreach etc (which disproportionately target one religion). Moreover why do they go beyond their responsibilities, why do they want to play God? Whether running Indian cricket or these stupid, arbitrary bans....

Quote

Believe it or not, there is no ulterior motive. As a judicial system, we are overburdened with a back log of cases. Do you think the Judiciary has the time or the resources to 'scheme' in the sense you think it does?

If they are overburdened they should clear backlogs instead of wading through needless controversies like the ones I mentioned. 

Edited by Gollum
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Many Indian millionaires dont invest back in society. It is a nation building, and they do not see themselves part of this ecosystem. There should be knowledge centers, libraries, export of Indian narrative, history overseas. That’s what rich Americans did with their money.

 

Instead, our millionaires see themselves as kings/queens, and aspire to be at the white’s man table. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 11/18/2020 at 8:13 AM, someone said:

Many Indian millionaires dont invest back in society. It is a nation building, and they do not see themselves part of this ecosystem. There should be knowledge centers, libraries, export of Indian narrative, history overseas. That’s what rich Americans did with their money.

 

 

 

This is the best post here.

 

Many Indians simply don't have the trait to give back. It is just not there in our DNA.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All the states/UTs that banned crackers in the eleventh hour causing misery to manufacturers in Sivakasi, hope TN govt repays the favor by imposing steep tariffs or maybe even bans on products from there, who said trade wars can happen only between countries? Cascade effect so be it, let everyone get affected, let everyone feel the economic pinch, maybe that will make them more considerate towards local entrepreneurs and traders. In future if Bengal, Haryana, UP, Rajasthan govts want to ban crackers let them pass orders 10 months in advance rather than screwing everybody over with their last minute BS announcements. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites



×
×
  • Create New...