Mid-day meal: after muslim kids it's turn of upper caste men to be an a$$

[kumble_rocks]

No this does not answer...my original and actual concern was that Muslims population growth is NOT just related to socio-economy. It has something to do with Religion. And this is keeping future of INDIA in mind....heck..for what we are debating, to debunk each other or for wider look at our country?? And then-- saheb aap, introduced Kerala to compare UP-Bihar to prove that Socio-economic fantasy is true and Religious angle is all bigotry thrown by Hindutvavadi? Right.?? I have been against this different state comparison in my previous post because-- simple reason, even if Muslims improve by socio-economically, VERY FEW or VERY LIMITED of them will excercize the population control...because they cannot abondon their radical religious affiliation.... Now since you have mentioned Kerala...a quick search of Kerala reveals following --- Just check by yourself and think again if socio-economic improvement has totally changed them like Hindus and Christians of Kerala--- Read below please--- KOZHIKODE, SEPT. 22. While the population of Hindus and Christians declined by 1.48 and 0.32 percentage points respectively, the population of Muslims increased by 1.70 percentage points in the State since the last Census in 1991, according to the First Report on Religion Data released by the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India, J.K. Banthia, in New Delhi recently. http://www.hindu.com/2004/09/23/stories/2004092306010500.htm Go figure--- how opposite the Hindus and Christians are in population control when compared to Muslims, even after considering so called socio-economic fanatasy state Kerala.

DR made a bigoted comment that "Muslims breed like Pigs ". Do you agree with that. a) Also, should he change reclassify his statement , if proven that Kerala muslims or Karanataka muslims have lower birth rate than UP and Bihar ? b) Can Kerala muslims or Karanataka muslims also criticize Hindus from Bihar , UP etc in the same derogatory way ? Simple questions awaiting your answer because DR has gone AWOL as usual.

[Lurker]

No this does not answer...my original and actual concern was that Muslims population growth is NOT just related to socio-economy. It has something to do with Religion.

If you put it that way yes. Of course there is no single one reason why this happens. The socio-economic issue is important since modern families clearly do not encourage having 2(or more kids). The religious angle is true in a sense that most orthodox religious people, which would include likes of Catholics, don't support family planning as such. And so many Muslims would not follow family planning. This issue certainly needs to be addressed. xxxx

[Lurker]

KOZHIKODE' date= SEPT. 22. While the population of Hindus and Christians declined by 1.48 and 0.32 percentage points respectively, the population of Muslims increased by 1.70 percentage points in the State since the last Census in 1991, according to the First Report on Religion Data released by the Registrar General and Census Commissioner of India, J.K. Banthia, in New Delhi recently. http://www.hindu.com/2004/09/23/stories/2004092306010500.htm

Sandtest saab, yehan pe aap maar khaa rahe hain. Gurudev do you want to bet that the Muslim 1.7 percentage point growth would be LESS than the percentage growth of Hindus in UP/Bihar?? If it is a religious angle here, and if there is indeed Ummah as you call it, the growth of Muslim population in Kerela should still be higher than Hindu Bihar population? No? xxx

[kumble_rocks]

If you put it that way yes. Of course there is no single one reason why this happens. The socio-economic issue is important since modern families clearly do not encourage having 2(or more kids). The religious angle is true in a sense that most orthodox religious people, which would include likes of Catholics, don't support family planning as such. And so many Muslims would not follow family planning. This issue certainly needs to be addressed. xxxx

Finally a sane post ! I think we all can agree on this matter. But trust this DR to completely twist the topic at hand which was me and Maris pointing to his double standards. But he made this hindu- muslim issue and with usual one sided BS , completely twisted the topic at hand which was caste system and the fact that Manu smiriti endorses caste system . And trust these Hindus here , to conveniently ignore the fact their immediate ancestors also contributed to the population explosion.

[Guest dada_rocks]

Population growth purportedly depends on many factor (1) socio/economic (2) religious issues.. (3) Other local issues U claim number (2) is not an issue I say it is .. now let us see the number to figure out who is on the right side of the fact.. (1) orissa poor state with non-existant literacy has much less population growth than kerala muslims: Keral muslim 2.1% ; orisa over-all 1.48%.. Obviously u can't explain this by socio/economic variables only because that criteria demands Orisa growth rate should have been higher. So there is sthg other than socio/economics at play. (2) Gujarat, Maharashtra, Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Haryana, Rajasthan and Bihar show a higher growth rate than the national average of 1.93 per cent. Mind you all these states Bihar included were better placed in terms of socio/economics during 91-01 in comparison to orisa You can obviously tell there is no consistent trend on the basis of socio/economic only theory.. There are various local variables at play which be it family values culture religion etc etc which decides the local population growth. That's why I find comparison from timbakttoo and jhumari-tilaiya just an exercise in psec polemics to somehow make it an eyewash. Having establlished the fact that population growth rate has much more than socio/economics to do with now if u look within states where local indicators other than socio/economics are same dividng the population on the basis of religion; the only main marker; then consistenbtly state after state without a single exception irrespectice of the relative socio/economic condition (refer case of gujrat for this where muslim have better standing in terms of socio/economics) muslim population growth rate leaves behind the rest of the population growth rate by a fair margin. Yes do throw the UP state number of hindu population growth rate sthg tells me it's same as kerala muslim population growth rate.. I have not been able to get hands on this data so far.. but 2.1% of kerala muslim growth rate won;t be easy to beat despite the pathetic socio/economic condition in comparison. http://www.jsk.gov.in/decadal_population_growth.asp (3) here is the UP number overall (2.585% per decade), Now throw me the number of hindu population growth rate from this I am reasonaly certain it's in same region as 2.1% kerala muslim population growth (4)Then another holy grail illiteracy: It is higher among the SCs than among Muslims. And yet, the Muslim growth rate is still 1.8% higher than that of the SCs over all.

[sandtest]

DR made a bigoted comment that "Muslims breed like Pigs ". Do you agree with that. .

In the heat of arguements such comments are possible Kumble Ji, we should spin the same single comment over and over again, to prove someone "begot"..for arguement sake...afterall we are all Indians and should not forget that reason for our debate is the supreme interest of India. And it remains a fact, that Muslims breed more than others....so that comment if you like can take as sarcasm, not because I am baised but because ,Muslims in middle-east and Pakistan consider we Hindus as cow-pi$$ drinkers and openly say many derogatory thinmgs about our gods-- so it is not a grave sin to return them the same, we can consider that it was directed to those Muslims.

a) Also, should he change reclassify his statement , if proven that Kerala muslims or Karanataka muslims have lower birth rate than UP and Bihar ? b) Can Kerala muslims or Karanataka muslims also criticize Hindus from Bihar , UP etc in the same derogatory way ? Simple questions awaiting your answer because DR has gone AWOL as usual.

Well we should provide statistics for some rationale conclusion...comparing one state with another is just an attempt to prove that fanatsy of p-secs that Muslim population growth is just due to Socio-economy backwardness--- I have said since very beginning it's NOT and it's very much related to religion. Above post has News of Kerala where Hindu and Christians population has DECLINED while Muslim has increased--- so how socio and economy afftected Hindus but cannot control Muslim population. Bhai mere, all this arguement is to conclude one simple thing -- Muslim Population growth is NOT just due to Socio-economy problem it has something to do with very Religion itself--now If your goodself agree with this I can rest the case and go out.

[Guest dada_rocks]

DR made a bigoted comment that "Muslims breed like Pigs ". Do you agree with that. a) Also, should he change reclassify his statement , if proven that Kerala muslims or Karanataka muslims have lower birth rate than UP and Bihar ? b) Can Kerala muslims or Karanataka muslims also criticize Hindus from Bihar , UP etc in the same derogatory way ? Simple questions awaiting your answer because DR has gone AWOL as usual.

U need stat 101 that's all I have to say.. (1) incidentally kerala muslim population growth remains more or less same as UP hindu population growth despite the stark difference in socio/ecnomic condition ( attempt of Timbaktoo andd jhumaritilaiya comparison not withstanding) (2) They will have to first face their hindu brothers next door when they come with mirror..t And when they come to UP they will find no actually despite allthose litreacy they are not better than UP hindus then they will have to first use some flooral words for their muslim brothers in UP. Anyway u have no clue what statistics is how any conclusion is drawn from the data.. So keepo Awol howl comments for the time when u learn these basic things..

[sandtest]

Sandtest saab, yehan pe aap maar khaa rahe hain. Gurudev do you want to bet that the Muslim 1.7 percentage point growth would be LESS than the percentage growth of Hindus in UP/Bihar?? If it is a religious angle here, and if there is indeed Ummah as you call it, the growth of Muslim population in Kerela should still be higher than Hindu Bihar population? No? xxx

Sir Bhagwaan ke liye UP-Bihar ko maaf ker do...aur tanik Kerala ki taraf dhyaan do. How come Muslim population still increasing while HINDU and Christian DECLINED Now Declined is a big thing --- at least if Muslim population wasnot declining it shoould have been stable but it's NOT it's still rising -- while others are declining. Why?...because they are Muslims?? aah simple answer. Please only tell me why Others Declined while they increaed---please leave UP BIhar aside for a moment and only tell for Kerala.

[Lurker]

Population growth purportedly depends on many factor (1) socio/economic (2) religious issues.. (3) Other local issues

Yes good to see we can agree on this one. Point 1 to me is most important. Take a Hindu family for example. Generally speaking a rich Hindu family will have less kids than a poor one. Why? Because poor families often want as many hands as possible. Plus of course they are not educated enough to realize the folly of it. Point 2 is important obviously. I don't think I have, or for that matter KR, has disagreed with it. Many orthodox religious people dont do family planning due to fear that they would "offend God". This is obviously wrong and needs to be tackled. xxx

[Lurker]

Please only tell me why Others Declined while they increaed---please leave UP BIhar aside for a moment and only tell for Kerala.

Easy answer for me is you are putting all your eggs in one basket ST. You are basing all your assumptions on one census. Are you telling me, for instance, that EVERY census since 1951 shows Christian population declining? Do you think that Hindu population declined in every census as well? Heck if that were true Kerela would have lesser number of people today than it had in 1951! On the whole though I would say that there is certainly a religious angle in here somewhere that we need to tackle. But the moment you will make it the cornerstone of your thought it will only doom the endeavour. Which is also why we need detailed census data to see exactly what is happening and not base our thoughts on innuendos. xxx

[Guest dada_rocks]

Easy answer for me is you are putting all your eggs in one basket ST. You are basing all your assumptions on one census. Are you telling me, for instance, that EVERY census since 1951 shows Christian population declining? Do you think that Hindu population declined in every census as well? Heck if that were true Kerela would have lesser number of people today than it had in 1951! On the whole though I would say that there is certainly a religious angle in here somewhere that we need to tackle. But the moment you will make it the cornerstone of your thought it will only doom the endeavour. Which is also why we need detailed census data to see exactly what is happening and not base our thoughts on innuendos. xxx

Yes lurker population growth rate has always declined with improving socio/economic condition and in case of kerala for the non-muslim it has become negative.. It declines even for muslim but at very snail's pace in comparison which ensures their absolute population percentage always keeps n increasing and if history has anythign to go by it's anythign but positive development as far as territorial integrity of any nation is concerend. If this were not the case I won't have cared. Within fifty years lebonan from christian majority has become christian minority and what it entailed is there for everyone to see.

[Guest dada_rocks]

Yes good to see we can agree on this one. Point 1 to me is most important. Take a Hindu family for example. Generally speaking a rich Hindu family will have less kids than a poor one. Why? Because poor families often want as many hands as possible. Plus of course they are not educated enough to realize the folly of it. Point 2 is important obviously. I don't think I have, or for that matter KR, has disagreed with it. Many orthodox religious people dont do family planning due to fear that they would "offend God". This is obviously wrong and needs to be tackled. xxx

That precisely was my point everything else remaining the same muslim population growth rate will always be higher than the rest and through census after census this fact gets established all over the world not just in India..

[kumble_rocks]

U need stat 101 that's all I have to say.. (1) incidentally kerala muslim population growth remains more or less same as UP hindu population growth despite the stark difference in socio/ecnomic condition ( attempt of Timbaktoo andd jhumaritilaiya comparison not withstanding) (2) They will have to first face their hindu brothers next door when they come with mirror..t And when they come to UP they will find no actually despite allthose litreacy they are not better than UP hindus then they will have to first use some flooral words for their muslim brothers in UP. Anyway u have no clue what statistics is how any conclusion is drawn from the data.. So keepo Awol howl comments for the time when u learn these basic things..

You sir should be ashamed of yourself. One one hand you have been warned by the moderators to stop your bigotry and yet you have the audacity to call my gentlemanly exit awol. Has it occurred to you that the only reason why I go Awol is because I am debating a truant child who fails to comprehend basic logic which is Statement A) made by you "Muslim breed like Pig " . Note no classification attached by the retard. Statement B) Muslim in Kerala have the same birth rate as Hindus in UP and Bihar. So what can any sensible man deduce from these two statements ! Let me try . Either I would add qualifiers to your statement A) simply because Statement B) in your own words can be deduced as "UP and Bihar Hindus ALSO breed like Pig" or better still , refrain from making such bigoted statements. I would expect an apology from you for degenerating this message board with your usual BS. This is going to be my final post on this topic . Rant on !:hysterical::hysterical:

[Lurker]

Yes lurker population growth rate has always declined with improving socio/economic condition and in case of kerala for the non-muslim it has become negative.. It declines even for muslim but at very snail's pace in comparison which ensures their absolute population percentage always keeps n increasing and if history has anythign to go by it's anythign but positive development as far as territorial integrity of any nation is concerend. If this were not the case I won't have cared. Within fifty years lebonan from christian majority has become christian minority and what it entailed is there for everyone to see.

Ab yaar there are so many loopholes in that paragraph ke I feel like baal ki khaal utaarna. For instance you say the population growth rate declines for Muslims, even at snail's pace but still the absolute population percentage increases. Ab if I for a minute I take it up for argument now you will be hard-pressed to explain how Muslim population declines? I mean surely they have to be using family planning or something right? Doesnt that blow away your religious philosphy then?(read Muslims dont go for contraceptions). Also I definitely do not agree that Hindu/Xtian population has declined in Kerela since 1951. Kuch data dikhao guru. xxx

[kumble_rocks]

In the heat of arguements such comments are possible Kumble Ji, we should spin the same single comment over and over again, to prove someone "begot"..for arguement sake...afterall we are all Indians and should not forget that reason for our debate is the supreme interest of India. And it remains a fact, that Muslims breed more than others....so that comment if you like can take as sarcasm, not because I am baised but because ,Muslims in middle-east and Pakistan consider we Hindus as cow-pi$$ drinkers and openly say many derogatory thinmgs about our gods-- so it is not a grave sin to return them the same, we can consider that it was directed to those Muslims.

You are new to this message board and apparently you have no idea about this poster DR. He has used choice words against muslims , hasn't spared the prophet and his defense is usually right wing websites which encourage his hatred and propoganda. And yes , he is a uncle sam stooge who will support anything US does. So , please spare me and that does not mean I condone Arab nut jobs who are known to be racist even to SE Asian muslims.

[Guest dada_rocks]

You are new to this message board and apparently you have no idea about this poster DR. He has used choice words against muslims ' date=' hasn't spared the prophet and his defense is usually right wing websites which encourage his hatred and propoganda. And yes , he is a [b']uncle sam stooge who will support anything US does. So , please spare me and that does not mean I condone Arab nut jobs who are known to be racist even to SE Asian muslims.

And if I again take u to task u will cry abuse.. I have called people what their action warranted them to be called period... and it's not thsi or that site it's the book refernce.. Won;t go into detail since religion talk is not ON and . u my friend are a psec delusional given to PC and whenever confronated with facts disappear like u did once again in this population debate......

[Guest dada_rocks]

Ab yaar there are so many loopholes in that paragraph ke I feel like baal ki khaal utaarna. For instance you say the population growth rate declines for Muslims, even at snail's pace but still the absolute population percentage increases. Ab if I for a minute I take it up for argument now you will be hard-pressed to explain how Muslim population declines? I mean surely they have to be using family planning or something right? Doesnt that blow away your religious philosphy then?(read Muslims dont go for contraceptions). Also I definitely do not agree that Hindu/Xtian population has declined in Kerela since 1951. Kuch data dikhao guru. xxx

It cud be many things I never said muslims never go for contraception my stance is they are given to increasing their number by virtue of their religious preachers exhorting the same.. You og it all wrong muslim population growth rate decreases like any other with socio/economic condition but the religion comes in way and arrests this declines to a virtual crawl.. Absolture population is always increasing even in more or less fully literate states like kerala as sand pointed out where rest of the people's number is actually declining.. Population growth rate has declined of hindu/xtian that's what i said not absolute population.. very recently has this resulted into absolute population decline in Kerala... I will give u data for whole India how the population growth rate is changing This is population growth rate per decade.. I don't have kerala data at hand but If whole India is seeing decline in growth rate of hindu population obviously kerala being most literate state most certainly will see the same.. 1971-81 1981-91 1991-01

Hindus 24.2 22.8 20.0

Muslims 30.8 32.9 29.3 Anyway my data crunching says if muslim population growth rate decline trend continues at the same rate and doesn't return to the increasing trend of 81-91, then their population will stabilize at 20 percent when and if India's population stabilizes.. I am just praying that doesn't become the critical mass.. other than this worry I cud care less who makes what percentage..

[Guest dada_rocks]

You sir should be ashamed of yourself. One one hand you have been warned by the moderators to stop your bigotry and yet you have the audacity to call my gentlemanly exit awol. Has it occurred to you that the only reason why I go Awol is because I am debating a truant child who fails to comprehend basic logic which is Statement A) made by you "Muslim breed like Pig " . Note no classification attached by the retard. Statement B) Muslim in Kerala have the same birth rate as Hindus in UP and Bihar. So what can any sensible man deduce from these two statements ! Let me try . Either I would add qualifiers to your statement A) simply because Statement B) in your own words can be deduced as "UP and Bihar Hindus ALSO breed like Pig" or better still , refrain from making such bigoted statements. I would expect an apology from you for degenerating this message board with your usual BS. This is going to be my final post on this topic . Rant on !:hysterical::hysterical:

why don't u compare their number with sub-sharan africa's population growth number it will paint them in further shiny light.. newflash kerala needs to be compared with kerala and in comparison to kerala hindus they are still breeding very very very very fast.. same education same socio/economic condition u go figure what makes them do what they do.. what happend to kerla muslims can call UP hindus bla bla bla.. Just accept it despite skwed literacy socio/economic condition of UP u cud not prove jack,, u won;t last here it's data based debate and.. BTW AWL/ HOWL still is lying in ur last post in this same thread was that word kosher then and suddenly turned haram when I used it:hysterical:

[Lurker]

1971-81 1981-91 1991-01

Hindus 24.2 22.8 20.0

Muslims 30.8 32.9 29.3

Based on the stats that you have put DR, I am sure you would agree to a few things: 1) Muslim growth is more than Hindus(I doubt any of us disagree on this, where we do disagree is what causes the difference.) I had myself mentioned a 0.8 kid differential per household and your stats are not entirely different. 2) Muslim growth rate has been steady at best, hovering around 30 and of late has shown a decling trend. Any way you want to look at the data you would be hard pressed to show how Muslims ahve bred like pigs(that was a very wrong statement btw man) I would like to learn more about the census, I suppose we all need to. For example does the census consider the Muslim migrant population from BD? It would obviously have a big impact. Also you raise an interesting question. What happens if Muslim population, in India, exceeds 20%? Should we care? If yes then should we also care if Sikh/Xtian population exceeds 20%? If not then why this thought against Muslims only?? If your answer is 1947 partition then the question becomes how long will Indian Muslims carry that stigma? xxx

[Guest dada_rocks]

Traditionally only muslims go for secessionist movement in favourable condition that's why I am bothered.. yes u can say even sikh did khalistan once but that movement never had popular support very small percentage of society egged on by our parosi indulged into it.. I will wait and watch for 2011 census data before passing any verdict who knows just like 80-91 census their gro' th rate again might go up.... Can't say it;s continuously declining yet.. Yes BD migration was big thing in 71 census data I guess in subsequent ones numbers are not that big to effect the overall growth rate.. That steady growth rate I don't like it should have shown steady decline whihc it hasn't sometimes it goes up sometimes goes down but remains around 30.......... And yes if their population goes beyond that critica mass, which in my view is 30% in case of India, then it won't remain matter of whether we should care, they will make sure everyone cares ..... I don't have good feelings about that equation talking of stigma it's not just 1947 ( had it been one off case I wud have relegated it to the dustbin) but it's data from all over the world where the same thing gets repeated.. from thailand to russia.. only thing changes is the alibi demand remains the same..