Texan Posted August 31, 2014 Posted August 31, 2014 Stalin's Vinayaka Chaturthi Greetings a Mistake, Says DMK On Friday, DMK Treasurer MK Stalin, a self-confessed atheist, surprised many when he tweeted greeting all on the occasion of Vinayaka Chaturthi. However, today in a U-turn of sorts, the DMK leadership said the greeting was posted by mistake on his Twitter and Facebook accounts. Greetings to all on the occasion of Vinayak Chaturthi! pic.twitter.com/gFYKmAdtlk — M.K.Stalin (@mkstalin) August 29, 2014 In a press release, the party said, "Enthusiastic website operators posted without his permission and the greetings were not his wishes." Since ages, DMK leaders who are staunch followers of the late rationalist leader EVR Periyar have remained self-confessed atheists and they have largely refrained from celebrating or greeting people during Hindu festivals. Mr Stalin's departure, though largely well received on social media, drew sharp criticism as well. One comment by Syed Ali in response to M K Stalin's greetings says "Is the Dravidian ship changing course? Another user, Saranjit, said "I read your greeting. I'm happy. What you say is wrong. It's painful." Although the DMK leadership usually refrains from greeting people during Hindu festivals, they do not fail to wish Muslims and Christians, seen as their vote bank, during Ramzan and Christmas. In the past, many pointed fingers at DMK Chief Karunanidhi for what many called his anti-Hindu remarks. In 2007, when objections were raised to the construction of the Sethusamudram channel slicing through a portion of the Ram Sethu, believed to have been built by Lord Ram, Karunanidhi asked, "Who is this Raman? In which engineering college did he study and become a civil engineer? When did he build this so-called bridge? Is there evidence?". Mr Stalin's first-of-its-kind inclusive greeting comes in the backdrop of the party's electoral rout in the recent Lok Sabha elections in Tamil Nadu and the BJP capturing power at the Centre. It also comes at a time when he is focused on boosting the morale of party cadre to regain lost ground in the 2016 assembly polls for which his supporters want him to be announced as the chief ministerial candidate of the party. http://www.ndtv.com/article/south/stalin-s-vinayaka-chaturthi-greetings-a-mistake-says-dmk-584591 I guess this is the definition of a secular party in India.
diga Posted September 1, 2014 Posted September 1, 2014 Although the DMK leadership usually refrains from greeting people during Hindu festivals' date=' they do not fail to wish Muslims and Christians, seen as their vote bank, during Ramzan and Christmas. .[/quote'] Arent they atheists?
Texan Posted September 1, 2014 Author Posted September 1, 2014 Arent they atheists? Are you saying that atheists are expected to believe in important religious occasions of Abrahamic religions, but not of dharmic religions?
Crookbond Posted September 1, 2014 Posted September 1, 2014 Are you saying that atheists are expected to believe in important religious occasions of Abrahamic religions' date=' but not of dharmic religions?[/quote'] Are you saying that Hindu is a religion and not a "way of life" ?
Detonator Posted September 1, 2014 Posted September 1, 2014 Arent they atheists? They are not atheists. They were anti-hindus and outright brahmin-haters posing as atheists.
Texan Posted September 1, 2014 Author Posted September 1, 2014 Are you saying that Hindu is a religion and not a "way of life" ? Did I write Hindu or did I write dharmic religions?
Crookbond Posted September 1, 2014 Posted September 1, 2014 Did I write Hindu or did I write dharmic religions? Your original post contains the term "Hindu festivals".
Texan Posted September 1, 2014 Author Posted September 1, 2014 Your original post contains the term "Hindu festivals". The post you quoted of mine did not have this term, hence the question. Now that you have mentioned a line from the article and questioned whether Hinduism is a religion or not - here is my interpretation. Hinduism is unlike any other religion in this world because there is no founder and there is no single text that can proclaim to contain all the tenets that followers must adhere to. It involves following certain customs and traditions that their ancestors have followed for centuries. Some folks may prefer to call it "a way of life" and some others may term it as a "religion". But didn't you know that already? Now, coming back to the article, I hope you read it and tried to understand the gist of it rather than just questioning whether Hindu festivals are or are not religious festivals. Now, what is your interpretation of the policies followed by DMK and Stalin in particular of not wishing followers of dharmic religions on their festivals but wishing those of Abrahamic religions despite proclaiming to be atheists? Besides Hindus, there are other religions (Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism) having significant followers in India and which I hope you recognize as religions. Or are all followers of all those religions just put together in a bucket labeled as "non-believers"?
Detonator Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 Are you saying that Hindu is a religion and not a "way of life" ? Your original post contains the term "Hindu festivals". Oh DM darling, trying to derail yet another thread instead of answering his question.
Crookbond Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 The post you quoted of mine did not have this term' date=' hence the question. Now that you have mentioned a line [u']from the article and questioned whether Hinduism is a religion or not - here is my interpretation. Hinduism is unlike any other religion in this world because there is no founder and there is no single text that can proclaim to contain all the tenets that followers must adhere to. It involves following certain customs and traditions that their ancestors have followed for centuries. Some folks may prefer to call it "a way of life" and some others may term it as a "religion". But didn't you know that already? Now, coming back to the article, I hope you read it and tried to understand the gist of it rather than just questioning whether Hindu festivals are or are not religious festivals. Now, what is your interpretation of the policies followed by DMK and Stalin in particular of not wishing followers of dharmic religions on their festivals but wishing those of Abrahamic religions despite proclaiming to be atheists? Besides Hindus, there are other religions (Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism) having significant followers in India and which I hope you recognize as religions. Or are all followers of all those religions just put together in a bucket labeled as "non-believers"? I totally understand the gist of the article and I find the practice deplorable. Now, try to wrap around the gist of mine. This dual nature is pretty unique and also conveniently taken advantage of. The moment someone says - "All Indians are Hindus" : our esteemed junta will come out and defend it and say "Hey look! Hinduism isn't a religion, it is a way of life". However, at the same time these people wouldn't mind comparing to Islam etc, which are religions. That is as bit of pseudo-secularism for me as to what DMK is trying to do.
Crookbond Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 Oh DM darling' date=' trying to derail yet another thread instead of answering his question.[/quote'] Deto-baby, lets have a drink.
Detonator Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 I totally understand the gist of the article and I find the practice deplorable. Now, try to wrap around the gist of mine. This dual nature is pretty unique and also conveniently taken advantage of. The moment someone says - "All Indians are Hindus" : our esteemed junta will come out and defend it and say "Hey look! Hinduism isn't a religion, it is a way of life". However, at the same time these people wouldn't mind comparing to Islam etc, which are religions. That is as bit of pseudo-secularism for me as to what DMK is trying to do. Completly agree. Just that you should have posted it at first place intead of asking counter questions :giggle: The problem with the congress (and DMK) govt is it's absurd nature of secularist views. The problem is when the secular ideology being shoved down into a particular religion (Hindus) is what pisses off people. Basically these DMK, Congress etc., are showing a form of nihilist attitude towards hindus. Easy and acceptable targets u see. For e.g, few yrs ago Karuna proposed a ban on usage of loudspeakers on temples during festivals but not on mosques and churches. He and many others around India called for a ban animal sacrifices in temples. Yep, instantly cutting down the head is barbaric but not the halal method where the butcher slowly cuts the windpipe and the blood vessels in the neck isn't a problem. Deto-baby' date=' lets have a drink. [/quote']
Precambrian Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 Deto-baby' date=' lets have a drink. [/quote'] DM admits he is a drunkard alcoholic.
Detonator Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 DM admits he is a drunkard alcoholic. I drink beer,, he drink complan milk
Crookbond Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 DM admits he is a drunkard alcoholic. :hysterical: You went from a suicidal alcoholic to a dumb suicidal alcoholic. You have great academic achievements mate - if your PM to me has to be believed. I know it is difficult to keep up with Reading Comprehension lectures when you drink too much or are busy having suicidal thoughts but even then to generalize "Lets have a drink" to "Alcoholism" is dumb. Also, there can't be any "non-drunk" alcoholics there can be only "drunkard" alcoholics.
Precambrian Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 :hysterical: You went from a suicidal alcoholic to a dumb suicidal alcoholic. You have great academic achievements mate - if your PM to me has to be believed. I know it is difficult to keep up with Reading Comprehension lectures when you drink too much or are busy having suicidal thoughts but even then to generalize "Lets have a drink" to "Alcoholism" is dumb. Also' date=' there can't be any "non-drunk" alcoholics there can be only "drunkard" alcoholics.[/quote'] You have zero sense of humour.
Precambrian Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 I drink beer' date=', he drink complan milk [/quote'] Does he chew when he drink water?
Crookbond Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 You have zero sense of humour. You have zero sense :--D
Muloghonto Posted September 2, 2014 Posted September 2, 2014 Completly agree. Just that you should have posted it at first place intead of asking counter questions :giggle: The problem with the congress (and DMK) govt is it's absurd nature of secularist views. The problem is when the secular ideology being shoved down into a particular religion (Hindus) is what pisses off people. Basically these DMK, Congress etc., are showing a form of nihilist attitude towards hindus. Easy and acceptable targets u see. For e.g, few yrs ago Karuna proposed a ban on usage of loudspeakers on temples during festivals but not on mosques and churches. He and many others around India called for a ban animal sacrifices in temples. Yep, instantly cutting down the head is barbaric but not the halal method where the butcher slowly cuts the windpipe and the blood vessels in the neck isn't a problem. Well said. I am anti-halal. Its stupid to assume that a creature feeling less pain during death is less stressed at death or suffering less due to the absence of pain. If i don't wanna die and you are going to kill me anyways, isn't it making me suffer more by making me die slower ? Forget about pain, we are not going to simply sit there thinking only of the pain. An animal can be equally duressed and under extreme emotional trouble if it realizes it is dying anyways. To assume that an animal is not cognizant of it dying ( oh no ! i feel faint, lets go to sleep!) is to assume too much about animals that we simply do not know. It may be true for cows or sheep, but if you are trying to tell me that to 'halal' a chimpanzee is less barbaric than to shoot it, its basically saing its less cruel to kill people slowly than to shoot them. Thats twisted!
Recommended Posts