Sachin=GOD Posted January 27, 2015 Author Posted January 27, 2015 We are honoring 1st preamble,hence this picture has come for advertisement: Rajyavardhan Rathore on Govt Ad on R-Day Seems like he read Bulbul's comment :nervous:
Precambrian Posted January 27, 2015 Posted January 27, 2015 We are honoring 1st preamble' date=hence this picture has come for advertisement: Rajyavardhan Rathore on Govt Ad on R-Day Seems like he read Bulbul's comment :nervous: perfect reply, and good choice.
Sachin=GOD Posted January 28, 2015 Author Posted January 28, 2015 BREAKING | #ConstitutionRow Sena welcomes removal of the words, says crores of Indians want the word ‘Secular’ removed - CNN ibn.
gslv Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 this fake sickularism should be removed, this majority minority bullshit is creating more problems.since when a 18 crore population is minority.
G_B_ Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 BREAKING | #ConstitutionRow Sena welcomes removal of the words' date=' says crores of Indians want the word ‘Secular’ removed - CNN ibn.[/quote'] and they are correct...
hhunaeh Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 BREAKING | #ConstitutionRow Sena welcomes removal of the words' date=' says crores of Indians want the word ‘Secular’ removed - CNN ibn.[/quote'] complete quote..
jalebi_bhai Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 complete quote.. Oh thank Govinda! Please, post the history of how the words 'secular' and 'socialist' were added to our constitution. Ab aayega mazaa.
jalebi_bhai Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Raghav and S!=G sirs, same request as I've made with hhunaeh. I want to have a progressive and secular debate on the issue :agree:.
hhunaeh Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 Oh thank Govinda! Please, post the history of how the words 'secular' and 'socialist' were added to our constitution. Ab aayega mazaa. I know how it was added. The reason i posted the remark was to highlight the below part, which was missing from s=g post. The country is of Hindus and belongs to them. People of all religions can live in India but Hindus will dominate This is what BJP's ally which is part of the NDA is saying. One set of people will dominate the rest because of their religion. You may not see a problem with this but i do.
jalebi_bhai Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 I know how it was added. The reason i posted the remark was to highlight the below part' date=' which was missing from s=g post.[/quote'] So you know, right? Should it still be part of our constitution?
hhunaeh Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 So you know' date=' right? Should it still be part of our constitution?[/quote'] It is the nature of the country. Taking it out will not make any difference. It will just show where everybody stands on the issue. Here is my question to you, do you agree with your shiv sena ally?
jalebi_bhai Posted January 28, 2015 Posted January 28, 2015 It is the nature of the country. Taking it out will not make any difference. It will just show where everybody stands on the issue. Who said so? Indira Gandhi? So you have no problem when a despot brings about changes in our constitution in an incredibly undemocratic manner as long as it suits you? Wah :congrats: Were the people of our country asked before the change was made? Here is my question to you, do you agree with your shiv sena ally? Yes, I do. I don't have any special love for the SS, but on this issue, I do. 100% India is the birthplace of Hinduism. The land belongs to those who are Hindu or have Hindu ancestry (that includes present day Muslims, Sikhs, Jains, Christians, Parsis). Cry all you want, this is a fact. I belong to a Catholic family myself (I'll PM you pictures of my passport if you don't believe me, my first name is not a traditional Indian one). But I personally consider myself a Hindu (an Agnostic Hindu, maybe in a few years I won't be Agnostic anymore) at heart. No one forced me to become so. I don't need to do so either. Hindus have never discriminated against my family and we have all our rights as citizens of India. I've always had an interest in history (favorite subject in school), and once I did my own independent historic research of India outside of school, I readily embraced our Hindu history. Not everything about Hinduism is perfect and Hinduism has gone through it's own reformation movements over the course of time. India was a Buddhist nation under Ashoka, how do you think it went back to being a Hindu majority country? Read up on it, it's a very interesting bit of history. I spent my childhood in the Middle East (my dad was posted in Oman and the U.A.E) and most of my childhood summers (and some winters) were spent in India. I will always be grateful to the Omanis and Emiratis for letting my family live in their countries. But if you think that they treat us South Asians as equals, then the joke is on you. Do you want to hear stories of how South Asian laborers, Muslims included, are treated in these Muslim majority countries? Read up on the history of the Zoroastrians, you will figure out which religion is the true religion of peace. Thomas Macaulay and Max Muller are two other personalities whose profiles you should definitely read about. Ever since the 1830s, our history books have been filled with trash that makes a mockery of India's proud Hindu history. Subversion is what it's called. Why do you think Pakistanis are facing such an identity crisis today? It's cause their history is messed up. Hinduism has contributed a lot to human civilization. Not everything good is necessarily a Hindu invention, we shouldn't take credit for things we haven't done. But to wrongly discredit Hindus is also not right. There are some maharathis on this very forum who seem to derive extreme pleasure from mocking their own people. The joke, is sadly, on them really. We are a very young nation and hence still plagued with problems. But as someone who comes from a religious-minority family himself, Hindus are not the problem. No sir.
diga Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 It seems that the original author debated the use of words "Secular, Federal, Socialist” and here is what he wrote ... http://swarajyamag.com/commentary/the-2-s-words-ambedkar-did-not-want-in-the-constitution/ While the government advertisement would have used the original Preamble , the omission of the words by the chief architect of the Constitution was intentional and well-founded. On 15 November 1948 at the Constituent Assembly debate in Parliament, a member, Prof K.T Shah from Bihar moved an Amendment to the original Preamble statement. He insisted that the words, “Secular, Federal, Socialist” be inserted into the statement. In a detailed reply, BR Ambedkar justified why he did not include the words “secular” and “socialist” in the Preamble: Sir, I regret that I cannot accept the amendment of Prof. K. T. Shah. My objections, stated briefly are two. In the first place the Constitution, as I stated in my opening speech in support of the motion I made before the House, is merely a mechanism for the purpose of regulating the work of the various organs of the State. It is not a mechanism where by particular members or particular parties are installed in office. What should be the policy of the State, how the Society should be organised in its social and economic side are matters which must be decided by the people themselves according to time and circumstances. It cannot be laid down in the Constitution itself, because that is destroying democracy altogether. If you state in the Constitution that the social organisation of the State shall take a particular form, you are, in my judgment, taking away the liberty of the people to decide what should be the social organisation in which they wish to live. It is perfectly possible today, for the majority people to hold that the socialist organisation of society is better than the capitalist organisation of society. But it would be perfectly possible for thinking people to devise some other form of social organisation which might be better than the socialist organisation of today or of tomorrow. I do not see therefore why the Constitution should tie down the people to live in a particular form and not leave it to the people themselves to decide it for themselves. This is one reason why the amendment should be opposed Then Ambedkar remarked, “The second reason is that the amendment is purely superfluous.” :hatsoff:
G_B_ Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 this thread has been created out of the Ansari not saluting the flag on republic day thread.
BeautifulGame Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 Who said so? Indira Gandhi? So you have no problem when a despot brings about changes in our constitution in an incredibly undemocratic manner as long as it suits you? Wah :congrats: Were the people of our country asked before the change was made?. So why is BJP govt now using the amended constitution brought by a despot during the emergency ? http://m.timesofindia.com/india/Only-secular-Preamble-in-government-ads/articleshow/46071759.cms
diga Posted February 1, 2015 Posted February 1, 2015 So why is BJP govt now using the amended constitution brought by a despot during the emergency ? http://m.timesofindia.com/india/Only-secular-Preamble-in-government-ads/articleshow/46071759.cms From the link you posted.. The government rebutted the charge that the advertisement used the original Preamble because the idea was to celebrate the Constitution as it was promulgated on January 26, 1950. Minister of state for I&B Rajyavardhan Singh Rathore had stressed the advertisement was a tribute to the founding fathers. He also pointed out that UPA had used the same picture of the Preamble in an advertisement to commemorate the birth anniversary of B R Ambedkar on April 14, 2014. so it was a simple case of cut & paste mistake :haha: S!=G:sniffle:
Texy Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 Who said so? Indira Gandhi? So you have no problem when a despot brings about changes in our constitution in an incredibly undemocratic manner as long as it suits you? Wah :congrats: Were the people of our country asked before the change was made? Yes, I do. I don't have any special love for the SS, but on this issue, I do. 100% India is the birthplace of Hinduism. The land belongs to those who are Hindu or have Hindu ancestry (that includes present day Muslims, Sikhs, Jains, Christians, Parsis). Cry all you want, this is a fact. I belong to a Catholic family myself (I'll PM you pictures of my passport if you don't believe me, my first name is not a traditional Indian one). But I personally consider myself a Hindu (an Agnostic Hindu, maybe in a few years I won't be Agnostic anymore) at heart. No one forced me to become so. I don't need to do so either. Hindus have never discriminated against my family and we have all our rights as citizens of India. I've always had an interest in history (favorite subject in school), and once I did my own independent historic research of India outside of school, I readily embraced our Hindu history. Not everything about Hinduism is perfect and Hinduism has gone through it's own reformation movements over the course of time. India was a Buddhist nation under Ashoka, how do you think it went back to being a Hindu majority country? Read up on it, it's a very interesting bit of history. I spent my childhood in the Middle East (my dad was posted in Oman and the U.A.E) and most of my childhood summers (and some winters) were spent in India. I will always be grateful to the Omanis and Emiratis for letting my family live in their countries. But if you think that they treat us South Asians as equals, then the joke is on you. Do you want to hear stories of how South Asian laborers, Muslims included, are treated in these Muslim majority countries? Read up on the history of the Zoroastrians, you will figure out which religion is the true religion of peace. Thomas Macaulay and Max Muller are two other personalities whose profiles you should definitely read about. Ever since the 1830s, our history books have been filled with trash that makes a mockery of India's proud Hindu history. Subversion is what it's called. Why do you think Pakistanis are facing such an identity crisis today? It's cause their history is messed up. Hinduism has contributed a lot to human civilization. Not everything good is necessarily a Hindu invention, we shouldn't take credit for things we haven't done. But to wrongly discredit Hindus is also not right. There are some maharathis on this very forum who seem to derive extreme pleasure from mocking their own people. The joke, is sadly, on them really. We are a very young nation and hence still plagued with problems. But as someone who comes from a religious-minority family himself, Hindus are not the problem. No sir. New found respect :hatsoff:
Precambrian Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 Who said so? Indira Gandhi? So you have no problem when a despot brings about changes in our constitution in an incredibly undemocratic manner as long as it suits you? Wah :congrats: Were the people of our country asked before the change was made? Yes, I do. I don't have any special love for the SS, but on this issue, I do. 100% India is the birthplace of Hinduism. The land belongs to those who are Hindu or have Hindu ancestry (that includes present day Muslims, Sikhs, Jains, Christians, Parsis). Cry all you want, this is a fact. I belong to a Catholic family myself (I'll PM you pictures of my passport if you don't believe me, my first name is not a traditional Indian one). But I personally consider myself a Hindu (an Agnostic Hindu, maybe in a few years I won't be Agnostic anymore) at heart. No one forced me to become so. I don't need to do so either. Hindus have never discriminated against my family and we have all our rights as citizens of India. I've always had an interest in history (favorite subject in school), and once I did my own independent historic research of India outside of school, I readily embraced our Hindu history. Not everything about Hinduism is perfect and Hinduism has gone through it's own reformation movements over the course of time. India was a Buddhist nation under Ashoka, how do you think it went back to being a Hindu majority country? Read up on it, it's a very interesting bit of history. I spent my childhood in the Middle East (my dad was posted in Oman and the U.A.E) and most of my childhood summers (and some winters) were spent in India. I will always be grateful to the Omanis and Emiratis for letting my family live in their countries. But if you think that they treat us South Asians as equals, then the joke is on you. Do you want to hear stories of how South Asian laborers, Muslims included, are treated in these Muslim majority countries? Read up on the history of the Zoroastrians, you will figure out which religion is the true religion of peace. Thomas Macaulay and Max Muller are two other personalities whose profiles you should definitely read about. Ever since the 1830s, our history books have been filled with trash that makes a mockery of India's proud Hindu history. Subversion is what it's called. Why do you think Pakistanis are facing such an identity crisis today? It's cause their history is messed up. Hinduism has contributed a lot to human civilization. Not everything good is necessarily a Hindu invention, we shouldn't take credit for things we haven't done. But to wrongly discredit Hindus is also not right. There are some maharathis on this very forum who seem to derive extreme pleasure from mocking their own people. The joke, is sadly, on them really. We are a very young nation and hence still plagued with problems. But as someone who comes from a religious-minority family himself, Hindus are not the problem. No sir. Top class post. One of the best ever I've read on any forum.:hatsoff:
adi B Posted February 3, 2015 Posted February 3, 2015 Who said so? Indira Gandhi? So you have no problem when a despot brings about changes in our constitution in an incredibly undemocratic manner as long as it suits you? Wah :congrats: Were the people of our country asked before the change was made? Yes, I do. I don't have any special love for the SS, but on this issue, I do. 100% India is the birthplace of Hinduism. The land belongs to those who are Hindu or have Hindu ancestry (that includes present day Muslims, Sikhs, Jains, Christians, Parsis). Cry all you want, this is a fact. I belong to a Catholic family myself (I'll PM you pictures of my passport if you don't believe me, my first name is not a traditional Indian one). But I personally consider myself a Hindu (an Agnostic Hindu, maybe in a few years I won't be Agnostic anymore) at heart. No one forced me to become so. I don't need to do so either. Hindus have never discriminated against my family and we have all our rights as citizens of India. I've always had an interest in history (favorite subject in school), and once I did my own independent historic research of India outside of school, I readily embraced our Hindu history. Not everything about Hinduism is perfect and Hinduism has gone through it's own reformation movements over the course of time. India was a Buddhist nation under Ashoka, how do you think it went back to being a Hindu majority country? Read up on it, it's a very interesting bit of history. I spent my childhood in the Middle East (my dad was posted in Oman and the U.A.E) and most of my childhood summers (and some winters) were spent in India. I will always be grateful to the Omanis and Emiratis for letting my family live in their countries. But if you think that they treat us South Asians as equals, then the joke is on you. Do you want to hear stories of how South Asian laborers, Muslims included, are treated in these Muslim majority countries? Read up on the history of the Zoroastrians, you will figure out which religion is the true religion of peace. Thomas Macaulay and Max Muller are two other personalities whose profiles you should definitely read about. Ever since the 1830s, our history books have been filled with trash that makes a mockery of India's proud Hindu history. Subversion is what it's called. Why do you think Pakistanis are facing such an identity crisis today? It's cause their history is messed up. Hinduism has contributed a lot to human civilization. Not everything good is necessarily a Hindu invention, we shouldn't take credit for things we haven't done. But to wrongly discredit Hindus is also not right. There are some maharathis on this very forum who seem to derive extreme pleasure from mocking their own people. The joke, is sadly, on them really. We are a very young nation and hence still plagued with problems. But as someone who comes from a religious-minority family himself, Hindus are not the problem. No sir. Hit the nail :nice:
Recommended Posts