Gunmen killed at Dallas event on Prophet Muhammad cartoons

[Khalpat]

Yes. That is whole point. I will be hurt too and if act has been done just to hurt hindus I'll be resentful as well and will register my dissent in my own way and will hope people are discouraged from doing so.

Yes, Agree completely. Isn't this the basic thing which we teach our kids that if someone in your class is making fun of you stop reacting and ignore them, if you will react there will be someone else who will make fun and it will go on and on and atlast you will remain frustrated. Same thing applies to Muslims also, if someone makes a cartoon and you will react then there would be hundreds of others who would do this, some due to the hatred some for publicity and some because they do not have anyting else to do. IF for once Muslims ignore this , by Muslim I mean the religious heads then I can bet no one is going to make fun as there will be no fun.

[Detonator]

You are talking about India. People in this country have no idea about freedom of speech. Our people are yet to mature and understand the concept of freedom of speech. People are too emotional in this country for silly things. I have lived in Tamil Nadu for months and observed a trend from the Dravidian parties . they continued to attack Hindu religion but they didn't say anything bad about Islam or Christianity. Why? Because Hindus in south India seem to be less religious and they are okay with new ideas. Its one of the reasons why Christian missionaries have been able to convert them. But, its hard to do in a place like Maharashtra because its one of the places where Hindus have fought the invading Islamic army for centuries. People are bound to be very sentimental about few things. But, still I don't recall anyone getting killed for saying stuff about Marathis are Bal Thackeray.

Hindus in TN are not less religious, just tolerant due to the laid back culture here. Dood, you should see they festival days where we walk all the way to Pazhani, walk on burning charcoal, use 20 feet rod piercing their cheeks, et., Heck even I always use steps to go to Thirupathi, and walk to sabarimalai every year after 48 days of fasting. (not for superstitious purposes, just for some escape from reality, which makes us feel better). The reason for christian conversions is mainly done on very poor people, which DMK literally given them free pass. They are most pathetically secular party in the country. Agree with MH, they fought against a common enemy while TN kings fought among themselves and perished. Then Vijayanagar along with Nayakars and Marathas bought some redemption.

[Clarke]

hehe, turning a discussion on Islamic murderers into hindoo bigots is so secular :two_thumbs_up:

[jalebi_bhai]

its been in the constitution forever but it gets implemented by choice of when the BJP thinks its ok to do. Even they themselves didnt ban in Maharastra in the 90s.

This discussion will most likely become cyclical so I'm not going to keep going back and forth but I must point out one thing. In order for state acts to be amended, they have to be passed by the state assembly as well as receive assent from the President (who is essentially a rubber stamp of the PM and cabinet). The state assembly passed the Maharashtra Preservation Act amendment around 1995-96 I believe, however, the governor at the time, P. C. Alexander, reserved the bill under Article 201. This is what article 201 says:

201. Bill reserved for consideration When a Bill is reserved by a Governor for the consideration of the President, the President shall declare either that he assents to the Bill or that he withholds assent therefrom: Provided that, where the Bill is not a Money Bill, the President may direct the Governor to return the Bill to the House or, as the case may be, the Houses of the Legislature of the State together with such a message as it mentioned in the first proviso to Article 200 and, when a Bill is so returned, the House or Houses shall reconsider it accordingly within a period of six months from the date of receipt of such message and, if it is again passed by the House or Houses with or without amendment, it shall be presented again to the President for his consideration Procedure in Financial Matters

He may have reserved it multiple times actually. We had 4 different PMs from 1995-99 (Rao, ABVP, Gujral, Devegowda). Neither could form a stable govt. at the centre till NDA 1 in 1999. MAH state elections were held in 1999 and INC-NCP came to power. Last year was the first time NDA got a decisive mandate at the centre and once the state assembly passed the ameneded bill, Pranab da gave his assent following cabinet approval. Now I know you have your biases against the RW, but don't let it cloud your judgment here. They tried to got the ban enforced but simply couldn't. Still has nothing to do with shooting people for drawing religious leaders, so I'm still confused why you brought it up in the first place. Let's leave it at that.

[coffee_rules]

Is this a reference to deporting MF Hussein for making those paintings? Yea, I agree with you here. Totally unnecessary. What they should've done was ask MF Hussein the price of his painting and collect money to finance the purchase of the painting. After buying the painting, they should've held an event, with M.F. Hussein as honorary chief guest, where they would throw that painting into a shredder. Nothing wrong with this na? Destroying something that you have legally purchased? Much more fun than deporting the guy.

He was never deported. There were protests and government was giving enough protection. He chose to live in Qatar in the last few years. Nobody asked him to leave India, at least not in official capacity. If he had depicted muslims or christians naked, then he would be lynched.

[jalebi_bhai]

He was never deported. There were protests and government was giving enough protection. He chose to live in Qatar in the last few years. Nobody asked him to leave India' date=' at least not in official capacity. If he had depicted muslims or christians naked, then he would be lynched.[/quote'] Thanks for the correction. Appreciate it. So he essentially ran away? Coward. Unnecessarily provoke and then runaway. Where have I seen this before? (rhetorical question) Still, the fact that he was under some sort of protection isn't good. People who didn't like his paintings should've simply bought his paintings and destroyed them. No one can tell you what to do with things you've legally purchased.