Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

BobPatterson · Mon Nov 20, 2017 4:04 am

DIRECTFLT wrote:
Dutchy wrote:
DIRECTFLT wrote:

I did not say that I had many Gods to worship. Where did you get that??

You have = one has, but you seem to acknowledge that there are many God to worship.

I'm just gonna let this go...

Your are wiser than I am. It is so hard to let pass a prime example of fuzzy thinking, often repeated here.

You have made no mention of many Gods, "yet you seem to acknowledge......blah, blah".

The practice of falsely attributing to people things they have not said is a mystery to me.

Dutchy · Mon Nov 20, 2017 10:43 am

BobPatterson wrote:
DIRECTFLT wrote:
Dutchy wrote:

You have = one has, but you seem to acknowledge that there are many God to worship.

I'm just gonna let this go...

Your are wiser than I am. It is so hard to let pass a prime example of fuzzy thinking, often repeated here.

You have made no mention of many Gods, "yet you seem to acknowledge......blah, blah".

The practice of falsely attributing to people things they have not said is a mystery to me.

Ah, a passive-aggressive response, whom would have thought from Bob :white:

ElPistolero · Mon Nov 20, 2017 2:01 pm

DIRECTFLT wrote:
DocLightning wrote:
I'm always amused at Americans of Christian (or sometimes Jewish) extraction trying to take up Hinduism because it preaches a fancy cosmology and is not related to Christianity and preaches oneness and togetherness. Christianity superficially preaches similar concepts of unity, peace, love, and nonjudgmentalism.

But within the Abrahamic religions and Hinduism alike are violent teachings of self-supremacy and intolerance. We don't think of Hinduism as a religion prone to violent fundamentalism but it is. Massive, organized religions generally can be twisted into violence.

Well, wherever Satan has a foothold in a religion, regardless of the religion, or sect of the religion, there will be bloodshed.

To which, one might ask, which religion does Satan not have a foothold in? Buddhism? Every religion has a history of bloodshed.

The problem with Hindu nationalism isn't necessarily the Hinduism part. It's largely the nationalism part. Unlike the Abrahamic religions (Islam, Judaism, Christianity), Hinduism doesn't divide the world between "believers" and "non-believers". If it did, it wouldn't be able to support as many different religious beliefs/"Gods and Goddeses" as it does. There's no real internal conflict between Hindus of different sects either - nothing comparable to the Sunni/Shia or Catholic/Protestant divide. Its a loose, partly outdated, philosophy masquerading as a religion by virtue of coopting any number of smaller religions and deities.

The problem comes with the nationalism aspect. Which continues, as ever, to define the "other" by what they aren't. Adopting nationalist concepts gives Hinduism the exclusivity it confronted in the Abrahamic religions, but could never draw from it's on religious concepts.

For what it's worth, there's no historical concept of Satan, heaven or hell in Hinduism. Although I'm sure some Hindu sect somewhere has retroactively created one.

BarfBag · Wed Nov 22, 2017 8:14 am

ElPistolero wrote:
Its a loose, partly outdated, philosophy masquerading as a religion

A religion is a system of faith. It's adherents decide whether or not it's a religion. Not you. You aren't even remotely qualified to make such a judgement. And where's the expiry date on the can you're looking at, that tells you if something is outdated or not, by the way ?

ElPistolero wrote:
For what it's worth, there's no historical concept of Satan, heaven or hell in Hinduism. Although I'm sure some Hindu sect somewhere has retroactively created one.

{facepalm} Heard of reincarnation ? Salvation ?

Your narrowminded Christian-centric view of the Hinduism sounds so... weird. Anything that doesn't look like what you do is 'not a religion' ? 'Something missing for which they need to create some matching notion of the end game' ?

Hinduism has been around since before Judaism, Christianity or Islam - three almost identical religions, with a continuous story to tell. Especially the latter two - Christianity and Islam - two essentially identical desert creeds in continuous conflict for a thousand years to the present day, from Crusades at one time, to militaries dropping smart bombs today.

ElPistolero · Wed Nov 22, 2017 5:54 pm

BarfBag wrote:
ElPistolero wrote:
Its a loose, partly outdated, philosophy masquerading as a religion

A religion is a system of faith. It's adherents decide whether or not it's a religion. Not you. You aren't even remotely qualified to make such a judgement. And where's the expiry date on the can you're looking at, that tells you if something is outdated or not, by the way ?
ElPistolero wrote:
For what it's worth, there's no historical concept of Satan, heaven or hell in Hinduism. Although I'm sure some Hindu sect somewhere has retroactively created one.

{facepalm} Heard of reincarnation ? Salvation ?

Your narrowminded Christian-centric view of the Hinduism sounds so... weird. Anything that doesn't look like what you do is 'not a religion' ? 'Something missing for which they need to create some matching notion of the end game' ?

Hinduism has been around since before Judaism, Christianity or Islam - three almost identical religions, with a continuous story to tell. Especially the latter two - Christianity and Islam - two essentially identical desert creeds in continuous conflict for a thousand years to the present day, from Crusades at one time, to militaries dropping smart bombs today.

- What is Hinduism's "system"? There is no binding doctrine or central authority. The 'religious' texts focus on morality and conscience, rather than the importance of getting into the good books of a divine entity who somehow manages to be compassionate and unforgiving at the same time. No Hindu religious teachings are binding. They can be challenged and disregarded if they're deemed no longer relevant. These are characteristics of a philosophy rather than of a religion.

- Expiry date? Hindu 'religious' texts like Manusmriti come with built-in expiry dates and have been discarded by Hindus accordingly.

- Hindu reincarnation/salvation have nothing to do with Heaven and/or hell. They not only precede the Christian heaven/hell, they preclude it. I'm not a Christian and I don't subscribe to the view that heaven/hell is a requirement to be considered a religion.

- Now that we've parked that strawman, its worth noting that you, not I, are trying to recast Hindu concepts to fit Abrahamic systems. Hindu salvation is about enlightenment/self-realization/knowledge. It does not require a belief in any divine entity. It is simply not comparable to the Christian heaven, which has clear rules for entry, including an explicit requirement to reject what it considers incorrect beliefs. By comparing the two, you've revealed your Christian-centric view of Hinduism.

- Let me reiterate: Hinduism isn't the problem here (not that it doesn't have its own issues). Hindu nationalism is the problem. Nationalism is inherently divisive, dividing the country into a superior 'us' versus an inferior 'other'. Instead of retaining Hinduism's traditional openness to different concepts in the quest for knowledge/self realization, Hindu nationalism has become about rejecting non-Hindus outright, including actively seeking to curb their freedoms. In some cases, adherents of this bizarre brand of Hinduism believe that human lives are worth less than those of animals (as documented in this thread).

- I'm a Hindu insofar as I adhere to aspects of Hindu philosophy that I deem appropriate in this day and age. I don't subscribe to any specific Hindu deity. And I reject the current Hindu nationalism fad outright. Why? Because I saw the fallout of Babri Masjid with my own eyes. The problem for Hindu nationalists is that they're always going to have to contend with Hindus like me, who reject their desire to turn Hinduism into a violent, deranged and easily offended movement. The part I enjoy the most: they can't reject my Hindu credentials, what with being from the priestly caste and all.

BarfBag · Fri Nov 24, 2017 6:29 pm

ElPistolero wrote:
What is Hinduism's "system"? There is no binding doctrine or central authority.

A religion requires neither a binding doctrine nor a central authority. Hinduism has survived 1000+ years of onslaught from Islam and Christianity simply because there's no central authority to destroy.

You're confusing creeds and religions. Since you're an Indian, you're familiar with the phrase "without regard for caste, creed, colour and religion" ? Those are four different words because they're four different unrelated things. Caste exists in more than one religion. Creeds exist in some religion. Colour has nothing to with religion, and religion is separate from caste or creed.

Further, you're confusing Eastern and Abrahamic religions. None of the eastern religions - barring Sikhism to an extent - have a central authority. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainisism, even Daoism, are all similar in this regard.

Religion does not require any one authority, or a single body or literature, a creed, or anything of the sort.

Philosophy is not the same thing as religion. It's a study of human condition, not an effort to maintain a belief system.

ElPistolero wrote:
The 'religious' texts focus on morality and conscience, rather than the importance of getting into the good books of a divine entity who somehow manages to be compassionate and unforgiving at the same time. No Hindu religious teachings are binding.

Binding ? Are you under the impression that Christianity and Islam are 'binding' ? Short of ISIS lopping people's heads off, what exactly is the binding character of these religions ? Their books state various things against divorce, murder, greed, etc. Last I checked, that's not stopped anyone from doing any of those things, even the devour types.

ElPistolero wrote:
Hindu reincarnation/salvation have nothing to do with Heaven and/or hell.

{facepalm} That's exactly what I said! All religions have an end game. YOU are the one who stated that an end game needs to sound like 'heaven/hell' for something to be a religion. I said that's nonsense and that they can come up with anything else not related to a binary good vs bad place.

What you argue about 'Hindu nationalism' is a central tenet of both Christianity and Islam. Neither of them will EVER profess 'sarve dharma sambhava'. It is explicit that they are superior to others. Try sitting down and debating with them that 'Christ / Mohd and Krishna are equally valid ways to divinity'. Good luck. You can sit around babbling about 'Hindu nationalism', despite the fact that the two largest faiths on the planet are aggressively nationalist themselves. Even in liberal Dubai, you cannot seek to convert a Muslim.

BawliBooch · Sat Nov 25, 2017 12:22 am

Muslim cleric & 2 relatives lynched on train in UP state

A MUSLIM cleric and two of his relatives were allegedly assaulted by some unidentified persons on board a Delhi-Shamli passenger train, in Baghpat district on Wednesday night. According to an eyewitness, the attackers said they wanted to remove the head scarves which the victims were wearing.

BarfBag wrote:
What you argue about 'Hindu nationalism' is a central tenet of both Christianity and Islam. Neither of them will EVER profess 'sarve dharma sambhava'. It is explicit that they are superior to others. Try sitting down and debating with them that 'Christ / Mohd and Krishna are equally valid ways to divinity'. Good luck. You can sit around babbling about 'Hindu nationalism', despite the fact that the two largest faiths on the planet are aggressively nationalist themselves.

Fascist terror groups like the RSS want to turn Hinduism into sad facsimile of Islam using the argument that Hindus are weak and vulnerable because of our openness and syncretic culture. Hence the rise of terror attacks and lynch mobs especially now that they have state power and all the protection it provides.

ElPistolero · Sat Nov 25, 2017 3:30 am

BarfBag wrote:
ElPistolero wrote:
What is Hinduism's "system"? There is no binding doctrine or central authority.

A religion requires neither a binding doctrine nor a central authority. Hinduism has survived 1000+ years of onslaught from Islam and Christianity simply because there's no central authority to destroy.

You're confusing creeds and religions. Since you're an Indian, you're familiar with the phrase "without regard for caste, creed, colour and religion" ? Those are four different words because they're four different unrelated things. Caste exists in more than one religion. Creeds exist in some religion. Colour has nothing to with religion, and religion is separate from caste or creed.

Further, you're confusing Eastern and Abrahamic religions. None of the eastern religions - barring Sikhism to an extent - have a central authority. Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainisism, even Daoism, are all similar in this regard.

Religion does not require any one authority, or a single body or literature, a creed, or anything of the sort.

Philosophy is not the same thing as religion. It's a study of human condition, not an effort to maintain a belief system.
ElPistolero wrote:
The 'religious' texts focus on morality and conscience, rather than the importance of getting into the good books of a divine entity who somehow manages to be compassionate and unforgiving at the same time. No Hindu religious teachings are binding.

Binding ? Are you under the impression that Christianity and Islam are 'binding' ? Short of ISIS lopping people's heads off, what exactly is the binding character of these religions ? Their books state various things against divorce, murder, greed, etc. Last I checked, that's not stopped anyone from doing any of those things, even the devour types.
ElPistolero wrote:
Hindu reincarnation/salvation have nothing to do with Heaven and/or hell.

{facepalm} That's exactly what I said! All religions have an end game. YOU are the one who stated that an end game needs to sound like 'heaven/hell' for something to be a religion. I said that's nonsense and that they can come up with anything else not related to a binary good vs bad place.

What you argue about 'Hindu nationalism' is a central tenet of both Christianity and Islam. Neither of them will EVER profess 'sarve dharma sambhava'. It is explicit that they are superior to others. Try sitting down and debating with them that 'Christ / Mohd and Krishna are equally valid ways to divinity'. Good luck. You can sit around babbling about 'Hindu nationalism', despite the fact that the two largest faiths on the planet are aggressively nationalist themselves. Even in liberal Dubai, you cannot seek to convert a Muslim.

Yeah, no. You're creating straw men thatI have no interest in defending.

- I'm not confusing anything. Hinduism and Buddhism (can't speak to the others - not familiar with them) are philosophical in nature. They seek to truths about the human condition, while Abrahamic religions are about infallible 'divinely revealed truths'. Like philosophies, Hinduism and Buddhism are open to internal challenge and revision. The Abrahamic religions have a harder time coping with internal dissent.

- Islam and Christianity have certain beliefs that the faithful have to subscribe to in order to be considered practitioners of the faith. Refusing those beliefs (which are self-evident) amounts to apostasy. How does one become an apostate in Hinduism?

- Hinduism surviving Islam has nothing to do with it being a 'religion'. Greek philosophy survived suppression by the Catholic Church without being a religion.

- I never said anything about an end game. I merely refuted an absurd point about Satan having a foothold in religions, by pointing out that the concept of Satan, as well as associated concepts of heaven and hell, have no place in Hinduism writ large. This "end game" is your straw man.

- As for Christianity and Islam, perhaps you need to read more carefully. I said they're both exclusivist, and Hindu nationalism has given some Hindus a vehicle to become exclusivist. That doesn't make exclusivism a good trait. That one side is doing it doesn't mean the other has to stoop to their level. The simple, ugly reality is that Hindu nationalism has stooped so low, that a non-Hindu Indian citizen can count on better protection of his/her rights and freedoms in the west than in India these days. Why? Because the west endeavours to separate religion and state, while Hindu nationalism seeks to bind them. How's combining religion and state working out in Pakistan?

- I don't care about how (un)/favourably Hinduism compares with other religions. That's your straw man; you deal with it. All I'm going to point out is that Hindu nationalism has unleashed an unbelievable number of easily offended folk who dont think twice about resorting to violence against fellow citizens. Freedom of religion, freedom of expression, equality, democracy,sanctity of human life, live and let live (especially when it comes to movies/books that no one is forcing you to consume) - these are all alien concepts to Hindu nationalists, even the ones who pay lip service to it. And yes, I know these concepts are equally alien to the Taliban. Which tells you about the ideological similarities between the two movements. Same wood, different tree, and all that.

BawliBooch · Sat Nov 25, 2017 7:03 pm

ElPistolero wrote:

Yeah, no. You're creating straw men thatI have no interest in defending.

- I'm not confusing anything. Hinduism and Buddhism (can't speak to the others - not familiar with them) are philosophical in nature. They seek to truths about the human condition, while Abrahamic religions are about infallible 'divinely revealed truths'. Like philosophies, Hinduism and Buddhism are open to internal challenge and revision. The Abrahamic religions have a harder time coping with internal dissent.

Excellent points! Excellent counter to typical BarfBag bhakti!

BawliBooch · Fri Dec 08, 2017 12:31 am

Most disturbing case yet. Muslim man attacked with axe and burnt alive in a "protest against Love Jihad". Incident filmed and made viral across India using WhatsApp to "send a message". "love Jihad" is a favorite dog whistle for the Right Wing in India - refers to Muslim Men marrying Hindu women to convert them. This is apparently an ISIS conspiracy according to RW conspiracy theorists.

Man burnt alive in Rajasthan’s Rajsamand after being axed for alleged love jihad
(Warning: Video in News story may be disturbing)

In other news, the accused in the Pehlu Khan lynching case last year have been let off by the police for "lack of evidence". That attack had also been filmed and made viral.

India's slow descent into Talibani Hell.

BawliBooch · Sat Dec 16, 2017 2:42 am

Christian Group singing Christmas Carols attacked; car set on fire.

BHOPAL: A group of carol singers and two priests were detained for hours by the police in Satna in Madhya Pradesh last evening after they were accused by the rightwing group Bajrang Dal of forcing religious conversions. Later, a car used by some carolers who went to the police to find out about the detained priests was allegedly set on fire by activists of the same group.

The police say a case has been registered against "unknown people" for the car-burning.

The carolers - about 30 of them - were picked up by the police from a road as they were moving around the town singing carols for Christmas.

TryToFlySomeday · Sat Dec 23, 2017 1:34 am

I guess I have no right to comment here as a Pakistani Muslim born and raised in America.

But because I can't resist, I'll talk anyways.

India, at least in religious tolerance, is better than Pakistan. Despite Jinnah's wishes for a secular country, Pakistan got rid of secularism in their country in 1956, while India has been secular since 1950 thanks to Nehru.

This is why some Muslims chose to stay in India. This is also why Christians, Jews, Sikhs, Ahmadis, Parsis, Buddhists, atheists, and Jains stayed in India - because they were guaranteed protection as equal citizens to Hindus in their constitution.

I'd say the problem roots to 1976 when secularism was defined in India as different from secularism in the west - "equal treatment of all religions" instead of "separation of church and state" - or in the case of India, "separation of temple and state".

The above meant that the Indian government can still be involved in religious affairs, but they have to treat every Indian citizen equally regardless of religious belief.

Now that sounds flawed doesn't it? Well, it is. The fact that Indian secularism and western secularism have two distinctly different definitions allowed the BJP to come to power, because Indian secularism is weaker than western secularism. Though better than Pakistan's Islamic Republic, which continously persecutes Jews, Hindus and Ahmadis (to the point where there are very few registered Jewish families living in Pakistan), India is getting itself to the point of becoming Hindustan (the Hindu Pakistan).

With all these lynchings occuring to Muslims and Christians and lower-caste Hindus, India risks going down the path of Pakistan and becoming a Hindustan. That could destabilize the South Asia region. It's bad enough that Pakistan has become unstable due to Islamic extremists, do we need India to become unstable due to Hindu extremists?

India should try to match western secularism, as the largest democracy in the world. It cannot afford to do otherwise.

BawliBooch · Sun Jan 07, 2018 1:25 am

TryToFlySomeday wrote:
India, at least in religious tolerance, is better than Pakistan. Despite Jinnah's wishes for a secular country, Pakistan got rid of secularism in their country in 1956, while India has been secular since 1950 thanks to Nehru.

Nehru built democratic institutions that kept India a liberal democracy even as other 3rd world states faced military coups and dictatorships. But the govt in power in India today hates Nehru and are working furiously to dismantle his legacy.

TryToFlySomeday wrote:
With all these lynchings occuring to Muslims and Christians and lower-caste Hindus, India risks going down the path of Pakistan and becoming a Hindustan. That could destabilize the South Asia region. It's bad enough that Pakistan has become unstable due to Islamic extremists, do we need India to become unstable due to Hindu extremists?

You said it! A friend of Pakistani origin, now in Seattle, told me India's descent into madness is similar to what Pakistan faced in the 1980's under Zia. He should know - he was a student activist in Karachi who fled Pakistan soon after Zia's takeover. Pakistan never really recovered from the Islamic radicalisation of the 1980's. It will be far worse in India with 100 sub-nationalities and languages.

TryToFlySomeday wrote:
India should try to match western secularism, as the largest democracy in the world. It cannot afford to do otherwise.

Well, those of us who argue for a return to Nehruvian ideal's and adopting the secular ideals of the French are described by America resident desi's like BarfBag as "Naxalites".

Finally: 3 incidents of lynchings this week. 1 in Bhima-Koregaon (Maratha) and 2 Muslim's- Rajasthan & Jharkhand.

TryToFlySomeday · Sun Jan 07, 2018 5:52 pm

Dear gosh - 3 lynchings after just one week of 2018? Not a good way to start.

Are there any political parties in India who condemned the lynchings? What are the chances those parties will show up on the ballots in 2019?

BarfBag · Sun Jan 07, 2018 6:09 pm

Naxalites

Because you ARE one, by your OWN admission - a hard left Marxist who believes in class warfare and the destruction of India's primary Hindu ethos by any means, violent and otherwise. You've spent all your life being indoctrinated in the most virulent creed of the 20th century - left wing Marxism - and sit around babbling about 'Hindu nationalism'. You, an upper caste bigot who uses swear words against lower castes and then blames 'Hindu nationalism' ? Hah.

You are a self-admitted anarchist, who went to JNU, and by your own admission, misused public funds to instead spend your entire time at a state-subsidized university of higher education drinking, doing drugs and fcuking anything that moved. And you assert pride in having done so - you - a person who was educated at public expense, uses that opportunity to indulge in a travesty of what higher education should have been.

In India, 'journalists' aren't the top of the pile for good reason - no one gets into that business by being the best . You become a journalist because you're a back bencher with no academic credentials, doing a BA/BSc and then wasting even more time at some place doing a useless masters degree where for most part you're busy drinking and partying as you've yourself admitted. You grew up with no sense of personal responsibility. You graduate and go work in an industry full of leftist back scratchers busy railing at a Prime Minister who still runs >80% favorable ratings and whose alliance runs 19 of India's 30 states today, up from 4 a decade ago, the party itself running 15 states.

Who's your best political hope ? The Bihari dude who's about to end up in jail ? The mentally deficit Nehru scion who spends half the year outside India getting private treatment for his drug and drinking habit ? His alcoholic sister, whose shyster husband will have the law land on his head the moment she ventures into politics ? Or their waitress mummy ? Remind me again, how many big states does Congress rule ? Karnataka and... nothing.

BarfBag · Sun Jan 07, 2018 6:24 pm

- Islam and Christianity have certain beliefs that the faithful have to subscribe to in order to be considered practitioners of the faith. Refusing those beliefs (which are self-evident) amounts to apostasy. How does one become an apostate in Hinduism?

Apostasy is one of the stupidest ideas mankind has ever come up with. Are you seriously arguing that it's a parameter for calling something a 'religion' ? For real ? "Stop believing in jeebus/allah and I'll kill you!!" . WTF - that's your idea of 'religion' ? Where do you pull such 'logic' from ?

- Hinduism surviving Islam has nothing to do with it being a 'religion'. Greek philosophy survived suppression by the Catholic Church without being a religion.

Hinduism's survival has everything to do with it being a religion that 100s of millions cherished and wished to save from 800 years of assault from Islam, and another 200 years of Islam and Christianity's attacks on it, that continues to this day thanks to its gullible footsoldiers like BawliBooch.

And Ancient Greek religion - a once alive system of faith with its own temples, priests and followers - is dead. As is ancient Egyptian religion. They remain as nothing more than curiosities of the past. But Hinduism is not. It's the same vibrant religion of 3000 years ago, predating the Mauryan Empire. It's actively practiced by close to a billion people.

I said they're both exclusivist, and Hindu nationalism has given some Hindus a vehicle to become exclusivist.

You have a problem with fire being fought with fire then ? Fair enough. At least you *do* realize the exclusivism is not Hinduism's primary nature, but is reactive. You may not like it, while I wholly support it. The fact remains - based on your own description - that the problem begins with the exclusivist nature of other religions. The solution also begins there.

Islam and Christianity MUST give up their exclusivist doctrine. *ALL* religions are equal. *ALL* are equally valid paths to the divine. Siva and Krishna stands at the same level as Jesus and Mohammed. There's *no* point in religious conversions since all paths are equal, and thus all religions must only grow organically. Anyone is free to stop - on their own - believing in any particular God, without any fear of retribution.

That's my challenge to you. Get them to accept that, and poof, your fearsome 'Hindu nationalism' disappears too.

By the way, Hindutva is not religion. It's politics. It's an active mobilization of Hindus to focus their political alignment on Hindu-specific issues. As mullahs in mosques and bishops in churches tell their flock to vote for a certain candidate, Hindutva ensures sants and priests tell their flocks to do so too. And we all know the latter is far more effective, because of this .

That image is why you, Bawli and all others violently attack Hindutva, because you know, when any Hindutva-driven party manages a conversion rate on that population map of even half, no other
political entity stands a chance. This has nothing to do with religion, and everything to do with the aquisition of political power, through the single most dominant cohesive feature of India - Hinduism. It holds India together, and anyone who harnesses it politically, rules the land by a long long way.

BawliBooch · Mon Jan 08, 2018 3:44 am

Aaah! The US resident, Muslim/Dalit/Christian hating upper caste Hindutva apologist has finally spoken!

BarfBag wrote:
Naxalites

Because you ARE one, by your OWN admission - a hard left Marxist who believes in class warfare and the destruction of India's primary Hindu ethos by any means, violent and otherwise. You've spent all your life being indoctrinated in the most virulent creed of the 20th century - left wing Marxism - and sit around babbling about 'Hindu nationalism'.

Hain? Class warfare? Destruction of India's primary Hindu ethos? What are you smoking dude? I don't believe "class warfare" or other such hard ideologies which have gone past their expiry date, but European socialism is certainly an ideal that I aspire to.

Yes, I am an upper caste Hindu like yourself. But unlike you, I understand the difference between my religion "Hindu" and "Hindutva" - which is RSS terrorism. Unlike you, I don't accept that Muslims/Christians are the "others" who deserve to be lynched or raped on streets. Unlike you, I dont believe in demolishing Churches and Mosques and putting temples in their place. That isnt reviving religion - it is terrorism. PERIOD.

BarfBag wrote:
You, an upper caste bigot who uses swear words against lower castes and then blames 'Hindu nationalism' ? Hah.

Prove it! Prove that i used swear words against lower castes! I have quoted the speeches of some of the people you defend - you know the ones who are going out lynching the lower castes and minorities. But like Modi himself, bigoted bhakts like you are masters in hit & run tactics with your lies. Repeat a lie in the hope that it becomes accepted as the truth. Wont work here.

BarfBag wrote:
You are a self-admitted anarchist, who went to JNU, and by your own admission, misused public funds to instead spend your entire time at a state-subsidized university of higher education drinking, doing drugs and fcuking anything that moved.

Aww! Yes I am proud my parents sent me to a world class university like JNU instead of dumping me in a shakha like yours did! And along with an education, we did have our fun! While Sanghi bigots like Modi were abandoning their wives and snooping on women and counting condoms outside our University!

BarfBag wrote:
This has nothing to do with religion, and everything to do with the aquisition of political power, through the single most dominant cohesive feature of India - Hinduism. It holds India together, and anyone who harnesses it politically, rules the land by a long long way.

Aaah! At last the admission that it is all about politics.

Heres where I do differ from you @BarfBag. Nowhere in the world has the mix of religion of politics worked. Nowhere.

India chose to be a liberal, secular and democratic nation in 1947 while Pakistan went down the route of Islamism and look where it has taken them. Now the RSS and its defenders like yourself want to turn India into a Hindu version of Pakistan. We wont let that happen.

And using violence against Christians/Muslims to further your religious politics? That is TEXTBOOK TERRORISM!

BarfBag wrote:
Who's your best political hope ? The Bihari dude who's about to end up in jail ? The mentally deficit Nehru scion who spends half the year outside India getting private treatment for his drug and drinking habit ? His alcoholic sister, whose shyster husband will have the law land on his head the moment she ventures into politics ? Or their waitress mummy ?

Wow! Clearly you are rattled by the manner in which the RSS and its rabid brand of Hindutva terrorism is being exposed internationally. The fact that you quote whatsapp forwards and Crazy Subbu Swamy shows that.

But heres the thing: All your whataboutery in your last post does not justify the lynching of minority Muslims & Christians in India. You might think it does. But it doesn't.

The world is waking up to the dangers of the RSS and their brand of Hindutva terrorism.

TryToFlySomeday · Mon Jan 08, 2018 6:40 pm

Hindutva in India reminds me of Islamic terrorism in Pakistan - just makes the whole population of the respective country look bad. I recently went to Pakistan and I only bought groceries from one store and it was owned by Hindus who were surprisingly living in Pakistan comfortably. I’m sure there are some cases where Muslims and Christians live in India comfortably.

That said, I don’t ignore abductions of Hindus and Ahmadis in Pakistan. I condemn it. Just as I condemn Islamic terrorism, and the Hindutva movement.

ElPistolero · Wed Jan 10, 2018 3:58 pm

BarfBag wrote:
Apostasy is one of the stupidest ideas mankind has ever come up with. Are you seriously arguing that it's a parameter for calling something a 'religion' ? For real ?

No, that was just an example of the faith/belief in divinity that characterizes any religion. Its pretty obvious that one can be a Hindu without believing in Hindu divinity. As is often the case with any philosophical "way of life".

BarfBag wrote:
"Stop believing in jeebus/allah and I'll kill you!!" . WTF - that's your idea of 'religion' ? Where do you pull such 'logic' from ?

As opposed to the "Stop believing in (non-Hindu divine figure/non-Hindu beliefs) or I'll kill you!!" logic coming from your Hindutva brethren? People like you who think it's okay to lynch/kill anyone for having the temerity to eat beef.

BarfBag wrote:
Hinduism's survival has everything to do with it being a religion that 100s of millions cherished and wished to save from 800 years of assault from Islam, and another 200 years of Islam and Christianity's attacks on it, that continues to this day thanks to its gullible footsoldiers like BawliBooch.

The Hinduism of today, which is not the Hinduism of 800 years ago, has survived because good ideas survive (think Greek philosophy). Bad ideas crumble when challenged. I do not feel aggrieved by the British "Christian" assault on practices like sati. Or that exposure to foreign (ie - non- Hindu) concepts has helped us relegate Manu-smriti's views on women to the dustbin of history.

BarfBag wrote:
"And Ancient Greek religion - a once alive system of faith with its own temples, priests and followers - is dead. As is ancient Egyptian religion. They remain as nothing more than curiosities of the past.

Hundreds of thousands of people profess belief in Jediism. That's a "religion" based on Jedi beliefs from a fictional movie called Star Wars. Which is to say that anyone is free to practice any faith they want. Even Ancient Greek. That it's no longer practiced suggests that people have no interest in it.

Freedom can be problematic that way. It openly challenges the frankly absurd belief that any system of beliefs has a right to exist or flourish for perpetuity. They don't. Maybe that's why you and your ilk don't like freedom.

BarfBag wrote:
But Hinduism is not. It's the same vibrant religion of 3000 years ago, predating the Mauryan Empire.

Is it? Consider the Hindu temples of Khajuraho approach to modesty and sex. It's very different to the ultra-prudish views held by your "Hindu" Hindutva brethren, who evidently have more in common with equally prudish Christian Victorians and their Islamic counterparts than they do with their Hindu predecessors.

Reality is: this whole Hindutva ideology is just a poorly thought out imitation of the more conservative strands of Christianity and Islam. You lot purport to oppose them, yet can't help but imitate them. Ironic. Imitation is the best form of flattery.

BarfBag wrote:
You have a problem with fire being fought with fire then ?

Depends. Is it okay to use military force against religious terrorists? Yes.

Is it okay to set innocent women and children alight because their co-religionists may have committed a crime? No.

We both know where your "reactive" ideological brethren stand (think 2002 Naroda/Minister Maya Kodnani). You may want to rethink your posts because they suggest you support what Maya and co did there. Unless, of course, you do. Do you?

BarfBag wrote:
At least you *do* realize the exclusivism is not Hinduism's primary nature, but is reactive. You may not like it, while I wholly support it. The fact remains - based on your own description - that the problem begins with the exclusivist nature of other religions. The solution also begins there.

Sure. And if we continue with your logic, the best way to fight racism is by being racist. Let us know how that works out for you in any civilized society. If you ever leave India.

BarfBag wrote:
Islam and Christianity MUST give up their exclusivist doctrine. *ALL* religions are equal. *ALL* are equally valid paths to the divine. Siva and Krishna stands at the same level as Jesus and Mohammed.

Sure.

BarfBag wrote:
There's *no* point in religious conversions since all paths are equal, and thus all religions must only grow organically.

I don't see any point either, but I don't object to people converting to any religious belief that they want to (even Jediism). Anyone is free to believe what they want. Even Hindutva folk like yourself.

We normal Hindus don't object to your ideological brethren's epic snowflakey-ness (is there any group in the world that is more easily offended?) We draw the line at your tendency to discriminate against, physically harm or restrict the rights of others.

BarfBag wrote:
Anyone is free to stop - on their own - believing in any particular God, without any fear of retribution.

Are they free to continue believing in something without fear of retribution? Or is that contrary to your ideology?

BarfBag wrote:
That's my challenge to you. Get them to accept that, and poof, your fearsome 'Hindu nationalism' disappears too.

What makes you think I don't challenge other religions on exclusivism?

And "fearsome"? Ha. You wish. More like easily triggered whiney snowflakes with a massive victim complex who think it's okay to massacre/justify the massacre of innocent and defenceless women and children. I believe "pathetic" is a more accurate descriptor.

BarfBag wrote:
By the way, Hindutva is not religion. It's politics. It's an active mobilization of Hindus to focus their political alignment on Hindu-specific issues. As mullahs in mosques and bishops in churches tell their flock to vote for a certain candidate, Hindutva ensures sants and priests tell their flocks to do so too. And we all know the latter is far more effective, because of this .

If it's just about votes, why is it so hell-bent on limiting others' freedoms. Surely this Hindu can eat beef without depriving you of your precious votes?

Maybe its about manufacturing nonsensical issues and forcing half-baked beliefs on others. Not unlike your Islamic counterparts - the Taliban.

BarfBag wrote:
That image is why you, Bawli and all others violently attack Hindutva, because you know, when any Hindutva-driven party manages a conversion rate on that population map of even half, no other
political entity stands a chance. This has nothing to do with religion, and everything to do with the aquisition of political power, through the single most dominant cohesive feature of India - Hinduism. It holds India together, and anyone who harnesses it politically, rules the land by a long long way.

Interesting. Evidently you haven't given much thought to the flip-side of this approach. Namely that in your desire to harness Hinduism by exploiting its apparently deep insecurities, you've ended up projecting Hinduism internationally as an insecure, immature, snowflake-dominated religion with a bizarre victim complex, to the extent that it values animals above humans, doesn't respect basic notions ofrights and freedoms, and thinks nothing of impulsively ("reactively"?) killing innocent civilians.

That's a problem for Hindus like me, because what you lot are projecting as Hinduism is not actually Hinduism, but some violent and reactionary movement pretending to be Hinduism.

Maybe you lot should focus on the issues that advanced civilizations focus on, like welfare, healthcare, equality and education. Instead of, you know, what kind of meat I keep in my freezer.

BawliBooch · Thu Apr 12, 2018 12:30 am

2 more cases of lynchings this week. The madness refuses to die down.

Trying to make sense of it.

What Explains Mob Lynchings Becoming the New Normal in India

Making Sense of the Lynchings in India

BBC: Is India descending into mob rule?

Jouhou · Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:31 am

DocLightning wrote:
I'm always amused at Americans of Christian (or sometimes Jewish) extraction trying to take up Hinduism because it preaches a fancy cosmology and is not related to Christianity and preaches oneness and togetherness. Christianity superficially preaches similar concepts of unity, peace, love, and nonjudgmentalism.

But within the Abrahamic religions and Hinduism alike are violent teachings of self-supremacy and intolerance. We don't think of Hinduism as a religion prone to violent fundamentalism but it is. Massive, organized religions generally can be twisted into violence.

The fact that Buddhists are violently attacking Muslims is proof of this. ( See: Myanmar, Sri Lanka)

Buddhism is a couple notches up from Hinduism on the scale of non-violent teachings.

I'm gonna disagree on these religions teaching violence though.

The Abrahamics are violent religions. Look at the story of their namesake- ones faith and loyalty in god is more important than not murdering one's own child.

Hinduism and Buddhism have teachings that can be twisted into violence, but they aren't built upon violence like the abrahamics are.

Jouhou · Thu Apr 12, 2018 4:45 am

BawliBooch wrote:
2 more cases of lynchings this week. The madness refuses to die down.

Trying to make sense of it.

What Explains Mob Lynchings Becoming the New Normal in India

Making Sense of the Lynchings in India

BBC: Is India descending into mob rule?

That's some seriously militant vegetarianism. These dudes would be rip-shit seeing how much beef Americans eat.

... Good to know if I see any angry Hindu guys coming at me with knives I can just yell out that I'm a vegetarian.

Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Re: Muslim man lynched in India by Hindu extremists

Who is online

Popular Searches On Airliners.net