jelliclesfarm

Joined 9 years ago

Karma
11,906
Submissions
5,077
Member since
Jan 20
View on Hacker News

Recent submissions

Comment · 2 years ago
‘Why do they NEED to have a religious state?’

I don’t know, but I guess we can also ask:

Why does England NEED to be the only Christian Anglican country in the world?

Why does Saudi Arabia NEED to be an Islamic State?

Why would Indian Hindus want a Hindu nation? I guess it’s called Democracy.

Are you against Democracy?

Comment · 2 years ago
Praveen Mohan is a YouTube influencer. He is hardly an authority on anything except bad takes.
Comment · 2 years ago
There is no point of a discussion if you dismiss everything I present without countering it with your sources.

You haven’t offered one single citation of any feather..never mind wing. Except your ‘belief’ which doesn’t have much worth except to you.

Your beliefs have nothing to do with facts.

FACT: India is not a ‘90% Hindu state’.

FACT: India is not run by a ‘Hindu nationalist government’.

(Define ‘nationalist’)

Comment · 2 years ago
Judaism, Christianity and Islam are all ‘People of the Book’. Hindus scriptural texts are the Vedas.

Abrahamic faiths are monotheistic and against idol worship. While not all Hindus worship idols and multiple gods, these practices are not blasphemy or apostasy.

There is a binary criteria amongst Abrahamic religions about what constitutes membership.

Comment · 2 years ago
Let me explain: there is State religion, Dominant religion, Secularism.

1. Western Europe has a dominant religion but not officially secular.

2. Only 5 nations(please correct me with source material) that are secular by constitution.

3. The secular nations are : India United States, France, Japan and Australia.

4. Exceptions: Russia for example has no religion. Vietnam is officially atheist. But the dominant religion is Buddhism.

5. Nepal was the only Hindu nation until recently before the Maoist insurgency and Hindu as official state religion was struck off.

6. India is officially a Secular State. The dominant and majority religion is Hinduism, but principles of secularism is not practiced as Muslims and minorities enjoy more religious privileges than the majority Hindus.

7. This makes India secular in name only. It penalizes the majority of the religious citizens by denying them equal rights and privileges under law.

8. My opinion is that Hindus should have a Hindu nation where they are a majority at one billion especially because there is no other Hindu nation in the world and India is civilisationally Hindu and all Hindu shrines and holy places and sacred texts have ancient India or Bharat as its origin site.

All of this information with supporting evidence and official state dictates is available in the public domain and official state records.

I am going to ignore your second paragraph. It was an attack, unnecessary and personal.

Comment · 2 years ago
Is Shridi Sai Baba a religion?
Comment · 2 years ago
These are personal views. How can they be extremist? It affects none and has no power at all.

Does me as a Hindu having an opinion about my faith offend you and strike you as extremist?

Time is relative. Non abrahamic religions have always been a minority faith since millennia.

I think it’s not right to say that I ‘despise secularism’. I am critiquing the poor state and expression of ‘secularism’ in India.

Example: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism_in_India#:~:text=....

[..]The Indian Muslim Personal Law (Shariat) Application Act of 1937 continues to be the law of land of modern India for Indian Muslims, while parliament-based, non-religious uniform civil code passed in mid-1950s applies to Indians who are Hindus (which includes Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs, Parsees), as well as to Indian Christians and Jews.[..]

Is this a secularism?

All I am saying is that if Muslims are allowed to practice their religious laws, Hindus should also be allowed to hold their religious law as Personal law.

The state cannot discriminate between two faiths and call itself secular.

I want Muslims (and Christians and Buddhists and everyone)to have the freedom to practice their faith. I want the same for Hindus, Saying Hindus should have the same freedom and rights is causing me to face accusations of ‘extremism’.

Strange.

Comment · 2 years ago
Ok. I have elaborated here. Thoughts?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christianity_in_Norway#:~:te....

[…]Christianity is the largest religion in Norway and Norway has historically been called a Christian country. A majority of the population are members of the Church of Norway with 64.9% of the population officially belonging to the Evangelical Lutheran Church of Norway in 2021.[..]

FACT: if the majority of the population OFFICIALLY follows the Christian faith, then the DOMINANT religion is Christianity.

https://www.worldpolicycenter.org/policies/how-do-countries-...

[..]Special relationship with specific religion means that the constitution explicitly states it is secular, but establishes a special relationship with one specific religion. Types of special relationships include referencing a traditional religion, acknowledging the historical influence of a specific religion, or stating that the state is founded upon values or principles from a single religious tradition

Privileges religion over nonbelief means that the constitution explicitly states it is secular, but includes provisions to support religious practice over non-belief, such as granting tax exemptions to religious organizations, allowing religion in public schools, or recognizing or partnering with religious organizations in certain areas.

God included in oath of office means that the constitution explicitly states it is secular, but has certain officials swear before God in the official oath of office included in the constitution. The constitution does not provide for a further role for religion.

References God in preamble means that the constitution explicitly states it is secular, but references or thanks God in the preamble of the constitution. The constitution does not provide for a further role for religion.

No role for religion means that the constitution explicitly states it is secular and provides no role for religion. The constitution may explicitly place limitations on the role of religion.[..]

FACT: Only 5 countries satisfy the last criteria.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism_in_India#:~:text=....

[..]The overlap of religion and state, through Concurrent List structure, has given various religions in India, state support to religious schools and personal laws. This state intervention while resonant with the dictates of each religion, are unequal and conflicting.

For example, a 1951 Religious and Charitable Endowment Indian law allows state governments to forcibly take over, own and operate Hindu temples, and collect revenue from offerings and redistribute that revenue to any non-temple purposes including maintenance of religious institutions opposed to the temple;

Indian law also allows Islamic and other minority religious schools to receive partial financial support from state and central government of India, to offer religious indoctrination, if the school agrees that the student has an option to opt out from religious indoctrination if he or she so asks, and that the school will not discriminate any student based on religion, race or any other grounds.[..]

FACT: India is officially a secular state being the seat of Hinduism where a billion Hindus live. It is a pseudo secular state when the majority are being subjected to special rules to appease the minority.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Uniform_Civil_C...

[..]The Uniform Civil Code is a proposal in India to formulate and implement personal laws of citizens which apply on all citizens equally regardless of their religion. Currently, personal laws of various communities are governed by their religious scriptures.[..]

FACT: Personal laws cover marriage, divorce, inheritance, adoption and maintenance.

[..]Personal laws were first framed during the British Raj, mainly for Hindu and Muslim citizens.

UCC emerged as a crucial topic of interest in Indian politics following the Shah Bano case in 1985. The debate arose on the question of making certain laws applicable to all citizens without abridging the fundamental right to practice religious functions. The debate then focused on the Muslim Personal Law, which is partially based on the Sharia law, permitting unilateral divorce, polygamy and putting it among the legally applying the Sharia law.

Relevant to the parent here, Indian temples are managed by the state and every other religious institution is managed by their adherents despite Hinduism being the dominant religion in an officially secular state.

This gives special privileges to minorities while being extractive and punitive towards the Hindu majority adherants.[..]

Comment · 2 years ago
Hindi is a language.

Define Supremacist.

Comment · 2 years ago
What are the ‘standards of HN discourse’? I am willing to learn. Please..do tell.
Comment · 2 years ago
Which part do you find ‘extremist’. Facts are not rhetoric.
Comment · 2 years ago
Hinduism is a new term. We follow Sanatana Dharma and our basis is Vedism.

Judaism..as it is now.. wasn’t always monotheist. And it evolved over time. And not as old as Hinduism.

Texts and inscriptions and temples from the Vedic period are much older. And that’s why there has been a systematic purge, revisionism, faulty translations and suppression of civilizational history. Hinduism..as it’s known now..is and was decentralized giving it the ability to survive and thrive millennia.

While it can be called many names and has been co opted, our source text is common to all who call themselves Hindu and that is the Vedas…our religious text.

Comment · 2 years ago

Live from the official Hacker News API

A modern reader for Hacker News · SvelteKit + Skeleton