My answers to an email message Ė 06/01/2004

 

I received this mass email message and since I belong to the type mentioned in the subject of the email below, I wanted to bark, I mean, I wanted to respond to it. My stuff is in blue.

 

Subject: TO ALL THE SECULAR BARKING DOGS

PLEASE READ PATIENTLY, VERY GOOD INFO Ö. Please forward it, to as many Indians / Hindus as possible ........ Please read this entire article, before you delete it.

Excellent research done.. sad but all this is true... what to do????

Are you a Secularist? Then please answer these questions,

 

First of all, find the definition of secularism. You will find:

 

a)indifference to or rejection or exclusion of religion and religious considerations Ė Merriam ĖWebster Online Dictionary

b) the belief that religion should not be involved in the organization of society, education, etc. Ė Oxford Advanced Learnerís dictionary

c)not having any connection with religion; the belief that religion should not be involved with the ordinary social and political activities of a country Ė Cambridge Online Dictionary

 

Please bear these in mind the above as you read the e-mail I received and my responses to the questions asked.

1.†† There are nearly 52 Muslim countries. Show one Muslim country, which provides Haj subsidy.

†††††††††††

Yes, I too agree wholeheartedly, this is true. No other nation provides the Haj subsidy.

 

The Haj subsidy was brought into existence because the airfare to the Gulf had increased considerably in the 70ís due to rise in fuel prices. Maybe it has outlived its utility and should be revoked. Even many Muslim leaders want it revoked.

 

So go ahead and revoke it.

 

But who will bell the cat? The BJP had eight years. It did not revoke the subsidy. It doubled it. In fact, the great Mr. Vajpayee even claimed the increase as an Upper Selling Point in his election campaign.

 

The fact of the matter is that things like the Haj subsidy has been mercilessly used by every political party. Whatever the pious noise made during its tenure, come election time, all of them extended or increased such concessions. Why blame the Muslims for it? India has never had a Muslim government. It was these same Hindus in the government and who issued and used such handouts, not from the goodness of their hearts but from an avaricious eye on the ballot box.

2) Show one Muslim country where Hindus are extended the special rights that Muslims are accorded in India?

 

Sure, this is also true. Only I am not sure why anybody should be ashamed of it or think it is wrong. In fact, this is wonderful! If a country can look after its minorities, it should be proud of it. Again, if there are unfair and unwarranted privileges given to certain minorities and denied to others, including the majority, go ahead and rectify it. Problem is, you donít have the guts because you donít want to withdraw funds from your vote bank.

 

3)†† Show one Muslim country that has a Non-Muslim as its President or Prime Minister.

 

Again, is this something to be ashamed of? This was possible only because the majority in India is still secular, despite being Hindus. That is, they believe, consciously or not, that religion has no role to play in government and governance. Were that not true, people would not ever vote for a non-Hindu as they have done, in the past, have done now and will do so in the future.

 

This is the crux of the matter Ė that one can be a Hindu or a Muslim or a Sikh or whatever else, and still be secular. And that is what most of these religious fundamentalists - of whatever faith, color or race - do not accept. People can be religious, the government cannot and must not, especially in the country like India where there are so many religions, castes and sub-castes (many of the latter two have been created and is even now being bred by the same Hinduism).

4.†† Show one country where the 85% majority craves for the indulgence of the 15% minority.

This is vacuous, moronic, meaningless, populist, unadulterated bullshit and I will not even deign to answer it. Nobody wants nobodyís indulgence and if you do, itís your weakness, buddy.

 

5.                   Show one Mullah or Maulvi who has declared a 'fatwa' against terrorists.

 

Sure, there hasnít been one. Sure, very few have even condemned it. So? You want to go around kill all Muslims for that? You cannot condemn a religion because of a few of its devotees. Itíll be like condemning Hinduism and all Hindus because of a few militant Hindus who want to use violence as a solution to social problems.

6.                   Hindu-majority Maharashtra, Bihar, Kerala, Pondicherry, etc. have in the past elected Muslims as CMs; Can you ever imagine a Hindu becoming the CM of Muslim - majority J&K?

 

No, I cannot. But again, that is because Indians are secular by nature, even if they are Hindus by religion. If a group of people wants to elect one of its own community as leader over another just because he belongs to another faith, then they will pay for it, eventually. That is their problem, not ours. Today, sections of the Muslim community in India are suffering because some of their leaders used their own religion to keep them ignorant and backward, just as other Hindus are doing it in Bihar and Uttar Pradesh. And remember, which Hindu ruler was ruling a Muslim-dominated Kashmir at the time of partition? And which Hindu rulers rules Kashmir for decades before that?

7.       Today Hindus are 85%. If Hindus are intolerant, how come Masjids and Madrassas are thriving? How come Muslims are offering Namaz on the road? How come Muslims are proclaiming 5 times a day on loudspeakers that there is no God except Allah?

 

Hindus are not intolerant, but some Hindus are, just as some Muslims are and some Christians are and some Sikhs are. If Masjids and Madrassas are thriving, India should be proud of it, not ashamed and we should not reverse it. Would you rather that they donít survive?

 

Why is every strength of India being potrayed as its weakness? Taking care of your less privileged bretheren is not a weakness, it is a reason for pride.

 

If Muslims are offering Namaz on the road and obstructing traffic, stop them legally by all means. Bring in the police, bring in the army if you have to. Do not allow anybody, anybody to disobey the law of the land. Can you bear losing the votes? Do you have the guts?

 

Was it right for people to take the law into their own hands and bring down the Babri Masjid? Was that legal? Even if the government thought it was wrong or illegal, neither the state nor the central government had the guts to stop it? They did not want to lose those Hindu votes either.

 

Though I personally believe that the votes will not be lost and even if they are, only temporarily. Nobody is blind.

 

And what about Ganesh Chaturthi and Diwali and Durga Pooja? What about those loudspeakers blaring Hindi movie songs including ďCholee ke peeche kya hai?Ē I am not saying that the Muslims are right in using loudspeakers, but come on guys, at least they are using it for prayer!

 

8.                   When Hindus gave to Muslims 30% of Bharat for a song, why should Hindus now beg for their sacred places at Ayodhya, Mathura and Kashi?

 

You donít have to beg nobody. You have gone to the Supreme Court and once you have the judgment, enforce it, whatever it is, whether it favors the Hindus or the Muslims. Donít go to court and then say that you will not obey its order if it goes against you. But then, do your leaders, Hindus and Muslims, have the guts? Nobody thought of Ram for centuries and now everybody is jumping up and down as though building a temple where he was supposedly born, will really bring Ramrajya into India.

 

Instead of building a temple to Ram, why donít you guys build Ramrajya instead?

9.       Why temple funds are spent for the welfare of Muslims and Christians, when they are free to spend their money in any way they like?

 

Hello, temple funds are being spent on the welfare of Muslims and Christians by Hindus, not by them! It is not because they are secular, it is because they are looking to gain some more votes in the next election. A secular person would not allow government funds to be spent on any particular religion.

10.    When uniform is made compulsory for school children, why there is no Uniform Civil Code for citizens?

 

Sure, go ahead and enforce one. Do you have the guts to lose the next election but probably win the next after that? No, politicians have only short sight.

 

11.In what way, J&K is different from Maharashtra, Tamil Nadu or Uttar Pradesh, to have article 370?

No, J & K is not different. Go ahead and revoke it. Do you have it in you?

 

12.Why Gandhiji supported Khilafat Movement (nothing to do with our freedom movement) and what in turn he got?

13.Why Gandhiji objected to the decision of the cabinet and insisted that Somnath Temple should be reconstructed out of public fund, not government funds. When in January 1948 he presurrised Nehru and Patel to carry on renovation of the mosques of Delhi at government expenses?

14. If Muslims & Christians are minorities in Maharashtra, UP, Bihar etc., are Hindus not minorities in J&K, Mizoram, Nagaland, Arunachal Pradesh, Meghalaya etc? Why are Hindus denied minority rights in these states?

15. Do you admit that Hindus do have problems that need to be recognized. Or do you think that those who call themselves Hindus are themselves the problem?

 

16. Why post-Godhra is blown out of proportion, when no-one talks of the ethnic cleansing of 4 lakh Hindus from Kashmir?

17. In 1947, when India was partitioned, the Hindu population in pakistan was about 24%. Today it is not even 1%. In 1947, the Hindu population in East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) was 30%. Today it is about 7%. What happened to the missing Hindus? Do Hindus have human rights?

18. In contrast, in India, Muslim population has gone up from 10.4% in 1951 to about 14% today; whereas Hindu population has come down from 87.2% in 1951 to 85% in 1991. Do you still think that Hindus are fundamentalists?

19. Do you consider that - Sanskrit is communal and Urdu is secular, Mandir is Communal and Masjid is Secular, Sadhu is Communal and Imam is Secular, BJP is communal and Muslim league is Secular, Dr. Praveen Bhai Togadia is ANTI-NATIONAL and Bhukari is Secular, Vande Matharam is communal and Allah-O-Akbar is secular, Shriman is communal and Mian is secular, Hinduism is Communal and Islam is Secular, Hindutva is communal and Jihadism is

secular, and at last, Bharat is communal and Italy is Secular?

20. When Christian and Muslim schools can teach Bible and Quran, Why Hindus cannot teach Gita or Ramayan?

21. Abdul Rehman Antuley was made a trustee of the famous Siddhi Vinayak Temple in Prabhadevi, Mumbai Can a Hindu - say Mulayam or Laloo - ever become a trustee of a Masjid or Madrassa?

22. Dr. Praveenbhai Togadia has been arrested many times on flimsy grounds. Has the Shahi Imam of Jama Masjid, Delhi, Ahmed Bhukari been arrested for claiming to be an ISI agent an d advocating partition of Bharat?

 

Dr. Praveenbhai Tagodia was arrested many times by Hindus who wanted to wrongly appease the minorities. But maybe he was also arrested a few times by secular people who do not like violence being incited against minorities. If any Imam is breaking the law of the land, arrest him like you would any law breaker irrespective of his faith. But do you have the guts to stand up and enforce it and lose the votes?

23. When Haj pilgrims are given subsidy, why Hindu pilgrims to Amarnath, Sabarimalai & Kailash Mansarovar are taxed?

A Muslim President, A Hindu Prime Minister and a Christian Defence Minister running the affairs of the nation with a unity of purpose. Can this happen anywhere, except in a HINDU NATION - BHARAT?

 

No, not a Hindu nation but a secular nation which does not believe in discrimination against or for anybody. And India will continue to be a secular nation which will elect Muslims, Christians and Sikhs as long as it does not become a Hindu nation. Secularists do not appease and appeasers are not secularists. Donít honor the appeasers by calling them secularists and donít insult the secularists by labeling them appeasers.

 

It is wrong and immoral to blame any faith or its followers. Religion is not a matter of reason and logic, it is matter of almost total faith with no relation to reality. There are things in other religions that may not seem acceptable to your own but as long as that is not forced upon you or does not curb your own freedom of religion, you have not cause or right to criticize. There is no better religion and no best one, there is no lesser and no greater, no more rational and no more irrational. Be a believer if you want to, donít force others to believe or disbelieve. Discriminating against any other faith or any followers of other Gods is a sin against your own.

As you can see, I gave up half way. Itís all the same. The Hindu politicians use the minorities as vote banks, then blame the secularists for the handouts and the rest of the Hindus lap it up and parrot it faithfully. The problem is that there are very few true secularists who do not want to appease the majority or the minority. A secular country will not hand out unjust privileges to minorities, but will not tolerate militancy from anybody, minority or majority. It will not allow government to promote or crucify any religion. It will not allow religion into governance and allow any minority to follow anything else but a Uniform Civil Code Ė but then, do you have the guts?

 

Donít blame the secularists and secularism, blame your power hungry ĎHinduí politicians! But first, purring fundamentalist cats, learn the definition of secularism!

Later on when you can, please forward it to as many Indians / Hindus - as possible.

Vande Mataram Ė yes, Vande Mataram, not to any pious Hindu or Muslim or Christian or Sikh or their isms, I bow to a truly secular Mother.