India and Muslim Ummah

Society Pakistan & World Affairs
21

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by khalif:
what is wrong on them telling that?
[/QUOTE]

Nothing really. I was merely asking Yahudi if RSS etc inciting hatred and instigating Hindu youth against Muslims is fine with him? Whether he thinks Al-Qaeda and Taliban represent the billions of Muslims? And if he does, then wouldn't it be only fair to say that RSS, bajrang dal and Shiv Sehna etc represent the real face of a Hindu? Right or wrong, I never judged. I only asked a simpe question.

OTOH, you seem to have no problems with these terrorist organisations!

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by khalif: *
have u ever been treated in ur country as a second rate citizen
[/QUOTE]

Yes. And guess what? I am from the majority. I am sure a couple of million more like me walk the streets of Pakistan.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by khalif: *
in the name of protection to minorities?
[/QUOTE]

No. I don't think I need to be a minority to be treated like a second rate citizen. This is no disneyland here.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by khalif: *
with virtually no minorities left there in pakistan
[/QUOTE]

Proof? Please also tell us their migratory route and destination.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by khalif: *
u donno the problems when minorities r kajoled to the extremes(as the shah banu case testifies.) why is that u never take out shah banus case where the rightful verdict of supreme court was overturned to appease the minorities.
[/QUOTE]

What is this Shah banu case that you talk of? If its something wrong, then I'll be a man and condemn it, unlike the majority of our beloved neighbours who disappear when the heinous crimes of their govt. are uncovered.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by khalif: *
if this is hou laws r bend to satisfy some community's interest then there is no wrong in other communities feeling hurt.
[/QUOTE]

...and the laws are never bent to "satisfy" some community in India? I just quoted examples where Muslims sentiments were clearly violated in India, and you haven't even bothered to condemn them! You are standing on very shaky moral grounds trying to justify your govt.'s actions by pointing fingers at Pakistan. I really fail to understand how HR violations committed in Pakistan absolves the Indian govt. from any sense of responsibility and guilt.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by khalif: *
we knou who is waging the tail to whom.
[/QUOTE]

Who is trying to gain entry into OIC? Arabs or Indians?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by khalif: *
if there is no market for arab oil in india then india will survive with russian oil but arabass would have missed out on the indian dollars.in capitalist world its the customers who r supreme. n i think arab oil atleast is capitalistic if not their feifdoms.
[/QUOTE]

pffft...what is stopping India from buying Russian oil right now? If Capitalism has taught us that customer is the king, then it has also taught us the lessons in supply and demand. With only a limited number of countries producing oil, I don't see Arabs having any trouble at all selling their oil. Just look at america. If oil was in such large supply, why would they need to attack Iraq?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by khalif: *
of couse it is that feeling in the kingdoms that has made the fiefdoms to pass laws tightening immigration.
[/QUOTE]

Immigration policy of a country is its internal matter. KSA's immigration policy is not discriminatory against any specific country, much less Muslims. Nevertheless, if you want to criticise someone's internal matters, why don't you start with Japan or Germany?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by khalif: *
when u keep screaming 12% is minority in a diverse land like india it is hypocrisy.
[/QUOTE]

No sir, its not hypocrisy. Its a fact. Muslims form 12% of the population in India. How does that make me a hypocrite?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by khalif: *
at the time of independence the percentage was less than 9%. in fifty years if it can grow to 12%
[/QUOTE]

Maybe this simply fact forced the govt. to resort to some urgent population control methods in Gujrat?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by khalif: *
with the medical improvement thats in india then what will b the increase with further developement?
[/QUOTE]

WOW. If the population growth is indicative of the health facilities available in a country, then India's health care must be better than even Europe and USA!

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by khalif: *
do u deny the root cause of gujarat that is godhra?.
[/QUOTE]

The onus is not on me to deny or accept anything. It is on the indian govt. or the people who seem to represent the indian govt. I deny or accept Godhra, what difference does it make to the naked fact that thousands of Muslims were brutally massacred in the worst case of state sponsored terrorism with the sole objective of ethnic cleansing? And this is a state who wants to win the respect of muslim ummah? If you fail to see hypocrisy in THAT, then you should consider erasing the very word from your vocabulary as it serves no purpose.

22

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ChthonicPowers: *

What is this Shah banu case that you talk of? If its something wrong, then I'll be a man and condemn it, unlike the majority of our beloved neighbours who disappear when the heinous crimes of their govt. are uncovered.

[/QUOTE]

In India, the “personal laws” of different religious communities continue to be legally recognized in marriage and divorce cases. Personal laws of all communities have been criticized for disadvantaging women. The Shah Bano decision, in which the Supreme Court overruled a Muslim personal law, granted a Muslim women alimony but threatened the limited legal autonomy granted to the Muslim minority in India. In response, legislation was proposed to prevent such a court decision in the future. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi faced a rights dilemma. His decision over whether to support the Supreme Court ruling or the new legislation, like the larger debate over whether to retain these personal laws or adopt a uniform civil code, poses dilemmas and debates for students of politics, law, women’s studies and human rights. Questions raised include: How should we weigh individual women's rights against the rights of a disadvantaged minority group? Can or should we have universal women's rights? Are human rights only the rights of individuals? Can we preserve both cultural traditions and individual rights? Is it possible to compromise when faced with such a rights dilemma?

23

*No sir, its not hypocrisy. Its a fact. Muslims form 12% of the population in India. How does that make me a hypocrite? *

If muslims make up only 12% of Bharat's one billion population, then why do I hear often the claim that more muslims are living in Bharat than in Pak. Someone cares to reply?

24

Muslims = 12% according to 1991 census data.

http://ncm.nic.in/html/minority.html

Thats why.

B/w, are you an Indian?

25

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Toddytapper: *

In India, the “personal laws” of different religious communities continue to be legally recognized in marriage and divorce cases. Personal laws of all communities have been criticized for disadvantaging women. The Shah Bano decision, in which the Supreme Court overruled a Muslim personal law, granted a Muslim women alimony but threatened the limited legal autonomy granted to the Muslim minority in India. In response, legislation was proposed to prevent such a court decision in the future. Prime Minister Rajiv Gandhi faced a rights dilemma.

[/QUOTE]

so what was his decision then?

26

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ChthonicPowers: *

so what was his decision then?
[/QUOTE]

what else to pass a law saying that muslim women are exempt from the rights of women in this country which otherwise would have been granted to her. the supreme court ruling was subverted for appeassing the muslim clergy n drived the last nail in the realtion b/w the two communities.

27

Gandhi genes. I respect the decision. :k:

28

You mean Nehru genes?

BTW, that decision did cause a lot of on the ground problems cause it was used as an excuse not to provide maintanance and support for divorcees by their ex-husbands.

29

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Toddytapper: *

You mean Nehru genes?

[/QUOTE]

Whoever. you get the point :o

30

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ChthonicPowers: *

Whoever. you get the point :o
[/QUOTE]

No I dont get the point. The point was that a court of law ruled in favour of a divorced woman getting maintanance. The fact is that some stupid politician interfered, and using a policy of appeasement, got the law changed to work around it. This is what happened.

Now the point is do you think that Rajiv Gandhi was right in interfering with the judicial ruling?

31

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Toddytapper: *

No I dont get the point. The point was that a court of law ruled in favour of a divorced woman getting maintanance. The fact is that some stupid politician interfered, and using a policy of appeasement, got the law changed to work around it. This is what happened.

Now the point is do you think that Rajiv Gandhi was right in interfering with the judicial ruling?
[/QUOTE]

the question itself is wrong. how can it b wrong. then even sati camn justified in the name of the religion. this sort of thing is incomprehensibl.
the main point last is that after this there has been increased occurance of veils for muslim women. when hindus do this they r condemned for violating women rights. my basic doubt is r women born in islam not women to b protected?

32

First of all make sure if Indian Muslims treat Pakistani Muslims as their brothers and sisters, vice-versa. I think thinking on this line will help you get the answer.

Why Indian or Pakistani Muslims? Think, whether all Muslims in our locality have the same brotherly feelings towards one another? Are all of us stick to our Kalimah? Do we treat eachother equally on socio-economic front?----------------------- This is the prime requisites of Ummah-------------------work for it, begin it in ourselves and our surroundings and so on.............

Allah Hafiz

33

The point was that the man inherited liberal genes from his parents. The upbringing must’ve had some effect too. and why are you telling me what the point in my post was? :teary1: :bummer:

anyway I still don’t know the complete background of this drama, but I will have to ask: Did Rajiv had a constituional right to reverse a judicial ruling?

34

Making sure that divorced women dont get their maintanance was liberal?

Anyways his constitutional authority was used to go around the ruling of the supreme court…

35

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Toddytapper: *

Making sure that divorced women dont get their maintanance was liberal?

Anyways his constitutional authority was used to go around the ruling of the supreme court.....
[/QUOTE]

ofcourse... it is liberal. that would remain liberal as long as it is able to satisfy some vested interests.
those who speak of liberty will b quiet for this point as if this has nothing to do with them.
hypocrites.

36

THE FACT of the matter is that indian muslims have no link what so ever with the muslim ummah. though i must add here that indian muslims are no less religious muslims than any other muslim
indian muslims are a political non entity. infact the indian muslims after the partition of india have not really bothered to form thier own party (apart from kerala) which shows thier secular credentials.
indian muslims would like to be a part of the muslim ummah but they are scared and are into thier shells.
the so called muslim leaders people like shahi imam (this man actually became a pawn at the hands of politicions) and shahabudin have done more harm to the indian muslims than good though unintentionally, and there are som show boys like bjps mukhtar abbas naqvi and shanawaz hussian who are of immense pain to indian muslims