 |
|
|
I am not sure how many people follow AR Rahman's concert, but he had one in London last week. It was titled "Netru Indru Nalai". Well many "Indians" walked out of the concert and were pissed because there were many Tamil songs. They complained how can he sing Tamil Songs in London where all Indians live. They lamented on being forced to sit and listen Tamil language. 
Well I was surprised that many thought he is from Bollywood.
cheers,
Super
------------------------------------------
Too much of good is bad,mix some evil in it
|
|
|
|
|
I have no clue about AR Rahman concert's but I believe its the fault of the organizers.
I think if there is a bilingual song composer, they should make it clear which language the composer is going to use as his primary language.
I don't think the Hindi audience would be too happy if more than 50% songs are Tamil and vice versa.
Don't know how expensive the concern was too - what a waste of money!!
|
|
|
|
|
The name of the concert was in Tamil ( words) and in the website, the playlist was mentioned while booking
cheers,
Super
------------------------------------------
Too much of good is bad,mix some evil in it
|
|
|
|
|
super wrote: playlist was mentioned while booking
Ok. Then I don't think either the organizers or Mr AR Rahman can be blamed here.
|
|
|
|
|
super wrote: "Indians"
BTW, are you implying Tamilians are not Indians?
modified 17-Jul-17 11:46am.
|
|
|
|
|
Same question I have to ask the politicians and rest of India, are Tamilians a part of India??There are lot of situations where Tamilians are referred as Tamilians and not Indians. Particularly farmers are left in lurch here.
|
|
|
|
|
Dinesh.V.Kumar wrote: where Tamilians are referred as Tamilians and not Indians
By whom? This is a misconception created by the system in Tamil Nadu itself!
Amongst all the South Indian states, I believe our politicians value Tamil Nadu the most (obviously because of the number of seats allocated to them in assembly polls).
It is what the people from Tamil Nadu want to believe to use against others.
Farmers from several states including Haryana are struggling. Just like other middle class are.
So lets not bring petty regional politics into the current state of affairs.
|
|
|
|
|
Abhinav S wrote: By whom? This is a misconception created by the system in Tamil Nadu itself!
Just do a google search on Fisherman + Sri Lanka + Pakistan and you can see the difference.
Abhinav S wrote: Amongst all the South Indian states, I believe our politicians value Tamil Nadu the most
Nah . atleast not by BJP but Congress yes.
Abhinav S wrote: Farmers from several states including Haryana are struggling. Just like other middle class are.
So lets not bring petty regional politics into the current state of affairs.
Its a fact right? When UP government waived the loans it was Ok. When Maharashtra did it was OK but when TN did RBI said no and also the center.
cheers,
Super
------------------------------------------
Too much of good is bad,mix some evil in it
|
|
|
|
|
My "" meant in sarcastic way to emphasize that Tamil is also part of India because they question him for singing Tamil even though he is an Indian.
And If you look carefully, the Mainstream Media (Delhi based) always say "Tamil" fisherman caught by Sri Lankan army and "Indian" fisherman caught by Pakistan
cheers,
Super
------------------------------------------
Too much of good is bad,mix some evil in it
|
|
|
|
|
super wrote: And If you look carefully, the Mainstream Media (Delhi based) a
I don't agree with you.
Its something that those from the state of Tamil Nadu believe - it is not really true that Tamil Nadu is ignored.
It always surprises me that several people from Tamil Nadu have this weird notion.
It is always true that under each government, some states have got preference.
But it is untrue that people elsewhere think that Tamil Nadu is not an Indian state.
There will be tons of examples where media might have used 'Konkani fishermen' in news - so I guess Goa (or Konkan cost) is not part of India too!
Why do we say 'farmers from Haryana'? So Haryana is not in India too?
modified 4 days ago.
|
|
|
|
|
The irony here is Tamil people are ditched by their own govt, which is worse.  I understand I am deviating from the thread's actual purpose but still felt the need to highlight it.
|
|
|
|
|
You have an upvoter as well (obviously Tamil the way he has been up-voting alternate messages in this thread!) 
|
|
|
|
|
In this doom and gloom, sometimes its refreshing to see the government agency working like a charm.
Small Background.
While booking/ planning for India trip this month, I realized that my daughters passport has been expired for more than 4 months. So I immediately applied for the passport via post and surprise, I got the call next day from Embassy saying that they cannot process the application because her passport is expired and so here visa is too. And it means she is staying in Germany illegally (on paper). They requested a "No objection" certificate from German immigration. As usual I asked my Indian friends and they warned not to approach as she may be deported or blacklisted etc. Anyway I went to German office and explained what happened and asked what is the consequences and how to rectify it. Well they first gave a letter addressed to Indian embassy that they should process her application immediately. Second they gave a letter mentioning in general that Though her paper showed that visa has expired, she is not violating any law or staying illegal because she is a minor and my status (permanent residence) super-cedes any other status of family. Then she gave her a new visa paper valid for 6 month ( without valid passport) so that she can travel to India.
Well after these documents, her Indian passport was given in a week instead of usual 4-8 weeks citing that summer vacation will be over soon and Indian kid should visit their native once in a year.
What I learnt so far is that I need to have a app to remind me on key dates and if you are law abiding citizen, there is nothing to fear.
cheers,
Super
------------------------------------------
Too much of good is bad,mix some evil in it
|
|
|
|
|
Neatsy! I always like a story with a good ending like this.
A pleasure to know everything went well for you as well.
|
|
|
|
|
Yeah so far only minor hiccups that in the ticket counter and Emigration in India whey were not able to machine read my kids passport but they said its no big issue.
May be some explanation will be given when they enter Germany again but since then she will be travelling with Papa "Bear" it should be a cake walk.
cheers,
Super
------------------------------------------
Too much of good is bad,mix some evil in it
|
|
|
|
|
It's rare for Super to post something pleasant here if you think about it. 
|
|
|
|
|
I know I may be a minority in my opinion but let me say it anyway.
At present, BJP leaders (2nd and 3rd level) are destroying the basic fabric of peace in India. BJP MP's and law makers are publicly sending stills from Movie to create riot and more animosity between Hindu and Muslim. Some are using Images from other countries and posing it as riot pictures. The Indian newspaper headline is photo shopped to suit their narrative.
MMS was accused to be silent when scam was going on, but here NAMO is also silent on this issue. There is no hope. the only difference was that under BJP rule, they are more confident and rearing their ugly head ( right wing group).
There is an article today mentioning that the Job creation is at the lowest now but our priority is still on Beef. !!
cheers,
Super
------------------------------------------
Too much of good is bad,mix some evil in it
|
|
|
|
|
Are you talking about bengal riot where in some minor posted something on a "religion" on facebook and for that peaceful people want to lynch him? or about the stabbing of an RSS activist in mangalore (he is the 13th guy to die) and pelting stones on his funeral procession.
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" -Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
I am talking about all incident and more including lynching of Police office in front of mosque and targeting "Beef" people.
There was a norm and still many follow where the name of the religion is not mentioned in news.
What irritates is that BJP leader are actively forging headlines, images to increase the tension and create more violence
cheers,
Super
------------------------------------------
Too much of good is bad,mix some evil in it
|
|
|
|
|
I do not endorse violent retorts towards those who consume or slaughter cows. However, you do need to note that slaughtering cows is unconstitutional in India.
Article 48 is very clear about this, and leaves little room for alternative interpretations: The State shall endeavour to [...] take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle.
It is the law of the land, and one has to abide by it if they wish to remain in India. Now, if this law is loved by me, you, or anyone else, is a completely different discussion. It has no impact on the fact that slaughtering cows is illegal.
As such, "targeting beef people" doesn't mean what you think it means. If the "beef people" are going to commit a crime, the government has a right to go after them (again, I'm not endorsing violence here). Given the legislation, you might as well say "targeting robbers", or "targeting frauds" is something you dislike.
|
|
|
|
|
I agree on your basic premise that if it is the law of the land then it needs to be followed.
But, in this case, article 48 is not necessarily an enforceable law.
From Wikipedia[^]:
They are enforceable by the courts, subject to specific restrictions. The Directive Principles of State Policy are guidelines for the framing of laws by the government. These provisions, set out in Part IV of the Constitution, are not enforceable by the courts, but the principles on which they are based are fundamental guidelines for governance that the State is expected to apply in framing and passing law's.
Also explained on Quora[^]. The first reply tries to justify the prohibition, the second reply mentions that the article in Part IV of the constitution which is named: PART IV DIRECTIVE PRINCIPLES OF STATE POLICY.
I tried searching for a definition of Part IV here[^] but couldn't find it.
Disclaimer: I'm not a lawyer and have very little knowledge about the contents and interpretations of the Indian constitution. I am trying to rectify that now.
The links I've posted are ones I found from a google search after I read your comment. So any misinterpretation or misrepresentation is not intentional and I would be grateful if apt corrections to my interpretations are presented on this thread. Will help me learn about my country's constitution.
"It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something."
-Ornette Coleman
"Philosophy is a study that lets us be unhappy more intelligently."
-Anon.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not a lawyer either, but it appears to me that while directives aren't "enforced" upon any given state, the state itself may wish to follow the directive, thereby making it enforceable in one way or another.
Based on what you've clearly quoted from Wikipedia, and from this link[^]: [...] these principles are fundamental in the governance of the country and it shall be the duty of the State to apply these principles in making laws.
I'd interpret this as a delegation of power from the legislation to individual states, in forming laws around prescribed directives that could be individually tailored to suit the state in question. So, if a state like UP passes a law banning beef, that would mean they're simply accepting one of the directives in article 48 and are making a law applying the prescribed principles. This automatically makes cow slaughter illegal in a state like that, notwithstanding the fact that article 48 itself isn't directly legally enforceable.
|
|
|
|
|
It may take time, and a gutsy government, but in the next 10-15 years I am hopeful that archaic laws like those that make homosexuality punishable, slaughtering cows a crime, etc. will be removed from the constitution. What will hinder it is the fact that politicians have to cater to their voters' preferences, and the easiest way to do that is to play to their religious beliefs. If you leave out Hindus from states like Kerala, West Bengal, and Goa, and to a lesser degree, Tamil Nadu, a large number of Hindus in the rest of the country are not happy with people eating beef (whether they are other Hindus or non-Hindus). Growing up in Kerala, I was not aware of this. It was only after I moved to the US, when I encountered non-Malayalee Hindus that I realized that eating beef was frowned upon in most parts of India.
|
|
|
|
|
Homosexuality? Yes, I do believe people should be allowed to do what they want so long as they're not putting themselves or others in danger. Going by that, they should make homosexuality and gay marriage legal. I'm however not sure that gay marriage will be legalised, even if homosexuality gets legalised.
However, please don't put cow slaughter in the same basket (the western society would love to do that though). Cow slaughter is far, far more implicating and it is more than just about appeasing religious beliefs.
We have already lost some native species due to mindless slaughtering, and we need to be able to conserve our own species, even though the west would like quite the opposite to happen.
Jallikattu is also directly related to this, and it has traditionally been known as an excellent mechanism to conserve the species, in addition to allowing cattle farmers to raise money. This is why sh*tty scumbag organizations like PETA wanted to ban Jallikattu in India under the nonsensical pretext of preventing animal cruelty.
We were playing Jallikattu before the west had a Jesus Christ, and we recently demonstrated without a shadow of doubt that they aren't going to destroy our culture, or make our indigenous species go extinct.
The west has a particular interest in this as their Jersey cow, the mutated monster, provides milk that's nowhere near as beneficial as the milk secreted by the Brahman cow (Bos Indicus) that is our native species. Destroying our species would mean we'd have to rely on theirs for our dairy industry. Banning cow slaughter is consequently in the best interest of preserving our indigenous species and our eco-system.
You'd also know the US actually tried to patent Basmati rice so we'd have to pay royalty to them if we need to produce our own. And that was when India AND Pakistan fought together to knock some sense in their heads.
The west has already successfully driven a few native species to extinction, and have stolen or destroyed a lot that's ours; we need to do what we can to prevent such things from happening again.
|
|
|
|
|
Wouldn't it be a better idea to promote breeding of the cow rather than ban slaughter?
I mean it could end up being a thriving business and help preserve the cow breed.
Also, and this I realize the irony in the following lines given my statement above, but are you against PETA the organization or against their motto of preventing cruelty towards animals?
I personally think the motto has it's place, as in, I would like unnecessary cruelty towards animals to reduce, but I do think PETA (the organization) goes beyond common sense.
"It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something."
-Ornette Coleman
"Philosophy is a study that lets us be unhappy more intelligently."
-Anon.
|
|
|
|
|
parths wrote: Wouldn't it be a better idea to promote breeding of the cow rather than ban slaughter?
What you're saying is that we need to start slaughtering these animals in order to preserve them. I get the underlying commercial idea, but I couldn't predict how it would go, given the sentiments around this.
parths wrote: but are you against PETA the organization or against their motto of preventing cruelty towards animals?
I'm sorry if you believe PETA are who they say are. I don't. They're just a sham, and do next to nothing to prevent the cruelty of animals on a scale that would matter. There was a lengthy discussion with several posts on this topic here when Jallikattu was being resurrected.
I can't come to terms with the fact that some people would believe farming animals in a shed without light, genetically mutating them so they could quite literally be milked to the last drop in case of cows, or have breasts so large that their own feet cannot bear their weight in case of chickens, and I could go on. Just because the animal is murdered quickly doesn't make the nightmare of a life they're being subjected to on a daily basis is somehow acceptable.
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: What you're saying is that we need to start slaughtering these animals in order to preserve them.
Not sure how you got that message from what I said. I mean to say that the there are people who do not mind consuming beef (that's probably an understatement). Banning beef will more likely result in illegal trading of beef... which in turn might result in more inhumane treatment of the animals.
My suggestion was to make it legal and encourage breeding. If it is legalized and regulated the inhumane treatment that you speak of can be monitored, controlled and minimized.
"It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something."
-Ornette Coleman
"Philosophy is a study that lets us be unhappy more intelligently."
-Anon.
|
|
|
|
|
parths wrote: Not sure how you got that message from what I said
No worries, let me help you understand.
parths wrote: I mean to say that the there are people who do not mind consuming beef
Sure, but it's unconstitutional (or even illegal, depending on the state). And when something is illegal, it's irrelevant that some people "don't mind" doing it.
parths wrote: Banning beef will more likely result in illegal trading of beef
It depends on how well does it get policed, and I am pretty sure that the current government is capable of policing quite well. Besides, India is not a major market for beef consumption. Most of the beef was being exported to countries like Bangladesh and Pakistan, which would stop now.
parths wrote: which in turn might result in more inhumane treatment of the animals
Is this a joke of some sort? Do you think that the animal industry will treat them like kings and queens? They will be locked up in cages in a factory without light, and milked day and night, and when they could be milked no more, they'll be slaughtered without mercy. I don't think it makes any sense to assume that this kind of treatment is "humane" - quite the extreme opposite.
parths wrote: My suggestion was to make it legal and encourage breeding
That's what Jallikattu and Kovil Kaalai, etc. are for. I encourage you to do a bit of reading so as to understand our heritage and culture around this topic. We've been playing Jallikattu even before Jesus Christ was born, and we were doing quite well without a slaughtering industry, and we don't need one now to "preserve the species" - that sounds like the plan of a dazed mind.
parths wrote: If it is legalized and regulated the inhumane treatment that you speak of can be monitored, controlled and minimized.
Umm, how about NO.
May I suggest that you read up a bit, or even easier to do is to look a few videos on how cows are actually 'stored', forcefully impregnated (I'll spare you the gross details, but would say that a hand is involved), the calves separated a day after birth (and most likely killed away if it's a male), the mother milked while it's grieving the loss of its child, and basically treated this way until it could lactate no more, only to be murdered in cold blood? Do you ever stop for a minute and think why people consume the milk of another species? We're the only creature in the entire world that does this. It's unhealthy, and downright dangerous for us. But the dairy industry would like us to believe us otherwise.
Did you know that milk could contain various pathogens, and that drinking raw milk could mean you could contract tuberculosis? Did you know that during the world war countless soldiers were lost to tuberculosis contracted directly from drinking milk? Do you know that milk causes osteoporosis, and meat could cause various types of cancer (opening the pandora's box again). I'd encourage you to see my response to Nish's message as well below. The dangers of animal foods are not exactly a secret. Colon cancer has overtaken diabetes as the number 1 killer in the UK.
Or may be you could show me how many people in rural Africa or Cambodia are dying of heart diseases or colon cancer, because they simply don't have the money to buy or eat meat. Or tell me why are the rice eating Chinese and/or Japanese generally lean and fit, and live to a ripe old age (not counting the current generation as they've largely adopted the McDonalds expert nutrition regime).
Either ways, the production of milk and dairy products is cruel enough, and if that's intertwined into the culture, then so be it. But we're not going to open up a "beef shop" anytime soon here.
|
|
|
|
|
OK, I'll make this my last post on this topic.
Thanks for the conversation. I do not agree with most of your points but it was enlightening in parts.
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: No worries, let me help you understand.
You had mentioned something to the effect that I was implying slaughtering cows to help breed them. I don't see anything in your current reply explaining it.
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
Sure, but it's unconstitutional (or even illegal, depending on the state). And when something is illegal, it's irrelevant that some people "don't mind" doing it.
It isn't unconstitutional in my opinion. And if we do decide to make it unconstitutional based on some beliefs of Hindutva leagues then we are marching on towards a Hindu, non-secular state. That's scary to me.
Check This[^] and this[^].
I read the Ambedkar article (the one linked to scribe) a long time ago and it was interesting to say the least. Not sure if it is officially a 'scientific theory' but when I followed it up with more googling, it seemed like the no-beef-eating policy hasn't been a hindu trait from eternity.
I'm surprised how you attributed good policing to control illegal smuggling of beef while later in the post failed to acknowledge (actually you denied it with a pretty vehement NO) that proper policing could actually help maintain humane standards in cow breeding.
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: and if that's intertwined into the culture, then so be it.
If it's wrong, how can you be OK with it only because it's intertwined in your culture and yet ask other cultures (in this case, the beef eating part of the society) to change their habits just because you don't like it?
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: But we're not going to open up a "beef shop" anytime soon here.
Again, if you don't want a 'beef shop', so be it, but if we (hindus) force our ideas upon others then we're no longer living in a true democracy.
Also, you mentioned the cruelty towards animals but I don't hear anyone (except maybe the Jains) calling for bans on chicken or goat or sheep eating... Fish too for that matter.
I can't really argue on the health aspects of milk or meat... I smoke, I drink, a lot. I do it in my own space (my home) and avoid doing it in public places where it is prohibited, especially with kids or non-smokers around, but I think I should have a right to kill myself enjoying my life if I so feel
"It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something."
-Ornette Coleman
"Philosophy is a study that lets us be unhappy more intelligently."
-Anon.
|
|
|
|
|
parths wrote: OK, I'll make this my last post on this topic.
Is that some way of getting "da last wordz"? Feel free to drop out any time you like, without having to announce it. If you don't post any further, I'd know (if I wanted to, that is) that was your last post.
The one thing that I intensely dislike in any discussion:
- When someone does not take the time to read or research even after being provided several hints, but are however in a rush to get their opinions out. This leads to the discussion starting to go in circles at some point as they've not taken the time to listen to the previous points made.
parths wrote: You had mentioned something to the effect that I was implying slaughtering cows to help breed them. I don't see anything in your current reply explaining it.
I'll give it another go.
I said that mindless slaughtering resulted in the extinction of native species, and I pointed out that the constitution recommends for the cows not to be slaughtered. Thereby, doing so makes the unconstitutional (may not be illegal in some states, but unconstitutional as the constitution's recommendation is clear - I see you've argued around this as well, but I recommend you look up the definition of the word "unconstitutional" in case of doubts).
You responded with:
Wouldn't it be a better idea to promote breeding of the cow rather than ban slaughter? I mean it could end up being a thriving business and help preserve the cow breed.
The first part is a question, which is suggesting two things:
1. Promote breeding of cows
2. Do not ban slaughter (in other words, slaughter cows)
The second part says that slaughtering will be a thriving business, and that would help preserve the cow breed. Thereby, implying that slaughtering cows will help preserve them.
parths wrote: Rajesh R Subramanian wrote:
Sure, but it's unconstitutional (or even illegal, depending on the state). And when something is illegal, it's irrelevant that some people "don't mind" doing it.
It isn't unconstitutional in my opinion.
Since when is your opinion a deciding factor on whether something is unconstitutional or not? I'd have thought that doing something that the constitution suggests NOT to do is unconstitutional. I (and ironically you) provided ample detail on what the constitution suggests in the matter of cow slaughter. Therefore, slaughtering cows is unconstitutional. It may additionally be illegal in certain states that have accepted the directive of the constitution in making their laws.
parths wrote: And if we do decide to make it unconstitutional based on some beliefs of Hindutva leagues then we are marching on towards a Hindu, non-secular state. That's scary to me.
You've no reason to be scared now, as it should be clear to you that we're not "deciding to make" anything unconstitutional based on some beliefs of Hindutva leagues, but the constitution itself has clear wordings on this matter (You see what I said about people taking me in circles?)
parths wrote: Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: and if that's intertwined into the culture, then so be it.
If it's wrong, how can you be OK with it only because it's intertwined in your culture and yet ask other cultures (in this case, the beef eating part of the society) to change their habits just because you don't like it?
Yeah, drinking milk is "wrong" in my opinion, however it's not unconstitutional or illegal. Slaughtering cows is different from this since it's unconstitutional and may consequently be illegal in certain states. I'm not asking anyone to change their habits (I never did, and I don't appreciate false accusations, thank you), but the law of the land may.
Another important point is that I have NEVER said anywhere that "I don't like it (slaughtering or eating cows)". I've only been saying that it's unconstitutional, and/or illegal as applicable. Would appreciate you not putting words into my mouth. For all intents and purposes, I've several mates who are meat eaters and that doesn't bother me at all. Me abstaining from meat and milk is not a matter of religion, but a matter of choice (personal health, suffering of animals, doing my best to the environment[^])
parths wrote: Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: But we're not going to open up a "beef shop" anytime soon here.
Again, if you don't want a 'beef shop', so be it, but if we (hindus) force our ideas upon others then we're no longer living in a true democracy.
Is this your attempt at portraying me as a Hindu extremist? When I said "we", I meant "we", as in "Indians". I said we're not setting up a beef shop, because our constitution directs us to not slaughter cows. You certainly did not miss that?!
parths wrote: I can't really argue on the health aspects of milk or meat... I smoke, I drink, a lot. I do it in my own space (my home) and avoid doing it in public places where it is prohibited, especially with kids or non-smokers around, but I think I should have a right to kill myself enjoying my life if I so feel
Yep. You (or anyone else) should be free to drink or smoke because that's NOT unconstitutional or illegal.
|
|
|
|
|
Late reply
Cows are not considered endangered in the US - in fact there are cows that are bred purely for beef. I'd like to see something like that happen in India.
|
|
|
|
|
I'm sure you'd like to see that, except for it's not going to happen, given the religious sentiments of millions. Besides, it's also unconstitutional (or even downright illegal depending on the state) as I explained. Kinda chasing our own tails now as this is what I said several posts ago.
Besides, it's a bit irrelevant how well cows are doing in the US, because India is a different place, and different things happened here (including native breeds having been driven to extinction due to slaughtering).
Besides, there's a point to it beyond just "preservation" of the species as we in India would like these animals to live peacefully as opposed to crammed in a factory and slaughtered by machines.
For the record, I don't even consume milk for numerous reasons, including the fact that milk is dangerous for human beings (opening the pandora's box now), causes severe osteoporosis (due to the excess lactic acid dissolving the calcium in your bone by acidosis), various types of cancer (the dairy industry wouldn't like you to believe in this though - they'd like quite the opposite), and not to mention the fact that the animals are constantly go through living hell right from their birth up until their death. Not my cup of tea (pun intended).
|
|
|
|
|
Well, having been raised in Kerala, I never knew the other states in India were so sensitive about beef and how badly their religious sentiments come into play over this topic.
I do agree it's probably not going to happen, not in the new couple of generations anyway, but I really really wish India as a country would become less religion obsessed.
Interesting about your avoidance of milk. Do you use soy substitutes?
|
|
|
|
|
Nish Nishant wrote: Well, having been raised in Kerala, I never knew the other states in India were so sensitive about beef and how badly their religious sentiments come into play over this topic.
I figured that part to some extent, as my father is from Kerala, and I know the culture there (to some extent). On the other hand, I do believe there's a certain amount of political play involved in this scene, as I've had mates at Tamil Nadu and Maharashtra who were meat eaters (including beef) and I've never had any problems with that, whatsoever. I do believe that most educated people will be the same.
Nish Nishant wrote: I do agree it's probably not going to happen, not in the new couple of generations anyway, but I really really wish India as a country would become less religion obsessed.
I couldn't agree with you more. We're way too obsessed with petty things that are stalling our progress in many ways. In fact, I was mainly trying to point out that such sentiments are so deep rooted that our constitution speaks about issues like cow slaughtering. But when I do know a little arm twisting is always expected in GIT, I was interpreted as voicing my religious opinion (I don't have one such opinion) on this matter.
There are also pressing concerns like basic rights for transgenders, legalising gay/lesbian relationships, looking at what we could do to reduce climate change, and most importantly reduce
redtape and corruption in the government. Sometimes I like to think that the politicians blows petty sh*t like this out of proportion so that we don't think too much about the larger issues that may affect them.
Nish Nishant wrote: Interesting about your avoidance of milk. Do you use soy substitutes?
There are heaps of plant based milk substitutes that I use, except soy as it causes excess gas in me. The smell doesn't help either, but you don't want to know more (just ask my wife). Rice milk works best for me, and I've taken to using almond milk or oat milk for coffee or tea. It also helps that most cafes here offer to prepare their coffees with almond milk if needed.
A slightly more complex challenge is societal and family pressure as they generally tend to think that I'm doing myself a disservice (quite the opposite) by avoiding milk and dairy products.
The biggest challenge of them all was dealing with my cognitive dissonance in accepting the truth. I grew up consuming plenty of dairy products (tambrahm) and suddenly accepting that dairy is in fact bad for health, for the animals, and to the environment, was painful to say the least.
|
|
|
|
|
I have a few Malayalee friends and based on what I've heard, Kerala seems like one of the more open minded states in India when it comes to religion.
Is it the literacy that causes this? Or the communist culture? Or something else in Malayalee culture?
I want to give literacy credit, at least in part.
Also, why is your language so frikkin difficult :P ? I've only learnt to pronounce 4 words in 4 years... none of them can be uttered among decent company.
"It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something."
-Ornette Coleman
"Philosophy is a study that lets us be unhappy more intelligently."
-Anon.
|
|
|
|
|
I am not sure how liberal Mallus are compared to the rest of India. The early commie governments brought land reform acts which sorta eradicated the bad effects of the caste system. And Kerala also has significant Muslim and Christian populations, so people are used to living together without any one religion being a super minority. The literacy and the money from the middle east also helps I guess. Which kinda explains why the state is number 1 in various performance and development indexes (for the country).
And yeah, Malayalam can be a tough language unless you speak a similar language like Tamil.
|
|
|
|
|
BTW, I know there were some generalizations in my previous post. Maybe I've encountered the good ones, but I know a decent number of mallus for the law of averages to kick in and put at least one idiot among them... It hasn't yet ... and that's why I have a generally respectful opinion about them.
Nish Nishant wrote:
And yeah, Malayalam can be a tough language unless you speak a similar language like Tamil.
That too... if you have been speaking Malayalam since childhood, you already earned my respect 
I did get most of the pronunciations right, but struggled with a few. Remember 2-3 words (the bad words).
I've sworn I'll learn at least a few sentences someday.
"It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something."
-Ornette Coleman
"Philosophy is a study that lets us be unhappy more intelligently."
-Anon.
|
|
|
|
|
What's your native language (Indian)?
|
|
|
|
|
Bengali and Marathi (by birth), Hindi and English by habit (since those are the ones I use most of the time).
"It was when I found out I could make mistakes that I knew I was on to something."
-Ornette Coleman
"Philosophy is a study that lets us be unhappy more intelligently."
-Anon.
|
|
|
|
|
My argument is not about legality of Cow slaughter. It would require another thread. As of now , many states have laws which has banned Cattle slaughter but it only caters to unauthorized slaughter. If you have proper paper, then you are allowed to slaughter cows and buffalo..
My argument is that how this can inferred as rights of Hindu Right wing group to kill and lynch people and if the quarrel is not getting serious then why are they using fake image to create riots. Today BJP IT cell had said that they will use fake images. My only rant is only on that
|
|
|
|
|
That is one of "directive principles of state policy" - not law. The directive principles are mainly there to guide the government to make policies or laws. They are not laws. I remember that quite well from civic classes in 8th class because there was a big discussion about this topic between me and my teacher.
So it is not illegal to slaughter cattle in India.
|
|
|
|
|
You're correct, I was wrong in my previous post. Parths posted something along the same lines, and my response is here[^].
|
|
|
|
|
That is the work of media. Media always spins it how they want it. Media guys wants to create the exact same effect what you are seeing. There are a lot of hate speeches against each hindus too. Do they show it? No. They try to catch every utterance of BJP leaders only and show it big. If people come to know that as a lie they apologise small(front page and 4th page small column).
"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from religious conviction" -Pascal
|
|
|
|
|
I have a little different take on this
super wrote: At present, BJP leaders (2nd and 3rd level) are destroying the basic fabric of peace in India
it's not just BJP. it's leaders in general. Be it Cong,BJP or any other. Just to get some votes they will go to any extend.
super wrote: BJP MP's and law makers are publicly sending stills from Movie to create riot and more animosity between Hindu and Muslim. Some are using Images from other countries and posing it as riot pictures.
Yes BJP is far ahead in doing such things however other are catching up very fast.
super wrote: There is an article today mentioning that the Job creation is at the lowest now but our priority is still on Beef. !!
Exactly. And Indian are at fault here. Instead of taking about things which will make actual difference in their life they are much happy in discussing things which make no difference at all. If some is eating a pig or a cow how does it impact me? I don't want to eat very good just don't force other and use your time and mind in something which will add some actual value to your life.
|
|
|
|
|
CS2011 wrote: Be it Cong,BJP or any other. Just to get some votes they will go to any extend.
Its not about votes. Its creating violence and death and I am not aware of other national parties using forged images for this.
CS2011 wrote: Yes BJP is far ahead in doing such things however other are catching up very fast.
Example?
cheers,
Super
------------------------------------------
Too much of good is bad,mix some evil in it
|
|
|
|
|
Commodity prices are supposed to have gone down. No business is passing on the benefits of these lowered prices.
There is no law that forces them to pass on the benefits to consumers.
In effect, taxes have gone up by 3% (from 15 to 18).
Was GST just another way to increase tax burden on the common man?
|
|
|
|
|
I heard that some automotive companies have already lowered the prices of vehicles to pass on the benefit to the consumer.
Business who don't do it will eventually have to do it to keep up with the competition. Personal opinion, of course, and I do think there will be some culprits who will try and double dip the system.
|
|
|
|
|
Rajesh R Subramanian wrote: I do think there will be some culprits who will try and double dip the system
Some businesses wait till people get used to 18% and then give a slight benefit to customers still making a profit!
Other more greedy businesses will keep their prices at 18%.
Sad story really (for the consumer).
modified 11-Jul-17 23:00pm.
|
|
|
|
|
As expected there's not much replies(justification) for this thread.
At-least you're lucky as there's no GST for ![Beer | [beer]](https://codeproject.global.ssl.fastly.net/script/Forums/Images/beer.gif)
|
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
