Wasn’t India declared a country for Hindus of the Indian Subcontinent during Partition?
Filed under Uncategorized
No. It is Pakistan which was declared as a country for Muslims. India was declared as a secular country under the constitution of Independent India adopted by the Indian Parliament. Even if we say hypothetcally, that India is a country for Hindus alone, it will imply that we supported partition on the basis of religion, but we didn’t do that, rightly so.
Dude, the word “secular” never existed in the constitution till the 42nd amendment by that old witch Indira Gandhi in return for communist support to form her government. The commies put forth this condition of adding secularism in the preamble, as also the word “socialist.” And if India is secular, then why do Muslims have their own civil law separate from the rest of the country?
You are right the word ‘Secular’ was added by 42nd amendment in 1976. But that neither added anything new, nor it has taken anything away from the original constitution adopted 26th Jan’56.
The preamble to the Constitution of India is a brief introductory statement that sets out the guiding purpose and principles of the document i.e. the constitution of India.
In the original description of ‘Sovereign Democratic Republic’, the significance of the word ‘Democratic’ is to be found in the preamble.
The first part of the preamble “We, the people of India” and, its last part “give to ourselves this Constitution” clearly indicate the democratic spirit involved even in the Constitution. India is a democracy. The people of India elect their governments at all levels (Union, State and local) by a system of universal adult franchise; popularly known as “one man one vote”. Every citizen of India, who is 18 years of age and above and not otherwise debarred by law, is entitled to vote. Every citizen enjoys this right without any discrimination on the basis of caste, creed, colour, sex, religion or education. So anyone who was a citizen at the time of the first constitution is entitled to vote.
More over the four pillars of the original constitution are Justice, Liberty, Equality and Fraternity. And liberty was of thought, expression, belief, faith and worship. So it was already secular in character and spirit. New addition is redundant. Perhaps it was added for the benefit of those who lack the intellectual rigor to study and comprehend a complex and massive volume such as Constitution of India, which incidentally world longest constitution containing 444 articles in 22 parts and 12 schedules.
Cynical , you are a moron.You should know that India is for the Hindus ,by the Hindus and of the Hindus. Ever Hindu who suffers persecution has a right to take refugee in India for any period of time and shinde has no business to ask a hindu who has been subjected persecution to produce proof of taht.
Do you even read before you hit the keyboard? Where did I say that Hindus should not be given shelter in India? I only opposed someone who said India is only for Hindus. India is not your little kitchen where you can cook anything, whatever way you want to. The country is run under a constitution. Yours and mine personal bias, frustrations and fantasy do not count. Law of the land does. Educate yourself. That will reduce your heartburn.
So you oppose if it is said that India is only for Hindus. But I do not understand why you oppose this simple Truth that India being the only Hindu homeland is only for the Hindus. You better mend your ways and digest this unpalatable Truth. The country is run under a constitution but does that mean that Hindus are to be treated as second class citizens in their own homeland. If that is the case then let that constitution go to hell.
Let me make it simpler. So that your little brain can understand. Pakistan was created as a country for the Muslims, because Jinnah said Muslims and Hindus are two different nation, and they can’t live together. The leaders of our freedom movement, mostly Hindus but with some notable Muslims like Maulana Abul Kalam Azad, M A Ansari etc. opposed Jinnah’s divisive theory. But when Jinnah started ‘Direct action’ which created mayhem of murder, rape and loot of both Hindus (in Muslim majority areas) and of Muslims (where Hindus were in strength) the British and the Congress leaders lost nerve and agreed to partition, to save millions of innocent lives. Jinnah and Muslim league didn’t care about the blood of innocent people, Hindus or Muslims, to get Pakistan. Congress and British did. Now tell me, if we say that India is only for Hindus, are we not supporting Jinnah who said Muslims and Hindus can’t live together? To claim that India is only for Hindus is supporting Jinnah’s theory. I will not do it.
I hate that man. He is the reason we have this Hindu-Muslim problem in India today.
I ask you, do you want Jinnah to win?
If India is for both Hindus and Muslims, then why have Muslims chased Hindus out of Kashmir?
That’s unfair and illegal. The government of the day should have prevented that. There are bad people in all sides, sometime our baddies win, sometime theirs. Besides Kashmir is a disputed territory. Nobody stops the government to take action.
Thank you very much that you have found some brain in me, little though. Any way,there were no nationalist Muslim leaders in India. May be Ashfaq ullah is the only exception. Abul Kalam Azad opposed the division of India because he dreamt the whole India to become Darul Islam and not only those tiny parts that formed Pakistan. When Azad became the first (who else?) education minister of India the first thing he did was to hound out R C Majumdar –one the of greatest historians India has ever seen— from the board of Editors entrusted with the task of preparing an authentic and comprehensive history of the different phases of the Indian struggle for independence. Because he knew that the kind of historian Majumdar was he would never hesitate to call a spade a spade and the real history of how the Muslims and the leftist had sabotaged the freedom would come out. Coming to Jinnah he was no creator of Pakistan. He only played to his advantage the ever existing rift between the Hindus and Muslims and carved Pakistan out of India. It is an unfortunate fact that the foundation stone for Pakistan had been laid on that day on which the first Hindu had been converted to Islam .
This man Cynical is Vicjugs!!!
What’s the meaning of ‘Vicjugs’? I am not much educated. I want to learn from you. Please do me a favour. I beg you.
This ” Cynical” guy is another left Marxist pseudo secular internet troll. Be wary of these type secular intellectuals who will not hesitate to sell our country if it is going to benefit them in some ways.
Is that even an argument? Do you know anything else other than hurling abuses? Pathetic low life.
NATIONAL INVESTIGATION AGENCY ACT, 2008 is an Act to constitute an investigation agency at the national level to investigate and prosecute offences affecting the sovereignty, security and integrity of India, security of State, friendly relations with foreign States and offences under Acts enacted to implement international treaties, agreements, conventions and resolutions of the United Nations, its agencies and other international organisations and for matters connected therewith or incidental thereto.
All matter should be put up under interrogation of N.I.A.
Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:
You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Twitter account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Facebook account. ( Log Out / Change )
You are commenting using your Google+ account. ( Log Out / Change )
Connecting to %s
Notify me of new comments via email.
Notify me of new posts via email.
Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts by email.
Join 464 other followers