From: pjoseph@ucselx.sdsu.edu (Paul Joseph)
Subject: Re: calcutta
Organization: SDSU Computing Services
Date: Wed, 16 Dec 1992 17:30:53 GMT

In article <gate.wVooVB1w165w@sytex.com> dante@sytex.com (Vikram David) writes:
>>Path: sytex!uunet!spool.mu.edu!news.nd.edu!beethoven!tzaki
>>From: tzaki@beethoven.helios.nd.edu ()
>>Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian
>>Subject: Re: calcutta
>>Message-ID: <1992Dec10.070215.24640@news.nd.edu>
>>Date: Thu, 10 Dec 1992 07:02:15 GMT
>>References: <1992Dec10.035449.22014@news.nd.edu>
>>Sender: news@news.nd.edu (USENET News System)
>>Organization: OUC, University of Notre Dame
>>Lines: 46
>
>>further info from Calcutta:
>
>>news blackout. Apparently, it is not known to them that
>>RSS/VHP has been banned. In my opinion, this is an extremely
>>stupid move. It is going to haunt them. On a related note,
>
>>will continue. In which case the numbers should
>>eventually favour the majority. Even in India the
>>tail does not always wag the dog.
>
>>In Pakistan the muslims in their inimitable style have
>>among others done the following:
>>Stoned to death several small Hindu children.
>>Burnt alive several womenfolk in a temple.
>>Destroyed temples with bulldozers (a neat touch there)

>>As far as the number games are concerned they are
>>Tamarlanes. Although it might surprise the spineless,
>>dickless and ball-less pseudo-secularist Indians.
>>They were the ones who posted all those "i am ashamed
>>to be a Hindu" crap.
>


Ball-less huh? Arent you preaching the same "inimitable" style you  attributed
to the pakis - and incidentally they are the ball-less ones killing children.
Some fool from India will take the cue from your words and commit some more 
blunder - the ball-less pakis will kill some more - Do you really care ???

>Why are you so against SECULARISM?
>SECULARISM: 1. secular spirit or tendency, EXP. a system of political or
>social philosopy that rejects all forms of religious faith.  2. the view
>that public education and other matters of civil policy should be
>conducted without the introduction of a religious element.
>
>Now, what's wrong with that?  Would you support a THEOCRACY more?
>
>Please explain.
>---
>                              

Secularism is the only way the country can survive - please dont lament 
about Hindus having been patient for years - be PROUD of it. Its only this
non-secularist attitude that needs to be lamented about. Is'nt it clear which
causes bloodshed ? 

And that goes for Mr. Khaleel too - just because a person's 
belief permits/requires him to worship idols doesnt make him in any way 
inferior in his belief. After all its the end that matters not the means,
as long as the means are not to kill/oppress people in which case the means 
just destroys the end. And since the end is justifiably praiseworthy 
( unity and peace for all and economic progress ) it really doesnt matter 
who worships how and that certainly is no business of yours. If you feel 
Islam is perfect then let it arouse respect not demand - I am sure you dont 
have to force people to pay attention to Islam and justify that it was ok for 
Babar break the idols. Its foolish to talk about what happened in the 16th.
century - and with all this hype - I allowed myself to slip into it too -
sorry.

> * OLX 2.2 * Ever stop to think and forget to start again?

Paul Joseph
Newsgroups: soc.culture.indian