From: natraj@volos.mcc.com (Natraj Arni)
Subject: Re: HINDUS OFFER PRAYERS AT AYODHYA RAM MANDIR
Followup-To: soc.culture.indian
Summary: Bigotry in the name of justice
Keywords: Ayodhya, Babri Masjid
Organization: MCC, Austin, Texas
Distribution: na
Date: Mon, 11 Jan 1993 17:01:32 GMT


Virendra Verma writes:

	It does. Justice is created by the people. We Hindus believe in
        Panchayata Raj where the decisions are taken by majority and
        concensus not by self appointed moron idiots judges. Judges are
        not true representative of people. That is the shame in the name 
        of justice. In U.S. also, the jury is above law.

This is so ridiculous that I don't even know where to begin. Does Mr.
Verma really believe what he wrote? Does the majority opinion
necessarily constitute justice? There is lots of evidence that a
majority of Germans, before and during the second world war were
disposed towards anti-semitism. Now does this justify the Nazi's
looting and burning of Jewish property ? After all a "majority"
thought that they were the greatest evil on Earth, right?

As regards the jury system, where do you get the impression that it is
a just system? Do Rodney King, Simi Valley, LA riots ring a bell? Did
you know that during the 50s and 60s (probably before then too) juries
in the deep south used to let go off criminals accused of lynching
blacks? A "majority" of southern white folks actually regarded blacks
as less than human !!

Coming to Panchayat Raj, is Mr. Verma aware of the fact that these
"under-the-tree" courts where "elders" dole out "justice" is
responsible for a number of deaths of Harijans and other so called
untouchables in U.P. and Bihar? [Refer to a recent issue of India
Today, about six months back I think].

I was quite shocked and dismayed to read an article written by
Girilal Jain and posted on SCI. He gives the impression that MIGHT IS
RIGHT when he says that the muslims have lost their bargaining
position now that the mosque has been razed. What is even more
disturbing is that he seems to ridicule intellectuals and "liberals"
for holding on to ideas like RULE OF LAW.

I have been following this thread on Ayodhya for quite some time and I
find it incredible that there are actually educated and supposedly
rational people who are trying to defend the indefensible. It puzzles
me when they openly declare that things like proofs etc do not mean a
thing. (Like the above gentleman from DEC). If the very basis for
destroying that mosque is the "fact" that the god Rama was born there
and that there was a temple, don't you think that it is *very*
reasonable to ask for proof of Rama's and the temple's existence? I am
not saying that Rama didn't exist or that the temple didn't exist, but
the burden of proof is on the hindus, right? Being an agnostic myself,
I find this whole idea of God being born at a place quite silly, but
that is me. But the proponents and supporters of the destruction of
the mosque claim that things like FAITH and BELIEF matter more than
hard facts and proofs. Fine, but when your faiths and beliefs infringe
upon someone's else rights, then you have a problem. For example, I
can beleive that my father is the king of the Universe. As long as I
keep that to myself, you might be amused by it and might even call me
silly, right? But now suppose I demanded a tax from everyone on
account of my father being the king of the universe, how many of you
would oblige? Would I be getting the vociferous support of the Vermas
and the Bhatnagars?

Let's take another example. Suppose some Americans started *believing*
that the Sri Venkateshwara temple in Pittsburgh is actually located on
the land where Jesus walked or stopped for a drink or whatever. And
now they want the place back. What would you do? I suspect you would
ask for proof.

What bothers me more than anything else is that while the rest of the
world is drawing up alliances and other such arrangements to improve
their economies eg: NAFTA, EC, The Pacific Rim, Eastern Europe to name
a few, we Indians have decided that those things are somehow less
important than this fight over a mosque/temple. Sure we will have our
temple, but we would have expended so much energy on this, that we
would be forever behind economically compared to others. That is where
we should be concentrating IMHO. But I am not very hopeful. With the
introduction of Kalashnikovs and AK-47s in Bombay and probably other
places too (this was inevitable, in fact I am surprised that it took
so long) we show every sign of becoming another Lebanon or Bosnia.

IS THIS WHAT WE WANT?

Natraj Arni

Comments welcome. Flames would be ignored.

-- 


 Natraj Arni
 ARPA: natraj@mcc.com