Preeti said: >>society has an obligation to curtail the freedom of those who seek to make socially irresponsible choices. Good. Then let society handle it. Leave the Government out of this issue. M. Nam

Keep in mind though. When the government is incapable of and unwilling to maintain law and order “society” ends up being policed by the guys who beat up pub-goers and throw fits over decals. There are appropriate ways of imposing social mores and inappropriate ways but the line between the two is barely visible when the government doesn’t have the police point it out.

Good. Then let society handle it. Leave the Government out of this issue.

M. Nam

That said, its completely pointless to try and link the pro-choice debate in the West to the tragedy of sex-selective abortions in India. Both are utterly disimilar in cultural context and social ramifications. AND its possible to be pro-choice and be opposed to sex-selective abortions. Its a valid moral and ethical position, for me at least

For religions like Islam and Sikhi that have only one holy book and small number of revered prophets, saints and gurus, it seems like such a problem could be easily brought under control for the devout by explicit declarations of forbiddeness from their prophet/guru and/or holy book. I think that is why desi Muslims have healthier gender ratios. The act was explicitly forbidden by their prophet.

That of course does not excuse any of the other misogynist traits of the religion, but at least we can acknowledge this step in the right direction.

Personally I feel the best places on Earth for desi Hindu and Muslim women to live are countries where Islam and Hinduism are NOT the majority. The ideal place is a town where Hindus and Muslims are present, but are in the minority. A place where 1, maximum 2, mosques and mandirs are present so that we women can get our religious fix on the weekends but live our lives without the prying eyes and pressures of a large community of culture obsessed desi (or arab) Muslims and Hindus.

This is why my mom would only let me go to Hare Krishna temples when I was little and wanted to experience “my mom’s religion”. After leaving India she wanted nothing to do with the same cultural crap thousands of miles across the 7 seas and she didn’t want her daughter exposed to all those idiosyncrises. Unfortunately at some point she objected to my involvement at the Hare Krishan temple as well and we had a parting of ways when I turned 18 and took my first trip “home”. I begged her to accompany me and re-unite with her family but she had not desire. I still go to India every few years and she has still yet to accompany me. The only think she held onto from India was her particular brand of Hinduism. And she held onto it alone, without the help of any mandir or cultural events, aside from the Hare Krishna temple, which at some point she distanced herself from because even that became “too Indianized and sexist”.

I have a hard time believing that without any input from outside, India would be moving anywhere near a state of equal rights.

The laws are intact but then what’s the excuse for this?

Temple purified after dalit government minister enters

You can take the priest out of the caste but you can’t take the caste out of the priest….

The constitution was aped from India’s colonial rulers. India’s western inspired govt can pass law after law to appease western sensibilities

i have to admit that sometimes when prema says rah-rah china, it is often warranted. now look at how original the chinese constitution is:

Article 1 of the State Constitution describes China as “a socialist state under the people’s democratic dictatorship”

now we, who have “aped” western constitutions, still foolishly a democracy precludes a dictatorship. but the innovative chinese have come beat us yet again and come up with this entirely new modern of governance: “democratic dictatorship.” prema, you’re truly ahead of our times. what an eye for trend-spotting!

The constitution was aped from India’s colonial rulers.

prema, you gots to give credit where it’s due. are we indians great at reverse engineering or what?

what?? those muslims secretly usurped our constitution too? we need a historical investigation into this matter, pronto. and a saffron rewriting of the constitution! paging koenraad elst!

102 · PS said

,whereas in many other countries are legally made unequal, the culture of India has created a form of govt in which women are legally equal – big difference.

Lie after stupid lie. It wasn’t hindu culture that created the modern secular constitution of India. The constitution was aped from India’s colonial rulers. India’s western inspired govt can pass law after law to appease western sensibilities but the misogynist and casteist culture remains strongly entrenched because the will to enforce the modern enlightened laws is just not there.

So are “intolerant or anti-secular comments” only bad if they’re not directed at Hindus?

India has many laws but very little enforcement. Laws are enforced depending on the situation – not too different from other parts of the world…….

,whereas in many other countries are legally made unequal, the culture of India has created a form of govt in which women are legally equal – big difference.

Lie after stupid lie. It wasn’t hindu culture that created the modern secular constitution of India. The constitution was aped from India’s colonial rulers. India’s western inspired govt can pass law after law to appease western sensibilities but the misogynist and casteist culture remains strongly entrenched because the will to enforce the modern enlightened laws is just not there.