Common Civil Code

by ZC » Fri Oct 31, 2003 10:19 am

then, what is the problem, having only one wife is part of CCC. atleast a part can be implemented. isnt it ?

by **From the heart of INDIA** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 11:57 am

If u feel RSS is not a good organisation, then first go ask ur fellow muslims to stop doing that, they do more than what RSS do... pak, bangladesh, malaysia , afganistan , saudi arabia, syria , qatar,palestine , sudan, iraq, iran, indonesia, nigeria , philippines , turkey, morocco, algeria, lebanon , jordon, ethiopia , ghana, senegal, mali, niger, libya, egypt and most importantly ,even in INDIA !!! tell me, muslims in which(atleast 1) country among mentioned above doesnot directly or indirectly support them...how many of u muslims felt happy when WTC collapsed and how many of u fely happy when indian soldiers were killed in war with terrorist in kashmir region ...
 
 This post applies to all the muslims who find no wrong with paki actions towards INDIA ... Others with negative comments r not welcomed, but negative comments r welcomed for those how fall in the category for whom this post is applied .

by **Tipu** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 12:44 pm

Hi,PRO-RSS,First of all why u have posted this kind of thing on which,u have mentioned that,1st catageory 2nd category,so that people should not answer u.1st of all donot think that I am Happy when our soldiers are killed,I feel very bad infact my mood is off,when I heared that our soldiers are died.Seconldy comming to your question,u have metioned so many muslim countries,u think all are doing wrong things,I donot know actually what they are doing,but I thing I can tell that what US is doing is also not good.No Muslim is happy when he sees any innocent is being killed,I think every muslim felt the same thing when they so many people being killed in WTC,(But there is stil no proper to justify that that is being done by muslims),U only think it by urself who is benefited by doing this,after that who got oppertunity to invade other countries,and who is being benefited.And what do u think of ten thousand people killed in Afghanistan in recent war,by bombing,and ten thousand people in Iraq,and many more in any many of the countries which u mention.Now I am also posting a similar conditional message and question like which u mentioned.The persons who agree that the killing of the innocent people,is allowed and a good act,should only reply to this message.
 NOTE:India is our country,and there is no need for us to give,oath or loyaltiy exam in front of people like you,u just pose,but we from heart accept India as our motherland

by ZC » Fri Oct 31, 2003 12:50 pm

Just a little unwell: U say CCC is draconian? what makes u say so? seems like ur a bit more unwell than u usually are ;-)

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 1:10 pm

ZC, i say it is \'draconian\' because if tomorrow it says you can\'t worship your cows anymore (since it doesnt sound very remarkable in an international context), then it would amount to taking away your freedom to practise your religious beliefs. If it were to leave cows untouched, but instead take up similar aspects of other religions (e.g. polygamy, as you have been enthusiastically pointing out), then it would be partisan in nature, which we of course do not want.
 
 To be fair to all parties, it is best to allow everyone to practise their idiosyncracies as stipulated by thier religions, as long as the society is not harmed as a result.

by ZC » Fri Oct 31, 2003 1:15 pm

Just a little unwell: Mr. Tippu has said polygamy is not from Quran and u r relating it to worship of cow. Worshipping a cow is a religious belief, but polygamy is not. if u take other secular countries, all laws are equally enforced on everyone. But they never talked abt Hindus cows or Muslims pigs or anything. am i clear ?

by **From the heart of INDIA !!!** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 2:05 pm

Hi, Tipu thats what i want every muslim in INDIA to be, no need to prove to others, no one here is asking u to do so... just be true for our country by urself ... did i say every muslim is like that, no. So, why r u questioning me ... i said this is just to those how r betraying my motherland, INDIA !!!

by **bhai-bhai** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 2:28 pm

Why is that worshipping a Ccw is not internationally right in context JLUnwell ? Why do you feel embarrased about the fact that we do worship and that it might as well be acceptd by you, if you are a Hindu and if are not, then so be it, that the Hindus worship and that it still holds good anywhere in the world as long as the Hindu believes in his religion. A simple example:The Gauntanamo bay prisoners from afghanistan demanded religiously right food (halal meat/ no pork) and \'they\' are being catered to !! The same ways, a burqa claded woman was searched by another woman in Boston airport inside a pvt. room while the rest of the women were normally searched by whoevr were there outside of these rooms !. The Muslims give importnace to their religion and let the others know that it is of great importance to them without any embarassment and they are given due respect unlike some of us Hindus who do not care to know much about our religion and just in case we know, we are embarassed ! Its time that we get up and save our wonderful religion, guys !!!

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 2:45 pm

Hi, my objective was not to ridicule worshipping cows or any other equivalent practise of another religion. My point was that a \'Uniform Civil Code\' that intrudes into such beliefs could trample upon the rights of citizens to practise their religion freely.
 
 Like some friends here are too eager to cite polygamy as an unacceptable / uncivilized practise (looking from their persepective). Similarly, from a neutral view point, worshipping cows could identically be viewed in the same manner. So, a bi-partisan or partisan UCC is going to be either unfair or is going to intrude into the civil rights of citizens. I may have my personal viewpoints about religions, but here my objective was not to ridicule any of them.

by **tipu** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 3:51 pm

Hi,Ind_by_heart,u again made a mistake,donot tell \"MY MOTHERLAND\" tell \"OUR MOTHER LAND\",bcos of thi type attitude,their is lack of unrest in country.If u are born Hindu then u cannot be loyal,by default,I can quote many recent examples,from army,our ministers who betrayed INDIA,are not muslims but Hindus,but no muslim tell any Hindu,donot betray our land,so donot gerneralise statement.

by **IdontDiscriminate** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 4:06 pm

\"Like some friends here are too eager to cite polygamy as an unacceptable / uncivilized practise (looking from their persepective). Similarly, from a neutral view point, worshipping cows could identically be viewed in the same manner\"????????????????????!!!!!!!!??????????
 
 Marrying multiple girls is similar to worshipping cows?LMAO
 thanks for makin my day,..i sure did laugh out my heart on that one.

by **JustaLiitleUnwell** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 4:29 pm

IDontDiscriminate, well, who\\\'s to judge? Probably worshipping an animal looks more bizzarre to a neutral observer. However, without going into such judgements, I would suggest to you to read my complete post, and try to understand the argument i\\\'m making against UCC (not against any particular custom of any religion). In case you still have issues, I wouldn\\\'t be of much help as I dont try to wake up people who are pretending to be asleep.

by **IdontDiscriminate** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 4:49 pm

My dear unwell.
 A uniform civil code ensures that everyone in our country be treated equally.why do u think it would be an infringement on personal freedom?according to our constitution every citizen has his/her freedom and thts a fundamental right.u can do whatever you want to but, there needs to be a law to monitor.
 The civil code would not prevent hindus from worshipping cows nor would it prevent muslims from hating pigs or a christian from attending his/her weekly mass at the church.there are certain inequities and the civil code aims at eliminating them.like you pointed out i do have issues, but all noble ones!i happened to stumble upon this page.i encourage everyone to read it.
 http://www.goacom.com/news/news2002/dec/msg00077.html

by **Srinu** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 5:38 pm

looks like this topic will never go out of fashion. i personally believe that humanity comes first. and probably every religion preaches that. but how many follow the \"true\" religion is very debatable. anyways, back to the topic at hand, common civil code HAS to be implemented. but there are a few issues to be ironed out. but most of the issues are politically motivated. why should issue of marriage or property be a religious issue. i request those against the CCC come out with their views/issues so that we have a discussion on the same.

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 6:52 pm

I just read that link you posted. As I mentioned in my original post, this link talks of a liberal Muslim woman (a young law student) who took upon herself to ensure gender equality - validating my contention that the affected parties are competent to take care of themselves. When Sanghis raise the issue, the motive becomes suspect, as the issue becomes just another stick to beat the minorities with and alienate them further.
 
 Another thing - Goa is a small state and it may be easy to attain uniformity within its small and well-educated population. Also, its Muslim population maybe an insignificant fraction, as the predominant communities there are Hindus and Christians. Whereas India as a whole is a geographically and socially diverse country where the man-woman equations vary even across regions, and social classes, despite being within the same religous community. If you want to bring a bulldozer to flatten all the ups and downs, there are going to be a lot of ruffled feathers, and hence, the motive for such an exercise has to be clearly established. What is the need for doing that? There needs to be a law to \'monitor\'? Monitor what? Srinu, why do you say it HAS to be implemented? What immediate benefits does it bring to the country?
 
 There is so much social injustice (untouchability for example) in the country and it cannot be levelled by enacting controversial laws. As the affected parties get empowered through education and employment, they will fight for their rights and earn them. It has been happening in the case of Dalits, Hindu women, and I dont see why it cant happen in the case of Muslim women as well.

by **JustaLittleUnwell** » Fri Oct 31, 2003 7:57 pm

While on the subject, I would like to add this as well:
 
 The Sanghis (not referring to anyone here, but the people belonging to BJP/VHP/Shiv Sena and the likes), who have been proposing this Uniform Civil Code try to show themselves as champions of women\'s rights. But their own track record on this front has been dismal. I wish to point to this link:
 http://www.brightlightsfilm.com/28/water.html
 which is about the Sanghi protests against the filming of Deepa Mehta\'s \"Water\". For the uninitiated, the film is about an age old custom whereby young widows were sent to \'widow houses\' in Varanasi to eke out a living as prostitutes. By not allowing their story to be told, the Sanghis successfully stifled freedom of expression, thereby aiding and abetting a deplorable practise against women, that continues to this day.
 
 And then they talk of \"Uniform Civil Code\" to eliminate \'inequalites\' in the society. A case of people living in glass houses throwing stones?

by **IdontDiscriminate** » Sat Nov 01, 2003 7:28 am

Hi i know the story about deepa mehta\'s water.just because some radical groups like the shiv sena or the rss propose the uniform civil code we dont have to shun it.the civil code is indeed good for the country.yes true india is a big country and it will take time to bring about a change, but then everyhing has a first time.for instance we know that pakistan will keep sending jihadis into kashmir, but would we give up kashmir for that?they are irrelevant and i know its a bad example but i hope u get the point.
 
 besides social injustices still exist to this date,true.but the government does have policies to curb it, its not like people are not doing anything about it.an let me point out that these inequities lie only among the illiterate most of the times.so we need to educate them, which everyone is trying to do.and as for the women i am sure the country and especially our state\'s trying to do a lot.it\'s the women themselves who have to come out and speak out!

by **Hyderabadi** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 4:27 pm

Hi,dont---de...,inequalities are the permenet thing in the society,which u have to accept,which in HINDU religion,if u follow it,Shudrs are not equal to brahaman.Why all that u were telling so many thgings about that,if u are a brahaman will u marry a shudr girl?.Reddy will not marry another cast girl or kamma will not marry other cast girl.How do u think that these things are going to end.

by **Srinu** » Mon Nov 03, 2003 8:24 pm

i just find it difficult to digest that each religion be allowed its own law. i am NOT for forcing hindu law on muslims or the other way round. i am a atheist, so does that mean i am bound to no law?? just for arguments sake, consider this. tomorrow, i start my own religion and have a rule saying \"in my religion its illegal to pay taxes\". i know its a very wild argument. but i really feel there should be a universal law and code for all religions. this of course, has to be done keeping in mind religious sentiments. but I don’t think property or marital laws are fundamental to religious sentiments. someone can correct me if I am wrong, of course.

Who is online