One of the hottest subjects of yesterdays(16/04/2014) debate on the Times Now channel was," Is wearing a skull cap sign of Muslim appeasement"? This subject was specifically chosen because Mr. Modi during a TV interview two days back, he had apparently said wearing a skull cap amounts to losing his identity and appeasing the Muslims. That was the reason he had refused to wear accept and wear it during his Sadbhavana Mission two years ago. I fully agree with him.
To all those who are telling that he is a hardcore communal Hindu because of his refusal to wear an Islamic religious symbol, I have the following very simple questions:
1. Would any of you secular people of any religion be able to get any of those Muslim ministers who claim to be secular to wear Saffron paste or Sandal paste or ashes on their foreheads. Especially, those ministers belonging to the "secular" party of the Muslims, by the Muslims and for the Muslims viz. the Indian Muslim League with whom the Congress is sharing power in Kerala and even the centre?
2. Is it mandatory for a Hindu to wear a Muslim religious symbol to prove his "secularism" and is not wearing a skull cap in public, a Hindu becomes a fundamentalist hardcore Hindu communalist, then, I am one such person.
3. Is Indian secularism a one way affair applicable to only the Hindu community?
Do you know, in Kerala, the "secular" Muslims tried to prevent to the students of a private school run by a Hindu trust from wearing their uniform because it had Goddess Saraswati's picture in their emblem. The education minister, a Muslim belonging to the Muslim league refused to light the traditional lamp saying that it was a Hindu religious symbol. So much for their "secularism"
If the Muslims have the freedom to retain their religious identity, why do they and the entire (psudo) secular brigades insist that Hindus should wear the Islamic religious symbol to prove their "secularism"?
If Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee, Advani or Shivaraj Singh Chouhan had worn the skull cap in public , I would say that it was for winning the Muslim votes and was nothing less than appeasement.
To all those who are telling that he is a hardcore communal Hindu because of his refusal to wear an Islamic religious symbol, I have the following very simple questions:
1. Would any of you secular people of any religion be able to get any of those Muslim ministers who claim to be secular to wear Saffron paste or Sandal paste or ashes on their foreheads. Especially, those ministers belonging to the "secular" party of the Muslims, by the Muslims and for the Muslims viz. the Indian Muslim League with whom the Congress is sharing power in Kerala and even the centre?
2. Is it mandatory for a Hindu to wear a Muslim religious symbol to prove his "secularism" and is not wearing a skull cap in public, a Hindu becomes a fundamentalist hardcore Hindu communalist, then, I am one such person.
3. Is Indian secularism a one way affair applicable to only the Hindu community?
Do you know, in Kerala, the "secular" Muslims tried to prevent to the students of a private school run by a Hindu trust from wearing their uniform because it had Goddess Saraswati's picture in their emblem. The education minister, a Muslim belonging to the Muslim league refused to light the traditional lamp saying that it was a Hindu religious symbol. So much for their "secularism"
If the Muslims have the freedom to retain their religious identity, why do they and the entire (psudo) secular brigades insist that Hindus should wear the Islamic religious symbol to prove their "secularism"?
If Mr. Atal Behari Vajpayee, Advani or Shivaraj Singh Chouhan had worn the skull cap in public , I would say that it was for winning the Muslim votes and was nothing less than appeasement.
No comments:
Post a Comment