Saturday, March 20, 2010

Thou shall not eat beef!


In an extremely sad move, inching closer to complete Hinduization of this country, Karnataka government headed by the Hindu right wing political party BJP, has passed a bill to ban cow slaughter, making sale, consumption and possession of beef a punishable offense up to seven years.

India was never a secular country.  It has been including many elements of bowing down to blind and irrational religious sentiments and made them laws to impose it onto everyone.  India is becoming more and more of a Hindu country much to the celebration of Hindutva supporters.  With these moves India is moving away from ideal of becoming a safe place for practice of one’s faith without intervention of state as protected in Article 25 of Indian Constitution. 

This is clear case of a Hindu majority, dominated by upper caste version of Hinduism where cow is a sacred animal, imposing its will on other religions and lower caste Hindus.  Beef is a food to many people just like chicken or mutton.  State has no right to impose what people of this country can eat or not eat, unless the animal species under consideration is deemed a protected species.   Making an animal sacred is not the domain of a secular country.

It’s a sad day for India as Karnataka joins the growing number of states which has banned cow slaughter and consumption of beef.   Many Muslims and lower caste Hindus eat beef.   There are many people working in this trade.  For many poor people beef is a cheap meat and good source of protein.  There are many restaurants where beef is on the menu.  Some Indians, irrespective of their religion, enjoy a good steak or a beef burger.   Many foreigners living in Bangalore buy juicy steak in the selected shops to eat their food once in a while feeling at home in India.  Now, all that is stopped because a certain version of Hinduism believes cow is a sacred animal.  Adherents of that version of Hinduism have now imposed their will onto everyone else to decide what a whole state can eat and what it cannot.  

This is a major setback to India’s promise towards making this a secular country where a person is free to practice his/her version of faith, and it is a step back from making India a mature democracy. 

134 comments:

  1. can you get pork in Saudi Arabia?

    ReplyDelete
  2. "India was never a secular country"

    ".....more and more of a Hindu country"

    What was it before Babar the mughal thief invaded India?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Nizam Osman Ali Khan prohibited cow-slaughter for any purpose in muslim ruled Hyderabad.

    ReplyDelete
  4. If people of karnataka don't like it, they will not elect the bjp again.
    on the other hand if people are not bothered or support the ban and elect them again, then everyone has to accept it.

    The minority who eat beef will then have to learn to live with it because the people (thru their elected reps) have willed it so.
    whether it is good for the country or not is an issue that will become irrelevant in this context.

    it is the same as france banning the burqa.
    it is the same as saudi banning photos of hindu gods.
    it is the same as Dubai (yes !) banning restaurants during ramzan.

    it is the same as imposing prohibition (in this case majority drinks)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Secular Democracy is not just the will of the Majority. That is why we have a constitution which also prescribes to "protect the minority from the tyranny of the majority'. If majority opinion is the rule then slavery would still be the law of the land in this world.

      Delete
  5. pok:

    The minority who eat beef will then have to learn to live with it because the people (thru their elected reps) have willed it so.

    No wonder you fail to understand Telangana movement. You think the minority Telangana has to learn to live with majority Andhra no matter what they do.

    ReplyDelete
  6. can you get pork in Saudi Arabia?

    But you get your hand cut when you steal, or flogged in the street for adultery.

    What was it before Babar the mughal thief invaded India?

    It was Lodis, Khaljis, etc.

    Nizam Osman Ali Khan prohibited cow-slaughter for any purpose in muslim ruled Hyderabad.

    And king of Patiala paraded naked and commanded his people to pray to his erect penis.

    ReplyDelete
  7. @sujai
    on one hans u say people who come to a place from outside, have to accept the ways of locals.
    on the other and u say minorities of India have to have their way.
    arent u contradicting urself?

    ReplyDelete
  8. @money maniac:

    on one hans u say people who come to a place from outside, have to accept the ways of locals.
    on the other and u say minorities of India have to have their way.
    arent u contradicting urself?


    Good that you asked this question. Sometimes I am misinterpreted by the comments that come after my post.

    I never said that immigrants ‘have to’ accept the ways of locals. In fact, I defend the rights of people to lead their own lifestyle, their food habits, their distinct identity without have to ‘conform’ to the majority or the locals.

    However, I do say, that ‘understanding’ the regional and local politics, their culture, their lifestyles, and hence their problems help the immigrants to appreciate the aspirations of the locals. That way, in times of political turmoil, they can better appreciate why locals are fighting for what they are fighting.

    I never ask of immigrants to abandon their identity to embrace the identity of the city or region they live. However, that freedom to maintain your identity should not be used as a weakness of the locals. A city will always have immigrants and they may be in majority in that city. That apparent majority should not be used to make a case to wean away the city from the region.

    There are many posts on this blog which further establishes my stand on these topics.

    ReplyDelete
  9. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  10. Good decision by govt, all children should drink enough milk at lesser prices and be easily affordable now. Cow slaughter houses can become cow sheds now

    ReplyDelete
  11. This needs to be implemented all over india, else pure milk will be a rare comodity with people drinking synthetic/artificial milk produced in factories and children will see a cow in animal Zoo in future.

    ReplyDelete
  12. Not to worry mate. We shall still eat our steaks. There is no point paying any attention to this filthy crowd that holds the dung sacred! We’ve all seen how this nation treats her holy cows in the traffic.
    It would be a waste of time to even think of the pathetic lot that reveres the cow excreta as anything other than lunatics. The morons that make up the assembly - am ashamed that I too were a part of the electoral process.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Sujai,

    Just as you want india to be a secular nation there are many of us who want it to be a hindu country. there's nothing wrong in wishing it to be that way.

    And i don't see why you have to bring telangana into this discussion. anyway, if the people of telangana will it, then they should get telangana. but first the people of telangana have to show that they are wishing for it. blogging like you do, or conducting a few meetings like the OU/JAC don'r prove it.

    Let all elected MLAs/MPs of telangana resign. then let the people of telangana elect the trs with high majority in ALL constituencies. If all people of telangana want a separate state they should prove it this way. i say trs because it is the only party formed specifically for a separate telangana and is the only party that for a separate state without any doubt...unlike tdp, congress.
    until then many of will believe that most people in telangana do not want a separate state.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Shankar,

    "filthy crowd" ... i hope you are not referring to hindus by that. i hope so otherwise pl remember that we can shower many abuses on those from other religions and many people will feel depressed.

    ReplyDelete
  15. Once again we see how upper caste agenda is imposed on lower caste hindus and other religious minorities. Upper castes dont even want to consider that lower caste hindus eat beef. It is the upper caste hindus arrogance talking when they think they represent all hindus.

    In fact ,this is not a majority decision imposed on minority , this is a minority decision imposed on the majority. The upper caste hindus constitute less than 30% of our population , but their sentiments wrt to cow slaughter are to be imposed on all people.

    Once again it proves that BJP Hindutva actually means upper caste Hindutva.

    ReplyDelete
  16. oh... i was waiting for this to come up here in Karnataka.

    No problem, hitch a ride to neighboring kerala you can gorge on it and it comes very cheap too.

    ReplyDelete
  17. You need to similarly respect the sentiments of Muslims and minorities in Hyderabad when they say they don't want Telangana ,as they envisage, imposed on them by the majority who have no concern for others.Majority cannot do whatever it wants to do just because it has numbers.Everybody has an opinion and a voice.

    ReplyDelete
  18. nayeem ,
    Do you understand what you are asking?
    You expect telangana to undergo more marginalization for years to come. For what?? Just because you are afraid for no reason.
    Do you think Telangana people want to separate just for fun????

    ReplyDelete
  19. Upper caste hindu minority is hijacking Indian institutions. This is a classic example.

    ReplyDelete
  20. many people i have met are justifying the ban quoting a verse from gita "krsi-go-raksya-vanijyam vaisya-karma svabhavajam" which means, it is the duty of the business class to engage themselves in agriculture and protect cows. now how fair is it pass a forcing all the business class people to engage in agriculture??


    except this verse, no where in hindu scriptures has it been mentioned explicitly not eat beef.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Idiot Saudi Arabia is openly a A Islamist country and their constitution doesnt gaurantee freedom of relegion.India is a secular nation atleast according to the constitution.

    ReplyDelete
  22. Just think what happens when Ramdev Baba's Swabhiman party comes to power.He will probably replace Indias constitution with so called set of laws by Manu.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Chomskyist:

    @SUJAI

    Switzerland has democratically banned building of Minarets for muslims.France has banned Public wearing of Burqas. Is it wrong to democratically ban Beef ?you will need a dictatorship to run a truely secular state in a country where a large majority follows only one relegion

    ReplyDelete
  24. You can get pork in Saudi Arabia in thousands of places.Mainly inside the residential compounds of foreign Oil Companies and inside American military bases.

    ReplyDelete
  25. All in the name of Animal Welfare think what happened in Gujarath cow slaughtering went underground and now its done in a more Unhygenic and Crueler way.
    You cant stop 100 million people from eating their favourite food it only breeds resentment and harmuful to the nation as a whole.
    I think all the relegious parties should be banned to uphold secularism.

    ReplyDelete
  26. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  27. Does this ban include halal beef too? Or just the non-halal beef?

    ReplyDelete
  28. A muslim country can impose laws on visitng peoples to wear burqa and do other stuff according to their country needs. In saudi, even visitng dignitaries are to wear head scarf.

    Why is that a hindu country like ours, we need to debate even on certain basic things which hurts the people of our land.

    When a muslim/Christian make a law, the plp of the land follow, but in India, we try we write time wasting blogs.

    U are trying to promote telangan in other forms ... sujai

    ReplyDelete
  29. First of all, I dont accept this abrupt intervention by Government, interfering with individual tastes of people and also putting many peoples livelihood in jeopardy. These parties can be insensitive to any extent to score some political mileage. Having said that, I have a different perspective on this.

    Saudi might have banned pork for religious reasons. But, what are the reasons for not finding juicy dog meat in US / Europe, where as its a delicacy in parts of Africa? Or how about shopping for whale meat in Australia, while the Japanese enjoy it very often?
    There are obvious cultural differences. I think if we decouple religion from this, we will be able to analyze more objectively. Indians reared cow for almost 6000 years (source: Guns, germs and steel by Jared Diamond) and it is very likely that cow has a special place in the culture of ancient Indians and is probably revered. Hinduism (as an organized religion) came much later and it is very likely that religious attributes are smeared onto this purely cultural sentiment and overtime this is now all about religion. In India, religion has hijacked our culture in every way possible.

    And cow is such a lovable animal. In the words of Nash: "Cow is of the bovine ilk, one end moo the other end milk". We can do well without eating beef, but still we should not be insensitive to the present reality.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Well, Karnataka joins the company of the liberal states California and Illinois of the US in this regard.

    In both the latter, slaughter of horses and sale of horse meat is illegal.

    In most states of the US, dog meat is considered illegal. Now Korean immigrants can complain that their favorite dish is not available in the US, couldn't they?

    Like it or not, local and majority sentiments matter in these kinds of things. Not even the so-called liberal Western nations are exceptions.

    We have the Aghori tribe who eat human corpses as a matter of their culture, and our govt. doesn't prevent them. We respect their right to do so.

    You think any Western nation will permit that to happen?

    ReplyDelete
  31. @Ledzious
    Chomskyist:
    Well the liberal Californians also have toughest environmental rules in US. Consider this scenario:
    Arnold schwaznegger passes a new law prohibiting Hindu Cremation sighting environmental concerns and the next day u die then ur corpse has to buried along with the cow eating infidels or shipped back home 2000 miles.

    ReplyDelete
  32. @@@
    A muslim country can impose laws on visitng peoples to wear burqa and do other stuff according to their country needs. In saudi, even visitng dignitaries are to wear head scarf.

    Why is that a hindu country like ours, we need to debate even on certain basic things which hurts the people of our land.

    When a muslim/Christian make a law, the plp of the land follow, but in India, we try we write time wasting blogs.

    U are trying to promote telangan in other forms ... sujai
    ???


    ANS::Precisely because we are not a "Hindu country".

    ReplyDelete
  33. Anon,

    Ofcourse we are a hindu country.
    All the muslims and christians are hindus who also believe in god by another name

    ReplyDelete
  34. I am from Karimnagar and I don't want Telangana, if it is dominated by psuedo-secularists and islamists. I don't think Maoists are a problem as they will fade away once the living conditions improve. But it is chicken & egg scenario. I do have serious doubts, if Telangana can get justice under current scenario with Andhras dominating in every sector.

    ReplyDelete
  35. I'm very glad that Karnataka state banned beef. Not because I'm a Hindu but because of the relief that a poor animal is saved! ( I am a veg.)

    Who told you that only lower caste Hindus eat beef? I know many so-called upper castes eating beef.

    Banning of beef will bring only good results in the long run. It is a well known fact that red meat eaters are more prone to fatal diseases like cancer, heart problems etc. So banning beef means a more healthier population in the future. Don't view this move as a hinduistic act. Your post will only help in kindling such notions in the most unsuspecting and innocent Muslims and other, as you say 'lower caste hindus'.

    And I wish Kerala too follow suit !

    ReplyDelete
  36. Your out of line, sujai. Cow is a symbol of motherhood. A sustainer of life. It is more than respected and there are unwritten rules which command a hindu to protect these creatures.

    India is a country where hindus are in majority. These hindus are religious. A constitution which orders them to be "secular" is a paper rule. People are religious and you cannot force them to be secular. You have no right to ridicule them when they refuse to be secular.

    [b]complete Hinduization of this country[/b]
    There is no such thing as "hinduization". Why do you dissuade yourself? The concept of the "holy cow" is an indic phenomenon.

    [b]India was never a secular country[/b]
    You are right. Do not force it down people's throat.

    [b]India is becoming more and more of a Hindu country much to the celebration of Hindutva supporters.[/b]
    That brilliant, sujai. When you reach a dead end, you start attacking with "semantics". These words are a tactic to pacify and enslave. For you, every person who questions MF hussain is a "hindutva" or whatever.

    I asked you a simple thing which was to reveal your stand but never answered that question. You hide behind this mysterious stand and adopt a policy of duplicity. I asked you three times to put down the interpretations of hussains portraits as per your thoughts but you kept ducking and dodging the question.

    [b]With these moves India is moving away from ideal of becoming a safe place for practice of one’s faith[/b]
    As i see it, religious practice is being commanded more then ever. When teachers in mahrashtra refused to let burka clad ladies in schools, the parents got violent and got there way. The muslims got there way with taslima and hounded her out because she question allah. Everyone is free to practice there faith. Do you understand what i mean, sujai?

    [b]Making an animal sacred is not the domain of a secular country.[/b]
    But india is not a secular country now is it? Why are you surprised? Why all the cries?

    [b]Now, all that is stopped because a certain version of Hinduism believes cow is a sacred animal.[/b]
    Sujai, i believe cow should be respected and protected. Does it make me a hindu fundoo according to you? Im an atheist so why do i do that? Are my beliefs a mix of "duplicity" or am i philosophical? Was this issue of such great importance to you that you made a whole blog post about it? What are your priorities, sujai?

    [b]Adherents of that version of Hinduism have now imposed their will onto everyone else to decide what a whole state can eat and what it cannot.[/b]
    Freedom of religion!!!

    [b]This is a major setback to India’s promise towards making this a secular country where a person is free to practice his/her version of faith, and it is a step back from making India a mature democracy. [/b]
    Why is secular better? Can you explain that to me?

    Do you know what secularism means? Secularism means [b]non-religious[/b].

    So whenever you say that "you want a a secular country where every person is free to practice there choice of faith..." [b]It sounds like a oxymoron!!![/b]

    A country cannot be secular unless it's people become secular or non-religious.

    BUT
    Words like "Secularism" and "tolerance" are just words. They are there only to mesmerize and to chase a dream that's impossible. Think about it.

    Hinduism on the other hand is not a religion or a faith. It is a philosophy. I strongly disagree with the "philosophy" of the caste system as it has got corrupted. It was supposed to be an act of social boycott but it has turned into a complete different thing today. I do not see anything wrong with banned cow slaughter. I have been a vegetarian for more than 20 years cause im philosophical. If they decide to ban non-veg food, i'd cheer them.

    ReplyDelete
  37. This utterly not right, being in secular state we should not impose ones religion on others. Law should made that every one should legitimately accept that. I am staunch follower of Hinduism. Our country is not Hindu country, but our country is secular with majority of the people live in here are Hindus. If u compare with Saudi or another country whose laws goes by religion, they are not secular. If you go by Indian history and believe Harrapans are Hindus or Sindhus, scientific evidents were found in excavation that they are beef eaters... Please don't spoil our secular spirits. We cannot make just Hindu country by making Hindu laws...

    ReplyDelete
  38. What' next? Mandatory recital of Vedas? India always had equal-importance-to-all-religions secularism rather than no-importance-to-any-religion secularism (the ideal form). Now we don't have even that. Where will this "Hinduization" stop?

    For people who compare India with Saudi, don't. India takes pride in itself as a secular country. *We are not a Hindu country*.

    ReplyDelete
  39. Hey folks, please do not get carried away. Why do everybody insist on this being an act to apeasee the Hindus? Who claims so? The aim is preservation and improvement of the breeds of cattle - period.
    Think about it. Isn’t it laughable?
    And our chief minister actually defended the bill by praising the medicinal qualities of cow piss. Wow!
    And then, somebody had a problem with my term 'filthy crowd'. Filth is going soft brother.

    ReplyDelete
  40. [ "Opinions are like assholes- everyone has one"! These are my opinions. ]

    I agree with you that ur opinions are assholes! How come you have so many?!!
    :D

    ReplyDelete
  41. Sh@nkar,

    You remind me of the fraud intellectual insecure parochial bengalis.

    ReplyDelete
  42. Sh@nkar,


    btw your great grand father used to cook his food using cow-dung pellets.

    ReplyDelete
  43. [imposing its will on other religions and lower caste Hindus. ]

    There are better & cheaper protine sources: worms, insects, frogs, rodents, cockroaches etc. In some Asian countries people eat dogs and human foetus!

    They can explore ..

    Tiger & elephant are protected so they gave the same status to cow & ox too. It has nothins to do with hinduism, secularism etc. Islam prohibits pork, does it mean it is protected animal? I don't think so..

    ReplyDelete
  44. As if Hindus do not eat Beef! Guys all are just political gimmick. But 7 years in Jail is too much!

    Rather let them take help of Menaka Gandhi and take care of Cows wandering in bangalore streets.

    ReplyDelete
  45. Technical question

    Is buffallo meat ok...

    What about MNC's and five star hotels ,With a sizeable foreign population It will be difficult in Bangalore..

    I am not sure how they implement this.

    ReplyDelete
  46. Sujai, Your crocodile tears shed will in no way help winning the Muslims for your Telangana cause. With this you have proved you not only hate Telugus, but also Kannadigas, among whom you currently live. Here is what is talked about your beloved city

    http://news.rediff.com/special/2010/mar/23/why-hyderabad-is-a-breeding-ground-for-jihad.htm

    God save India as Jihad is going to be trebled once a separate Telangana is formed and all the Telugus are driven out of Hyderabad by the Telanganites.

    ReplyDelete
  47. the general intent should be forwards not to the 'grand' era of our great grandfathers - whoever wanted to make that point please think where you are going.

    and whatever kind of insecure, parochial fraud i am, the people who still continue to stick to their guns on this remain the bigoted, narrow minded, petty, silly lot.
    and as far as alternate protein diets are concerned, thank you so much for your suggestions, but did the beef-eaters ever ask you to try their meat? respect the freedom of choice - grow up!

    ReplyDelete
  48. Sh@nkar,

    Most of the hindus i know who eat beef, do so only to 'get back' at their parents/families for perceived or real traumas imposed on them during their childhood. i have found that in almost all cases they are insecure in life. in almost all cases they consider themselves intellectually superior to others. a majority of these people happen to be bengalees.

    this excludes those who anyway eat beef in their families.

    ReplyDelete
  49. Wow, look at these numb nuts arguing like idiots. They have a problem with eating cows, but no problems with childred being abused and raped on streets,no problems with no access to clean drinking water to millions of indians.Basic amenities that people in the developed world take for granted...yet indians liek aruguing and are arguiing about dumb shit. Way to go

    Perplexed Indian

    ReplyDelete
  50. Wow, look at these numb nuts arguing like idiots. They have a problem with eating cows, but no problems with childred being abused and raped on streets,no problems with no access to clean drinking water to millions of indians.Basic amenities that people in the developed world take for granted...yet indians like aruguiing and are arguing about dumb shit. Way to go
    Perplexed Indian

    ReplyDelete
  51. Sujai,

    I would like to make point out here.. Beef is not just cow meat alone. they are bunch of animals come under beef category. I believe there is a strong reason than just religion, cow is source of milk and other products eventually. If you have to prioritize/prefer between milk and beef for people, I would go for milk first. So may be Karnataka govt see some trend that people are selling/slaughting for quick money or export meat. Certainly India should not allow exporting cow meat because we can get better profit/result from cow in india.
    Just my openion.

    ReplyDelete
  52. Akash, I would have been very happy if Karnataka had really had that kind of a rationalisation; but no - they do not have - they never furnished any data to prove anything in those lines! Mr. Yedurappa only wanted to take extract his medicines from his cow's piss. haha

    ReplyDelete
  53. Dog, cat, horse is also a good cheap source of protein.

    So let them eat all those animals, before they come to cow.

    insects, rats, worms are also cheap protein.

    muslims can eat cows, after all the pigs are exhausted.
    until then cow should have protected status.

    ReplyDelete
  54. do you know this blog ?

    http://parnashaala.blogspot.com/2010/03/blog-post_22.html

    seems like a true copy of your blog post in telugu.

    ReplyDelete
  55. @Sujai:
    "The minority who eat beef will then have to learn to live with it because the people (thru their elected reps) have willed it so.

    No wonder you fail to understand Telangana movement. You think the minority Telangana has to learn to live with majority Andhra no matter what they do."

    Sujai... If ur logic of criticizing K'taka govt decision is based on parallel to T movement (majority over minority crap), u r debasing ur integrity. It seems all ur views are based on extending such logic logic to T movement. T state will NOT happen. DEAL WITH IT.

    U r talking about majority domination. What do u say about Sharia law, haj subsidy, madrasa system, article 370... r they symbols of majority dominating minorities? If anything, it is people like u who APPEASE minorities in the name of secularism and politicians take advantage of it. This country should have a UNIFORM CIVIL CODE. All citizens should be treated equal. Then, we will see who will cry foul.

    Who is a minority in India? Do u want to know? An educated hindu forward caste MALE student in A.P. trying to become a doctor against ALL crap reservations. Do u want to guess the number of seats available to him in govt colleges for PG etc?

    There will be Hindu resurgence because politicians, media and hypocrites like u continue to ignore appeasement of 'minorities' in the garb of secularism. There will be some mistakes but the Hindu identity of India cannot be suppressed for long, as long as uniform civil code is not implemented. Strong anti-terrorism laws, uniform civil code, aborgation of article 370, elimination of ALL religious subsidies etc be implemented first.

    ReplyDelete
  56. Sujai:
    "India is becoming more and more of a Hindu country much to the celebration of Hindutva supporters."

    I do not see anything wrong with it. Indian constitution might not say so, but all people agree India is predominantly Hindu nation. That does NOT mean we are NOT a democracy. US is a judeo-christian nation and Israel is Jewish democracy. So, whats wrong with being called a Hindu nation? Ur immaturity reflects in the above comment. Do you seriously know what Hindutva means? If u looking at some fundamentalists and making a decision, then what will be ur decision after seeing Islamic terrorists and fundamentalists in several countries? Dude... STOP making urself pathetic.

    ReplyDelete
  57. "This is a major setback to India’s promise towards making this a secular country where a person is free to practice his/her version of faith, and it is a step back from making India a mature democracy. "

    Really? Did Karnataka govt or Union govt stop any muslim from "practice his/her version of faith"? U r obsessed with the word 'minorities' and it seems u will do ANYTHING to defend their actions, related/unrelated to T movement. The sooner u get over it, the saner u will become and u'll get back ur mental balance.

    ReplyDelete
  58. Anuj, others: It is fruitless to bang one's head against a brick wall, if you get my drift. Sujai's attitude is anti-Hindu, so he will cloak that attitude under "secular" and all those fancy words, and he will never admit his own hypocrisy, double-standards and intellectual dishonesty, though these are obvious to anyone who reads his posts and the comments. People like Sujai are ideologues who never admit that they are wrong, and keep offering layers upon layers of rationalizations.

    I'd suggest not wasting your time battling stubborn murkhta - unless of course, you guys enjoy it. :)
    In that case, carry on.

    -chirkut

    ReplyDelete
  59. Anuj:

    You should listen to chirkut.

    Sujai's attitude is anti-Hindu, so he will cloak that attitude under "secular" and all those fancy words, and he will never admit his own hypocrisy, double-standards and intellectual dishonesty, though these are obvious to anyone who reads his posts and the comments.

    ReplyDelete
  60. Prasad:

    I do not see anything wrong with it. Indian constitution might not say so, but all people agree India is predominantly Hindu nation.

    Some of us have a problem with that duplicitous stand. When Constitution says we are secular, how can all people agree it is a Hindu nation?

    ReplyDelete
  61. Prasad:

    What do u say about Sharia law, haj subsidy, madrasa system, article 370... r they symbols of majority dominating minorities?

    I make my stand clear on Sharia law, haj subsidy and madrasa system on this blog. If you have patience you can read on them.

    There will be some mistakes but the Hindu identity of India cannot be suppressed for long, as long as uniform civil code is not implemented.

    I don’t get it, why do you think uniform civil code will liberate Hindus? If ever, it will liberate Muslims?

    ReplyDelete
  62. Akash:

    I believe there is a strong reason than just religion

    I would like to know what that reason is. According to me it is nothing but imposition of Hindutva’s ideology nothing else.

    ReplyDelete
  63. Anuj:

    Cow is a symbol of motherhood. A sustainer of life. It is more than respected and there are unwritten rules which command a hindu to protect these creatures.

    The question is not what you believe. The question is why do you have to impose your belief onto others. You could believe that the whole universe came out of cow dung. You are entitled to that opinion. But there is no reason why you should impose it onto others.

    A constitution which orders them to be "secular" is a paper rule.

    We take these paper rules pretty seriously, the way we took Gentlemen’s Agreement pretty seriously. For many Andhras it was just a piece of paper, for Telangana it is a conditional agreement that made the merger possible.

    People are religious and you cannot force them to be secular.

    People can be religious in a secular country. We don’t expect the people to be secular – they can chose not to be secular. We expect the state to be secular. That means while people are free to practice their version of belief system, the state shall not make rules based on those beliefs.

    You have no right to ridicule them when they refuse to be secular.

    Yes I do.

    The concept of the "holy cow" is an indic phenomenon.

    The concept of “holy cow” is a Hindu phenomenon, and that too confined to certain Hindus only.

    I asked you three times to put down the interpretations of hussains portraits as per your thoughts but you kept ducking and dodging the question.

    I asked you few things. I asked you to find me the evidence where MF Husain said he painted Adolf Hitler in nude ONLY to humiliate him. I also asked you to interpret the paintings that I linked. I did the latter with a purpose. It is to enlighten you to the idea that art is subject to interpretation of the observer, and that it may carry many interpretations.

    The muslims got there way with taslima and hounded her out because she question allah. Everyone is free to practice there faith.

    And I criticized them for that.
    Being free to practice one’s faith does not come with a freedom to take away other person’s freedom to expression.

    Do you know what secularism means?

    I have several posts on this blog on this topic.

    So whenever you say that "you want a a secular country where every person is free to practice there choice of faith..." [b]It sounds like a oxymoron!!![/b]. A country cannot be secular unless it's people become secular or non-religious.

    Secularism does not mean atheism. Secularism allows people to practice their faith without intervention from the state, and stops one group from imposing its faith onto others.

    BUT
    Words like "Secularism" and "tolerance" are just words. They are there only to mesmerize and to chase a dream that's impossible. Think about it.


    For people like us, Gentlemen’s Agreement, promises, accords, etc, are not mere words. We take those words pretty seriously.

    ReplyDelete
  64. Anonymous:

    Banning of beef will bring only good results in the long run. It is a well known fact that red meat eaters are more prone to fatal diseases like cancer, heart problems etc. So banning beef means a more healthier population in the future.

    I read somewhere that consuming cheese is not good either. I also read that eating sweets and sugary items is not good either. I also read that chocolates are not good either.

    So should all these banned?

    ReplyDelete
  65. Why is that a hindu country like ours,...

    When did we decide India is a Hindu country.

    ReplyDelete
  66. Sujai,

    "I would like to know what that reason is. According to me it is nothing but imposition of Hindutva’s ideology nothing else."

    Forget about what govt says, do you agree sparing cow and use other farm animals for beef?

    ReplyDelete
  67. Pre islam arabs were eating Pork.
    Will arab countries let muslims allow eating it ?

    ReplyDelete
  68. India was never and never will be a secular country. Existence of Muslim personal law and subsidy for Haj, a fact ignored many leftist intellectuals, is a testament to this.

    Secularism, that you propose, is a western concept that is much more suitable for individualistic de-reliogionized societies.

    Indian secularism is the hard balancing act of mollifying highly emotional and religious populace.

    ReplyDelete
  69. Timely post Sujai. The over enthusiasm displayed here in defending the move of the ruling Hindutva party, despite the blatant show of arrogance put forth by such an unashamedly fascist gimmick, warrants a closer look at the facts, rather a close scrutiny of the overbearing arguments used to mislead the public and the apparent success with it, which is certainly a cause for alarm, for every democratic mind..

    Let us have a closer look at these arguments
    1. That the Hindu culture does not permit the consumption of beef
    2. This is a majority practice.

    Both are utter lies. Consumption of beef was wide spread across all sections of the Hindu fold, from the upper caste Brahmins to the lower castes’, as evidenced in most of the Hindu texts, the references of which are given below. This being the fact, the modern day aversion to beef and meat in general, is purely a construct of the upper caste to maintain untouchability, to construct a demarcation between the castes’. Brahmanism on the rampage! The majority of the Indian folk consume meat including beef and the move to impose Brahmanic culture onto the majority has to be opposed tooth and nail, for every such conquest over the majority Indian is a victory for fascism.

    For those to who were on the diet of ignorance fed by Brahmanism, here are the facts. Please help yourselves for a healthier diet

    References.

    1. Rgveda : Mandala-1, Sukta:162, Mantras: 2, 7, 9-15 and 19-21
    Detailed description of the Aswamedha horse sacrifice, where the horse, along with several goats and cows is killed, cooked and eaten after offering it to Indra and other deities.

    2. Manu smriti 5: 11-37 : Details of which meat can be consumed and which should not be. All except for the camel !! can be consumed as per Manu. He goes further to declare that one who desists the consumption of meat on such occasions that warrant its consumption, are doomed to be reborn, as many as twenty one times, as animals.

    3. Satapatha Brahmana 11:7:1:3: Declares that meat sacrificed in yagnas are the best for consumption.

    4. Ramayana (multiple verses) : Several references to consumption of meat of deer and goat including priests and Brahmins. The part where Sri Ram consoles Kousalya before his exile “I will have to survive on the fruits and vegetables of the forrest, after being denied the meats (of the palace)”. The story of Jayantha also describes Sita, Ram and Laxman having dried meat. Bharata is treated with meat on his arrival to the forrest, in search of Ram, by the adhivasis. There is also Dhanu (who was liberated from the Rakshasa avatar, kabandhan) describing the various meats and fish that are available at the shores of the river Pamba for Ram and Laxman. Yet another one is where Bali recalls the meats that can be consumed as per Manusmriti Chp 5, while down by Ram’s arrow.

    ReplyDelete
  70. 5. Susruta Samhita : Suthrasthanam, Uthara ardham Chapter 46, "Anna pana vidhi" (the chapter that deals with "healthy eating and drinking habits") Describes in detail various categories of meat and their benefits, the various methods of preparation for the best effects and the medicinal value of such meat. Suchrutha also recommends meat of cow for certain respiratory diseases. (verse 89). Buffalo meat is recommended for better sleep, sex and also for breast milk.

    6. Susruta Samhita Suthra sthanam, Chapter 20, "Hithaahitheeyam" (Chapter on healthy and unhealthy practices): Broad categorization of meat that can be consumed by all beings.

    7. Ashtanga hrudayam Suthra sthanam Chapter 5: describes preparation Meat cutlet (Veshavaram in sanskrit), and also the kinds of meat (including Frog, Bat, and even Rat!) that can be used to prepare the same. The same description for meat cutlet is given in Susruta Samhita in Sutra sthanam, Chapter 46, (Anna paana vidhi) :

    8. Brhadaranyaka Upanishad 6:4:18
    atha ya icchet
    putro me pandito vigitah. samitimgamah.
    susrusitam vacam. bhasita jayeta
    sarvanvedananubruvta
    sarvamayuriyaditi
    mamsaudanam. pacayitva sarpismantamasnyatam
    isvarau janayitavai
    auksena varsabhena va

    Translation of which is ..

    And
    One who wishes that his son
    should be learned, famous
    respected
    one who speaks well-thought words
    one who knows all the vedas
    (and) one who lives his full life, then, to be capable of producing a kid, Meat from either a calf or a bull with rice
    should be cooked (and) eaten.

    The modern day upper caste fancy for vegetarianism, rather the open display and declaration of food habits, mostly one sided declarations often out of context, can be easily identified as indirect proclamations of caste, which otherwise don’t manifest in their names (tails), if such be the case at all !!..

    Yes, we have to reclaim our culture that has been hijacked by the upper castes!

    ReplyDelete
  71. Jai Prakash Rao GttimukkalaMarch 25, 2010 11:09 AM

    Sujai, I am a vegetarian by choice. I also support vegetariansm on health & environmental grounds.

    The "super size" fascination has led to obseity problems in the US while devastating Latin American rain forests.

    Having said this I do not believe the Govt. can or should regulate the food habits of millions. Christians, Muslims, SC/ST as well as Malayalees eat beef as a choice.

    The main problem here arises from the "directive principles" of the Indan constituition. These non-mandatory principles include ban on cow slaughter & prohibition. I can only imagine this was a cmpromise between puritans who wanted to enforce "dharma" and pragmatists who just wanted to get on with the paperwork.

    ReplyDelete
  72. jai prakash roa garu,

    Obesity and ill health have nothing to do with read meat ...

    Meat eating countries like japan/honkong/icelad etc have the highest life expectancy

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

    It depends on our diet balance and the way we cook (saturated fat /polysaturated fat)

    US problem is not about meat but their junk food habit and the oils/fat they use..

    Simlarly ,India is the diabetic capital of the world although we eat very less meat ...

    It depends on the amount we eat ,the way we eat and the way we cook it

    ReplyDelete
  73. the link


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_life_expectancy

    ReplyDelete
  74. Secular india Sujai?

    4% reservation for muslims.
    Why not for the Christians?

    In addition to the medical college seats and engg college seats potentially reserved 100% for them in minority colleges.

    ReplyDelete
  75. "Thou Shall Not Eat Beef!"


    ok. fine. now, take that gun off my head.

    ReplyDelete
  76. Ekalavya,

    Brilliant!

    I am a vegetarian because I dont like the taste of meat. However, I do believe we are a secular contry, and cannot impose rules inspired by religion (often misinterpreted, as in this case). I was discussing the issue with my parents, who seem very orthodox on the surface, and my father, the son of a Brahmin priest and strict vegetarian, said exactly the same thing you did, and I was about to put references from our ancient texts on this site, to show that Hindus always ate beef, when I saw you had already done such a great job.

    ReplyDelete
  77. ekalavya!
    superb! amazing!
    some research! awesome :)

    ReplyDelete
  78. Sujai,
    My comment on the subject turned out to be very long, so I hosted it in my blog.
    Sathyardhi: Banning Beef?

    ReplyDelete
  79. Cow or Bull in India are grown for help in Agriculture where it is equal to man power. This cannot be seen as religious matter. Every one in India should take responsibility of protecting them.

    For your information Cow or Bull are not grown for beaf or meat.

    Regards,

    Swaroop Kunduru.

    ReplyDelete
  80. You will never have a good idea or good opinion. Always you search for the evil in everything. Thats why your blog has got good number of hits.

    ReplyDelete
  81. Good post Sujai. I believe meat eating is good. I am staunch proponent of animal welfare. Only happy and well cared animals can produce quality meat.
    Krishna Reddy

    ReplyDelete
  82. The question is why do you have to impose your belief onto others
    The chinese eat dog meat and some in europe eat horse meat. Why does US and several other countries do not allow these cuisines to be served in the restaurants?

    The thing is creatures like horse and dog have a very special place in the social norms of the americans similar to indians and the cow.

    Hindus do not eat cow just as the americans do not eat dog or a horse.

    But there is no reason why you should impose it onto others.
    Societal structure needs to be
    maintained. The chinese do not question the americans and the same is expected from the other side. We hindu's too expect that sort of understanding. Christian norms are the benchmark.

    People can be religious in a secular country.
    Now you sound like the same govt. babu who came up with these ridiculous contradictory rules. One of these is that everyone in india is free to practice his religion. That means i can grow a 5 feet beard and my burqa clad wife can enter any public place without question and if someone asks me to shave my beard or remove my wife's burqa then it is violation of freedom. Other norms be damned.

    That means while people are free to practice their version of belief system, the state shall not make rules based on those beliefs.
    Are you sure there not mixing religion and constitution together? Look again.

    Yes I do
    Then you are not secular and intolerant :)

    The concept of “holy cow” is a Hindu phenomenon, and that too confined to certain Hindus only.
    You obviously haven't applied you cynicism to western societies.

    I asked you to find me the evidence where MF Husain said he painted Adolf Hitler in nude ONLY to humiliate him.
    I already gave up on that and had explicitly mentioned that. Hence i moved on this other platform to settle our disagreements. You have kept dodging my suggestions as if im that average desi on the internet.

    I also asked you to interpret the paintings that I linked.
    Those painting are difficult to interpret and can only be decoded by the painter. There's no need to compare those with MF hussians paintings. They are world apart.

    Being free to practice one’s faith does not come with a freedom to take away other person’s freedom to expression.
    Religion and freedom are contradictory especially islam. You cannot be a third party unless you come away from it all and see them as what they really are. So the final outlook is to see which of them are "tolerant" and very importantly "co-exist-able".

    Secularism - I have several posts on this blog on this topic.
    Are you one of those people who believe that secularism and religious freedom can co-exist together? Utopian ideas are just that - utopian.

    Secularism allows people to practice their faith without intervention from the state, and stops one group from imposing its faith onto others.
    The why does the state intervene in sati practice? Why does the state intervene in female circumcision? Why does the state stop a muslim from marrying multiple wives? Why does a state stop a muslim from beheading a pagan? What are you talking about sujai? Is it utopian?

    For people like us, Gentlemen’s Agreement, promises, accords, etc, are not mere words. We take those words pretty seriously.
    Do not get irritated. Learn to agree and disagree.

    ReplyDelete
  83. Correcting mistakes
    *Christian norms are NOT the benchmark.

    ReplyDelete
  84. Dude,

    What are you upto?

    Can you speak similarly if you were in any Islamic country.

    I totally accept that India was never a secular country. AND It need not be.

    It will be and should be a Hindu country. Hinduism is just not a religion... its much above that.

    Regards
    Ravikanth

    ReplyDelete
  85. BTW France has not banned the burqa (yet). The present ban is on "conspicous religious symbols" in public schools (funded by the Govt.). Sarkozy's statements do not constituite French law (as of now)

    ReplyDelete
  86. "though shall not eat beef"

    okay! okay! Please dont kill me!!

    ReplyDelete
  87. Ha ha....Anuj...hats off...cannot agree more. Infact am visiting this blog to read your posts

    ReplyDelete
  88. Sujai :
    So will u also promote cannibalism ???
    promoting telegana with such ways shows ur attitude regarding our country religion & its vast cultural history ,,...

    India is a hindu country, which had rich cultural heritage. Its traditional values and culture which got looted by invasion of mugals and then by the British. They not only looted this country of its heritage but made the people of this country to get converted to their religion & also introduced their way of thinking....

    All the best for dividing the country into bits and pieces....

    ReplyDelete
  89. Jai Prakash Rao GottimukkalaApril 08, 2010 11:49 AM

    Sujai, April 07, 2010 is a red letter day in Telangana history. Our andha “brothers” have so far used the choicest language to describe the Telangana culture & people. We have been called lazy, shiftless, kaamchor, thieves, wicked, doras, slaves, Naxalites, Khalistanis, Talibans, Hindu & Muslim zealots, separatists etc. just when I thought there is no new abuse, our “Anonymous andha fiend” comes along on April 07, 2010 3:58 AM accusing us of promoting cannibalism :)

    Shayad unka aakhri ho yeh sitam
    Har sitam yeh soch kar rahgaye

    ReplyDelete
  90. @JaiPrakash,
    I am not sure where Anonymous is from, but I beg to differ on your opinion about him. He addressed Sujai and did not generalize those attributes to entire Telanganites.

    I also agree with his opinion on India being a Hindu country always.

    ReplyDelete
  91. A final nail in the coffin of 'Telangana' state is being planned now in Delhi, Chattisgarh and Hyderabad. Pest infestation will be exterminated.

    ReplyDelete
  92. Sujai, T_bidda etc...
    Ur T-supporting brothers r waging a war on India. U guys should return them the favour by joining their movement.

    We will exterminate and eradicate all the pests who killed CRPF men and are a blot on civilized society. The revenge that is about to come will flush out maoists in OU and other T regions. The endgame for people weakening India internally is NEAR.

    ReplyDelete
  93. milk has become dearer - so much for all those who thought banning beef will bring it in plenty.
    huh

    ReplyDelete
  94. Not eating beef is the reason why we Indians can't have a single Fast bowler, while our neighbour paki has lots ...

    ReplyDelete
  95. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oMRoyDetz0Y

    ReplyDelete
  96. To all of you,

    Could you estimate the population of cows and sheeps if they had not been eaten up by people? just think logical, could you have leather garments, shoes etc? In gujrat, it was banned and there was no place left on main roads of gujrat where you find cows sitting disrupting the traffic and moreover people can't provide shelter and food to them as they were growing in numbers so what they did?? they started to send them to other countries to get slaughtered. Why don't you oppose indian government who allows beef to be exported to other countries. cow is sustainer, motherhood what nonsense, this is only thing which divides people. in vedas it has been told that sustainer of life is cow???? sustainer of life can be only the GOD no one else. Read your books completely.

    ReplyDelete
  97. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  98. This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Open_Terrace:

    I am not saying all are maoists. I am saying that the maoists and their supporters who are cheering for T will be punished for their anti-national activities and for killing police. Those who were hiding in OU, inciting people in the name of justice and denying the presence of terrorists/maoists should be punished for playing to their tunes and taking up their agenda of destabilizing the country with their actions.

    ReplyDelete
  100. This guy Nagaraj wrote a letter to SKC and he is educating them on state formation etc. In the united AP, which will stay united no matter what, even T women are sluts, going by ur logic. U r denigrating INDIAN women... u pathetic ****head.

    ReplyDelete
  101. Hey Nagaraj Pingili
    You've denigrated women and transgressed all the moralities and decency.What the hell you know about Chilkaluripeta and Amallapuram?Do you know the backwardness and circumstances under which one becomes a sex worker.Did you study their conditions ? What do you know about them?
    You a member of Tracking Telangana forum in which fellows from Anveshi the organization which is involved in uplifting women.How would they appreciate to what u wrote ?
    Do they subscribe to your lewd ideas you moron? Is this a brand of Telangana campaign? You are besmirching the entire Telangana Campaign.The Sri Krishna Committee would know about the malice unleashed on women by so called Telangana intellectuals like you. A woman is a woman whether she is from Andhra or your Warangal or in Ethopia.Is unbecoming of an educated moron like you to bark like that.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Prasad,
    "Sujai, T_bidda etc...
    Ur T-supporting brothers r waging a war on India. U guys should return them the favour by joining their movement."
    Explain the logic behind asking Sujai, T-bidda and all the etcetera's (being a telanganiate and seeking an end to this age old mess of state integration, even I belong to that etc group) to join the Maoists? If you and Osama happen to sit in the same bus, travel in the same direction (inspite of your distinies), would you team up with him?? Would you represent\buy all his idealogy? What right do you have to humiliate us - the telangana supporters by asking us to join an anti-national group?
    "We will exterminate and eradicate all the pests..."
    What rot you are talking and in what context? Who are the 'We' you are referring to? Does that include Sujai, T-bidda and the etc's also? Or Just you and your so self-claimed patriots in the name of 'united AP' and just targetting Hyderabad's separation from Telangana?
    "even T women are sluts" - I won't even ask you whether that wasn't denigrating the woman or not!

    TO ALL WOMAN FRATTERNITY: That statement was solely aimed to show how much sentiments\feelings would be hurt bad when issues are generalised. You have every right to denounce me for using you woman fratternity. I shall endure all your wrath humbly. My due apologies! (Not to Prasad nor to some coward who prefers to sit in a corner of a house in Massachusetts - Anonimously, I shall fittingly expose his double standards when he comes out in public)

    ReplyDelete
  103. I condemm Prasad too for his slut remark.Lets keep this civil and lets not lose our decency.There are powerful words in English to bring out the feelings truly.Andhra or Telagana or women from anywhere need to be respected.

    ReplyDelete
  104. Tribute to B.R.Ambedkar:

    Violence, bandhs, street protests, lies and hatred against fellow Indians are all unconstitutional.

    From the archives of Constitution of India:
    "If we wish to maintain democracy not merely in form, but also in fact, what must we do? The first thing in my judgement we must do is to hold fast to constitutional methods of achieving our social and economic objectives. It means we must abandon the bloody methods of revolution. It means that we must abandon the method of civil disobedience, non-cooperation and satyagraha. When there was no way left for constitutional methods for achieving economic and social objectives, there was a great deal of justification for unconstitutional methods. But where constitutional methods are open, there can be no justification for these unconstitutional methods. These methods are nothing but the Grammar of Anarchy and the sooner they are abandoned, the better for us."

    The present T movement is following the grammar of anarchy and sooner it is abandoned, better for India so that we can focus on solutions for underdevelopment in India, not just for a region or hypothetical state. STOP the hate speech against fellow Indians, isolate the maoists and help our police crush them.

    ReplyDelete
  105. Huh! Safely ignoring to answer my questions above and again jumping along with a subject out of context??
    Ok Prasad, I will again chase you on your ground! You are talking about respecting the constitution! Does the constitution or Ambedkar gave you any special provisions to sling mud at Telangana supporters alleging them as Maoists? Isn't this what you said above?
    "The revenge that is about to come will flush out maoists in OU and other T regions" and then,
    "Those who were hiding in OU, inciting people in the name of justice and denying the presence of terrorists/maoists...".
    Come on I dare you to show the first hand evidence of a single Maoist in OU, I will withdraw my petition to SKC. Do you have any such? Even the High court of AP asked the state government to produce such evidences and the govt failed. Didn't you read this news yesterday dude? or conviniently ignored it?
    http://www.deccanchronicle.com/hyderabad/6-cops-indicted-ou-violence-047
    Whose fault was that? Were there any maoists found in that CID probe?

    "...so that we can focus on solutions for underdevelopment in India..."
    You are referring to Ambedkar and Constitution of India, did you file your response to the SKC? Where is it? What solutions did you suggest to 'focus on the development' of Telangana? Ok leave Telangana, that's your least interest area. Any solutions suggested by you to SKC to develop Rayalaseema and how to tackle the factionism there? Or Any focused solution from you suggested to SKC to develop Uttarandhra?

    Hey Unionist,
    Mere talking about unionism and intruding into Telangana bloggers space with, out of context subjects and revenge theories by sitting in Air conditioned warmth rooms in United states doesn't suffix to the development of this Union. Come down, continue to live your life in the parching summers, dry monsoons, coldless winters of Telangana. Or amidst those of Rayalaseema? Ever walkied through the roadless forests of Adilabad or Srikakulam tribal villages to witness the living conditions there?
    Stop dreaming the cinematic revenge stories, go with a gun to join the Salwajudum and kill atleast one Maoist! Weren't Naxalites\Maoists ever killed in this state? Does that gonna stop the leftist extremism?
    Come on Man, STOP your revenge speeches and START a LOVE SPEECH at fellow Indians. Live in a tribal village or sponsor to adopt a tribal village to educate them, address their under development and PREVENT them from becoming preys Maoism aka China sponsored terrorism!
    PS: Answer my questions or Stay away !!

    ReplyDelete
  106. The fact that hindus shouldn't eat beef is a stupid brahmin imposed element in religion just like untouchability or sati. Nowhere the bhagawat gita says that cows should be eaten. Some hindus say that cows shouldn't be eaten because it gives milk. Are we so selfish? then what about male cows and old cows. There are good source of protein for malnourished

    ReplyDelete
  107. To elle

    Bhagwat gita also does not say you should not take marijuana or heroin. Go ahead and take it.

    Brahmins are never majority in India. You have a choice to listen/not to listen. You do not need to call them stupid.

    Most of the americans do not eat dog meat and it is banned in america. But Koreans do eat and it.

    It is the same way most of indians do not eat beef. It should be banned. But americans do eat.

    No body eats human meat. The exception is some people in varanasi eat human meat too.

    It is about what you want in your society. It is not about customs/religion/caste.

    ReplyDelete
  108. Terrace:
    "Does the constitution or Ambedkar gave you any special provisions to sling mud at Telangana supporters alleging them as Maoists?"

    I will sling mud at people who threaten Indian union with separatist agenda built on lies and hatred towards fellow Indian citizens (in Andhra and rayalseema).

    "Come on I dare you to show the first hand evidence of a single Maoist in OU"

    I do not have a 'first hand' proof of climate change, corruption and criminalization of politics, presence of god etc. Does it mean they are lies and imagination? I go by the statements and actions of people colluding with maoists and naxals against Indian union.

    "You are referring to Ambedkar and Constitution of India, did you file your response to the SKC?"

    Yes

    "Where is it?"

    It is with SKC :)

    "What solutions did you suggest to 'focus on the development' of Telangana?"

    http://www.loksatta.org/cms/documents/skc.pdf


    Ok leave Telangana, that's your least interest area. Any solutions suggested by you to SKC to develop Rayalaseema and how to tackle the factionism there? Or Any focused solution from you suggested to SKC to develop Uttarandhra?"

    Nice to see that u consider then less developed? Why are u leaving them behind? is it because they were not ruled by Nizam like you?

    "Ever walkied through the roadless forests of Adilabad or Srikakulam tribal villages to witness the living conditions there?"

    Yes, my village is in Nalgonda and I grew up in Karimnagar. Now, u call me names because I consider underdevelopment across India as a problem, not just T-region.

    "STOP your revenge speeches and START a LOVE SPEECH at fellow Indians"

    Sure. If T state is not given based on fictitious lies, u need to show the same love towards people of other regions.

    ReplyDelete
  109. @Prasad's:
    "I will sling mud at people..."
    Thanks for the confession!!
    That's what was the main point of discussion and what I was trying to prove about your first comment.
    I don't have any proof that you belong to Nalgonda or ever lived in Karimnagar, so I may have to consider you as some one from Seema-Andhra who bought some real estate at Hyderabad and desparately opposing Telangana state formation. You have proved to the readers of this blog the double standards and baseless arguements of anti-Telangana udyamam aka 'samaikyandhra udyamam'. But I do have proofs that Prasad alias Raj alias Anonymous are all one and same who live in Everett, Massachussets, USA and posting comments with different names. But it's ok, Telanganites never expects any fairness from faked 'samaikyandhra udyamakaarulu'. All the best with all your desperate attempts and Keep slinging the mud!

    ReplyDelete
  110. Ur leader KCR threatens India with Civil war if T state is not given. Let all the patriotic Indians come out and condemn the anti-national comments he made to SKC. Otherwise, there is no difference between maoists and these T supporters who are threatening India with civil war. Where are Sujai and other T supporters, who are hesitating to criticize and condemn their leader's statements? Those who threaten India with civil war will meet the same treatment as Indian enemies.

    ReplyDelete
  111. 1946-47 time lo md ali jinnah said "we shall have either India divided or destroyed"
    ivalla pakistan paristhithi ento kalla mundu kanipistindi

    India lo civil war cheyadam bindranwale valane avvaledu,kcr ki unda antha dammu?

    ReplyDelete
  112. sujai, if i stop reading your blogs from now on, because of this post, u wont kill me, right??

    please, have some mercy. i have a family. [crying eyes out]

    ReplyDelete
  113. Sujai,
    Majority of us are comfortable with reservation policy of the government. The lower caste were not given / denied opportunity. We need it now. Hindu's right to live freely were denied in the last 400 years of foreign rule (Mughals were /are invaders). It is in Hindus Genetics to come out of islamic and christianic influence. Why is not acceptable if it comes against some religion that had denied them opportunity. If you accept Caste will be there forever in this Holy Land, then religious view should also be acceptable. We cannot have different yard stick.

    Discrimination will exists for ever in this whole world. It was caste based before in India, now it is of another form and tomorrow it will take another form. We can never see an ideal society.

    We need to accept that Hinduism is not religion but way of life.
    As far as I know, Hinduism has 6 different religions in it.
    Shiva,
    Vishnu,
    Sakthi,
    Vinayaga,
    Subramanya and
    Surya
    are the 6 major gods worshiped and each religion has a name for it.
    We cannot expect a person following faith of Shiva to adopt the customs of a person following Surya. And for example Saivsm itself has 4 sects within it.
    You are trying to comment on Hinduism ignoring the facts. Hindutuva is not about religion, it’s about the culture of this Land.

    ReplyDelete
  114. The good news is that there is no ban on beef.
    The comments here are ridiculous. LOL cow will become extinct someone said. Do you know that the cow is a product of artificial selection? Like Poultry. They cannot go extinct so long as there is a market !! Saudi is hardly the model state ! And who wants a hindu state? I am born as a hindu and an atheist. I want a secular state and as Sujai said India is not really one yet. And even brahmins ate beef please see Jha's work on it.

    http://www.hinduonnet.com/2001/08/14/stories/13140833.htm
    Thor

    ReplyDelete
  115. Read the post, and skimmed thru the comments. As usual, Sujai has formed his opinion on half knowledge and misreading of simple English.

    1.There is no ban on consuming beef any where in India.
    2.Only cow slaughter for food has been banned in Karnataka, and some other States in India.
    3.Article 48 of Indian Constitution which deals with Organisation of agriculture and animal husbandry says —
    “The State shall endeavour to organize agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall , in particular , take steps for preserving and improving the breeds , and prohibiting the slaughter of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle.”

    So, one can not run an abattoir in Karnataka now with the express intention of making beef out of perfectly healthy cows.One can still run an abattoir to process the skin, horns and any other body parts of cows that die naturally. Restaurants can of course procure beef from out side and sell it to those who want it.

    And since Sujai is an entrepreneur, I suggest he compare the cost of maintaining cattle for agricultural/dairy purposes, against the farming of cows mainly for meat purposes.Which one is more economical, more 'Green'?

    ReplyDelete
  116. Kumar Narasimha:

    As usual, Sujai has formed his opinion on half knowledge and misreading of simple English.

    I guess Times of India today has tried to clarify my position. :-)

    This is what it writes about the Bill:

    1.No person shall possess, sell or transport or cause to be transported, beef or beef products.
    2.Transportation of cattle from the state to other states for slaughter is banned.
    3.Prohibition of sale, purchase or disposal of cattle for slaughter. If authorities suspect that a person has sold his cattle for slaughter, then such a person is also punished.

    1.There is no ban on consuming beef any where in India.

    How can someone consume beef without possessing it?

    Restaurants can of course procure beef from out side and sell it to those who want it.

    How can restaurants procure beef from outside without transporting it?

    ReplyDelete
  117. Sujai,

    I tried downloding the text of the bill that has been passed.The Web page did not work :)

    Even assuming the reporters are correct, I don't see how a ban on consuming beef could be implemented.(like the ban on smoking in public places for example).I will agree that sale and consuming of beef should be allowed, and interested parties have a good chance to get a favorable judgement from the High Court on this clause.

    But the ban on cow slaughter is based on a Constitutional direction and I have mentioned it in my earlier comment.Cow slaughter is banned in J&K as well.Even Iran has banned cow slaughter for economic and environmental reasons.

    My objection to your post and various other protests about this bill is to the attempt to give a 'communal colour' to this bill.If the protest is limited to the ban on sale and consuming of beef, there would be many supporters including myself, even though I don't consume beef my self.

    And please answer my question on the economical and environmental impact of 'farming cows for meat' against 'farming cows for milk/agricultural purposes'.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. @Kumar Narasimha, the operating word is "cow", its not pig nor it is chicken, nor it is any other animal. If you want to take the environmental impact of farming animals for meat, you start with chicken. Well, that would be as sin as incest. right?.

      Delete
  118. Jai GottimukkalaJuly 02, 2010 5:18 PM

    @Kumar Narasimha, to the extent I know your assertin that the ban on cow slaughter is based on a "Constitutional direction" relates to the directive priciples, not enforceable. As I remember these principles include prohibition too (a failed experiment).

    ReplyDelete
  119. Kumar Narasimha:

    Even Iran has banned cow slaughter for economic and environmental reasons.

    Are you suggesting that Karnataka is banning cow slaughter and consumption of beef for 'economic and environmental reasons'?

    Look at all the arguments provided by the BJP government of Karnataka justifying this ban. There is no mention of economic or environmental reasons in it.

    Lets not attribute a reason to this cause which does not exist.

    Did this BJP government make a report on the 'economic and environmental reasons' against beef (from cow) vs. against mutton (from goat)?

    ReplyDelete
  120. Kumar Narasimha:

    "On the suggestions by various religious mutts and on the lines of other states, a bill to ban cow slaughter will be tabled in next Legislature session," Chief Minister, Mr B.S. Yeddyurappa said.

    Does it look like BJP government of Karnataka was concerned with environmental issues or religious issues?

    link

    ReplyDelete
  121. Kumar Narasimha:

    Yeddyurappa highlighted the medicinal benefits of cow urine which have been proved by research.

    link

    ReplyDelete
  122. Dear Sujai, you have become a hypocrite! you stay in Bangalore, criticize bangalore. Why do you link two subjects to Telangana? Why don't you shut down your business in Bangalore and work for full time to achieve and preach what you believe!!

    ReplyDelete
  123. Sujai,

    No where have I suggested that the BJP Govt has done it for a specific reason.I just said Iran has done it for environmental reasons.I am not sure why J&K did it.

    I only object to critics giving this a communal color just because it is a BJP govt.

    The various mutts advising against cow slaughter does not automatically make it communal.It makes it 'cultural' because since thousands of years, cow has been venerated in India as 'kaam dhenu'.The reason for it is the economic value behind rearing cows.I don't have to tell you I hope, that it is a tradition in Oriental civilisations to mask economic reasons with more palatable religious reasons.

    Going forward, if I comment again on your blog posts, I will explain every nuance clearly so that you don't automatically assume stuff that I have not said or meant.

    And you have still not answered my question about the environmental impact of cows for dairy and agri Vs cows for purely meat purposes.

    @Jai Gottimukkala: Please read the Constitution of India again, and understand the rationale behind the directive principles of State policy.Simply put, I can't sue the Govt if they do not implement a specific DP such as right to education, for example.But the Principles have been put in place so that Govts.(Union and State) will use them to frame the appropriate policies and legislative acts.Therefore, if any State Govt bans cow slaughter, they are simply following the guidance from the Constitution.Hope this helps.

    ReplyDelete
  124. Jai GottikummalaJuly 08, 2010 5:43 PM

    @Kumar Narasimha, you said "I can't sue the Govt if they do not implement a specific DP" which is the same as my phrase "not enforceable". While you give the example of "right to education", I referred to "prohibition" and called it a failed experiment. In other words, we appear to agree on the crux even if we differ on detail.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Kumar Narasimha:

    No where have I suggested that the BJP Govt has done it for a specific reason.

    I believe it has done it for ‘religious’ reasons. That’s because of the statements made by Karnataka CM, its ministers and also the ministers of other states when they proceeded with ban on beef. None of them cited environment reasons as the justification.

    I only object to critics giving this a communal color just because it is a BJP govt.

    Well, if it is not ‘communal’ then it is definitely ‘religious’. I don’t see any other reason for BJP government doing it.

    It makes it 'cultural' because since thousands of years, cow has been venerated in India as 'kaam dhenu'.

    And yet, many lower castes have been consuming beef for thousands of years. So, what about protecting their culture? Are they not Indians?

    And you have still not answered my question about the environmental impact of cows for dairy and agri Vs cows for purely meat purposes.

    The reason I have not answered that question is because ‘environmental impact’ has not been discussed in the current discussion. There is not a single hint that the current government has banned beef for environmental impact. A complete ban on beef, its transportation, and its sale does not suggest that BJP government was actually keen on classifying which cows are serving dairy/agri and which were not.

    If indeed BJP government cites ‘environmental impact’ as one of the reasons for banning beef, I would like to get into the discussion.

    ReplyDelete
  126. Sujai,

    I support the ban on cow slaughter because of its 'green' nature.I have no need to feel bad about the issue because some politicians played to one gallery over the other.

    And an added reason is the constitutional direction to implement such a policy.I am happy that one more State govt is taking this directive principle seriously because the DPs have been put in there for a reason.Surely, Dr.Ambedkar and others did not include it in there for communal or religious reasons? And don't you think the Constituent Assembly was aware of the beef eating habits of several communities in India?

    ReplyDelete
  127. Kumar Narasimha:

    I support the ban on cow slaughter because of its 'green' nature.

    Why is there a ban only on beef? How about ban on mutton? How about ban on chicken? Are they not ‘green’?

    What about rice fields and wheat fields which consume forests? Should we not ban rice and wheat for ‘green’ reasons?

    ReplyDelete
  128. "What about rice fields and wheat fields which consume forests? Should we not ban rice and wheat for ‘green’ reasons?"

    ROFLMAO ! Ok..as your debate has come to depend on such strawmen arguments, I shall leave the debate now.Thanks for being a nice host.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Sujai,
    One thing is sure...you must be from Kerala. Here at my place, beef is a delicacy. I guess people are more tolerant here.

    I recall my experience in Delhi, I once asked a Delhi friend of mine, where I could get beef. My friend was horrified to learn that being a Hindu i eat beef! I was disappointed to know that you don't get beef at Delhi.

    However, I must admit that I quit eating beef now. Not because I'm religious, but it has taken a toll on my health. I was a very big fan of beef and beer; later found that my cholestrol levels were quite high. The doctor advised me to avoid red meat ( but i still have it once in a while)

    It's sad that Karnataka Governement has banned beef. As per the Directive principles of State Policy, the state is encouraged by the constitution makers to impose prohibition and prevent slaughter of cows.

    Infact, the main problem with India and all government institutions is that there is a cultural mismatch. We have copied western institutions and western law, but these do not fit into our culture. Only the elite in this country will be able to enjoy the benefits as envisioned by the founding fathers of the Indian constitution.

    There are places in India where dalits are murdered for cow slaughter!! It is sad that human life is valued lesser than that of an animal!

    ReplyDelete
  130. http://www.outlookindia.com/article.aspx?213159#

    A Brahmin's Cow Tales

    Putting here for reference...

    . "If they want to ban my book, then they will have to ban the Vedas, the Upanishads, the Sutras and the epics. Where will they stop? I have given evidence, if they have counter-evidence, why don't they come forward with it? But they are so illiterate, they haven't even heard of those texts, let alone read them. I have texts and they go by blind faith," he says. "That is what a historian can and should do: counter faith with facts," he adds.

    ReplyDelete
  131. Let me clear one thing i'm a veg. but don't see anything wrong in eating meat .
    but as far as eating meat of cow is concerned and rights of minority here my logic
    'some find burning gita and quran or national flag of india at home and restraunts enjoyable'
    now he is a minority and obviously many people condemn him . so will his rights be protected ????
    simple and straight cow slaughter hurt sentiments of people . it's religious .
    now how will you decide which sentiments to respect and which to not , just by looking on other factors associated with it . and i think they too support ban on cow slaughter
    g meat .
    but as far as eating meat of cow is concerned and rights of minority here my logic
    'some find burning gita and quran or national flag of india at home and restraunts enjoyable'
    now he is a minority and obviously many people condemn him . so will his rights be protected ????
    simple and straight cow slaughter hurt sentiments of people . it's religious .
    now how will you decide which sentiments to respect and which to not , just by looking on other factors associated with it . and i think they too support ban on cow slaughter

    ReplyDelete
  132. | What about rice fields and wheat fields which consume forests?
    | Should we not ban rice and wheat for ‘green’ reasons?

    :) You have stooped low here. That's a rarity. If you look at right place on the web, you will know more about what's good for planet earth and what's not. Here's something for starters:

    http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2008/sep/07/food.foodanddrink?guni=Article:in%20body%20link

    ReplyDelete

Dear Commenters:
Please identify yourself. At least use a pseudonym. Otherwise there will be too many *Anonymous*; making it confusing.

Do NOT write personal information or whereabouts about the author or other commenters. You are free to write about yourself. Please do not use abusive language. Do not indulge in personal attacks and insults.

Write comments which are relevant and make sense so that the debate remains healthy.