Umesh:
It would have helped if you would have shown us ( you ought to
know since you make the assertion) where in the constitution it
bestows special privileges that are not available to the majority
in
I am well aware of the frequent assertions by certain assam
netters how those who don't like certain provisions of the
constitution, that Ram explains is a borrowed one just a mere 55
years back, and thus implying might be defective, ought to go and
amend it. But they conveniently forget (and no doubt believes
that others can't see it) the Catch 22 in it: HOW does a small group
of people, like for example Assam, effect a constitutional amendment,
in the face of opposition or apathy of the vast numbers of aliens who
dominate their lives and interests?
At 6:39 PM +0100 5/4/06, umesh sharma wrote:
C-da,
*** Please do and please do share. For you shall do the hapless,oppressed majority of India an enormous favor.
Here you go .
http://www.pucl.org/Topics/Academia/2003/minority-institutions.htm Article 29 and 30 discuss special rights for minorities in India. http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/welcome.html for Indian constitution
According to this only - minority run institutions are kept out of the purview of reservations for Dalits in admissions and are allowed to keep 50% of their seats reserved for their own members. Even in USA no institution can discriminate in admissions based on religion, ethnicity or race.
Current debate about 50% reservations for Dalits in IITs, IIMs and private unaided educational institutions - keep out minority run institutions out of the purview.
Our discussion was about why Indian courts not heed the appeal by Hindu groups to ban any film/books which they say hurts their religious sensitivity - and would and did in case of "sins" a movie of forbidden love -a real tale - between a Jesuit priest and his female married disciple or banning of anti-Islamic book "Satanic Verses" by Salman Rushdie - even without reading it.
It may not have a causal linkage but certainly there is high correlation between being a minority in India and having favorable judgements in Indian courts and Legislation by Indian Parliament.
Umesh
Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
At 1:21 AM +0100 5/4/06, umesh sharma wrote:
50% of seats in educational institutions run by minorities are reserved for members of their own faith.
*** Tsk, tsk! How unfair to the majority! My heart bleeds :-)!
Govt cannot interfere in institutions run by minorities -- cannot enforce reservation for Dalits in them, cannot dictate rules -unlike in secualr or Hindu run ones .
*** Can you help us understand this by referring to the law and its wording?
Though linguistic and religious minorities are identified - mostly religous minorities are vocal.
*** Say what?
I wonder how have you forgotten the special rights of minorities . If I remember correctly C-da it was you who had done internet search to identify that particular Article of Indian constitution which promoted those rights.
*** I did? Well I learn something everyday Umesh. Thanks for reminding me. Except I still don't remember EVER doing that. Must be the onset of senile dementia or Alzheimer's rapture or some such thing.
ALso there is the National Commission for Minorities -- no such for Majorities (Hindus/majority) .
*** Oh, my gosh! How very unfair!!
If you wish we can dig up more facts.
*** Please do and please do share. For you shall do the hapless,oppressed majority of India an enormous favor.
Umesh
Chan Mahanta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>Religious minorities have special rights in India as per Indian constitution.*** Really? What rights do the minority religions have that the majority religion/s are deprived of?
At 10:53 PM +0100 5/3/06, umesh sharma wrote:
Religious minorities have special rights in India as per Indian constitution. Period.
Law favors their views. Whether it is about reservation in admissions in educational institutions or films hurting religous sentiments - minorities have a special status.
Once you correct that imbalance in the constitution - perhaps then court could become as viable a course of corrective action for Hindus as for Christians or Muslims.
What hurts sentiments is a subjective issue - and educated people in India in general are afraid of seeming boorish by hurting sentiments of those who follow faiths popular in the West. Noone cares so much about hurting sentimenst of Sikhs or Jains or Buddhists or Hindus .
Umesh
Rajen Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
My question then is well why then the Hindus did not protest against the film, like the Kerela Christians did?
Where is the protest to ban the film?
Why the Hindus did not go to court to stop the film?
And if there was why it failed?
Don't say the Muslims and the Christians demanded to see the film?
The way I see it, the Hindus have failed to make case like the Kerela Christians and they are crying now.
Please note I may be wrong on some assumptions, I am going with what you are posting and trying to make a case.
from what you are posting, something is fishy.
RB
----- Original Message -----
From: umesh sharma
To: Rajen Barua ; [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 3:07 PM
Subject: Re: [Assam] NYTimes.com: Film Ignites the Wrath of HinduFundamentalists
Rajen-da,
The common thread is that when someone raises an issue which presents the negative aspects of a group its members raise an outcry.
Recently a Indian film (called "Sins" http://www.indiaglitz.com/channels/hindi/review/7455.html ) based on a real story of a Roman Catholic Priest from Kerala sexually harassed an underage teenager --raised a similar outcry by Indian Bishops and other Catholic priests who even went to courts and got a stay against its screening. Why didn't the (westernized) secularists say that it was alright to screen that story in India - then they defended minority rights.
About Da Vinchi Code (about Christ's love story with Mary Mag.) and RC Pope's response- you know better.
Tomorrow someone would come up with a film about Prophet Muhammad or about Marx-Engels love story which would be banned in Islamic countires and China /Cuba etc respectively.
Umesh
Rajen Barua <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why you try to bring the similarities of other religions?
Just to show that it is a matter-of-fact thing nothing to get excited about?
Anyway the similarities did not match.
RB
----- Original Message -----
From: umesh sharma
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] ; [email protected]
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2006 9:19 AM
Subject: Re: [Assam] NYTimes.com: Film Ignites the Wrath of HinduFundamentalists
Not surprising. Just like the Pope Benedict's ire against Da Vinchi Code and Gospel of Judas or like Muslim demonstrations against cartoons of Prophet Muhammad.
Communists would perhaps object to the notion that Marx and Engels were gay lovers -as has been recently reported.
:)
Umesh
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
footer { FONT-SIZE: 10px; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } TD.footer { FONT-SIZE: 10px; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } A.footer { FONT-SIZE: 10px; COLOR: #000066; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } FONT.emailHeader { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 13px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 4px; COLOR: #cc6633; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } bgc1 { BACKGROUND-COLOR: #f5f4f4 } TD.bgc1 { BACKGROUND-COLOR: #f5f4f4 } bgc2 { BACKGROUND-COLOR: #f8f8f8 } TD.bgc2 { BACKGROUND-COLOR: #f8f8f8 } bodycopy { FONT-SIZE: 12px; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } TD.bodycopy { FONT-SIZE: 12px; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } A.bodycopy { FONT-SIZE: 12px; COLOR: #000066; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } SMALL { FONT-SIZE: 11px; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } TD.small { FONT-SIZE: 11px; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } A.small { FONT-SIZE: 11px; COLOR: #000066; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } advertisement { FONT-SIZE: 9px; COLOR: #999999; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } TD.advertisement { FONT-SIZE: 9px; COLOR: #999999; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } A.advertisement { FONT-SIZE: 9px; COLOR: #000066; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } contextadbg { BORDER-TOP: #bfbfbf 1px solid; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 3px; BORDER-BOTTOM: #bfbfbf 1px solid } contextadheader { FONT-WEIGHT: bold; FONT-SIZE: 11px; COLOR: #98bc61; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } contextaddisclaimer { FONT-SIZE: 10px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 8px; COLOR: #999999; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } contextadtext { PADDING-RIGHT: 11px; PADDING-LEFT: 11px; FONT-SIZE: 11px; MARGIN-BOTTOM: 3px; PADDING-BOTTOM: 8px; COLOR: #000000; PADDING-TOP: 8px; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif } contextAdMiscText { PADDING-RIGHT: 11px; PADDING-LEFT: 11px; FONT-SIZE: 11px; COLOR: #000000; FONT-FAMILY: arial,helvetica,sans-serif }
This page was sent to you by: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Message from sender:
>From NYT
MOVIES | May 3, 2006
Film Ignites the Wrath of Hindu Fundamentalists
By ELISABETH BUMILLER
Deepa Mehta's new film, "Water," about the degradation of Hindu widows in India in the 1930's, has sparked protests from its onset.
Umesh Sharma
5121 Lackawanna ST
College Park, MD 20740
1-202-215-4328 [Cell Phone]
Ed.M. - International Education Policy
Harvard Graduate School of Education,
Harvard University,
Class of 2005
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________ assam mailing list [email protected] http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
![](""http://uk.f604.mail.yahoo.com/ym/""http://uk.f604.mail.yahoo.com/ym/'"http://www.nytimes.com/adx/bin/adx_click.html?type=goto&page=www.nytimes.com/yr/mo/day/movies&pos=TopRight-EmailThis&camp=foxsearch2006-emailtools04-nyt5&ad=Water_logo_88x31_2K.gif&go){kind=link}