*** As long as the ones who can't do it without their worship of the God/s of their choice and as long as they don't do it at the public expense they ought to be free to go do it wherever they wish to. There is NOTHING to prevent them from doing it.
But nooo---the Gujarati Hindus HAVE to assert the supremacy of their gods, their religion, over everybody else's, at the public's expense. That is what happened and their high-court asserted it , while waving that 'jhanda' of a 'secular desi demokrasy'. On Feb 11, 2011, at 11:30 AM, Dilip Deka wrote: > > Let's say a group of people associated with the construction of the new > courthouse annex just cannot do without a Bhumipuja but separation of state > and church(or temple) will not allow them to perform the Puja at the site of > the courthouse. So the group goes and performs the Puja at a nearby > temple.Will the blessings from their God/god/goddess still transfer to the > courthouse? :-) :-) > If so, there is the solution.No one can stop the group from feeling good by > performing the Puja at the temple. The temple belongs to the Hindus since > their devotees finance and run it. On the other hand the courthouse belongs > to all - used by all and funded with state (democratic?) money. Will the > Hindu majority accept it? Comments? > Dilip Deka > > --- On Fri, 2/11/11, Chan Mahanta <[email protected]> wrote: > > > From: Chan Mahanta <[email protected]> > Subject: Re: [Assam] Secularism in USA and India > To: "A Mailing list for people interested in Assam from around the world" > <[email protected]> > Date: Friday, February 11, 2011, 9:48 AM > > >> This act of lighting a lamp and chanting Sanskrit slokas too is not >> considered religious but cultural. > > *** I can understand that, to a point. But to perform Bhumi Puja at the > courthouse site goes far beyond following a cultural > tradition. BTW, WHOSE tradition is it to chant Sanskrit "slokas" and > lighting lamps. Are non-Hindu traditions similarly > followed in such pluralistic societies where there are many religious > traditions ? > >> This definition of secularism has been sanctified by years of prevailing >> usage and case law. > > *** It is an attempt to revise the English language. How can "absence of > religion" be the SAME as "In India, secularism means > equal treatment of all religions." It is, at best a nefarious ploy at > deception, isn't it? > > > > > > > On Feb 11, 2011, at 9:24 AM, Rajiv Baruah wrote: > >> In USA, secularism means absence of religion. In India, secularism means >> equal treatment of all religions. Thus the multi-faith prayers during >> "state" functions. This definition of secularism has been sanctified by >> years of prevailing usage and case law. There is also the very widespread >> practice of lighting lamps and chanting a few Sanskrit slokas to bless the >> start of many functions. This act of lighting a lamp and chanting Sanskrit >> slokas too is not considered religious but cultural. >> >> Trust this clarifies. >> >> Best regards >> >> Rajiv >> >> >> >> >> >> Sent from my iPad >> _______________________________________________ >> assam mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org > > > _______________________________________________ > assam mailing list > [email protected] > http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org > _______________________________________________ > assam mailing list > [email protected] > http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org _______________________________________________ assam mailing list [email protected] http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
