This is a cute one! > the cinemas, they need not prove their patriotism at all. For those who > watch movies thrice a week, they will now need to stand up thrice to prove > their patriotism. With a popcorn in one hand and a coke in the other.
Just remember - you will be standing up for the American brand Coke. And the pop-corn? Well, that's an American thing too! Jim Fernandes Scarsdale, New York. On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 17:06:10 +0530, Sandeep Heble <[email protected]> wrote: > The Supreme Court says the National Anthem must now be compulsorily played > in Cinemas and all must stand up. I guess everybody seems to be in the mood > of surgical strikes these days. This time, it’s the Supreme Court’s turn to > hit those who go to the cinemas for a round of entertainment. What a skewed > logic of patriotism the Court has come up with. For those who never go to > the cinemas, they need not prove their patriotism at all. For those who > watch movies thrice a week, they will now need to stand up thrice to prove > their patriotism. With a popcorn in one hand and a coke in the other. But > stand up they must. Why target the cinemas only where people go for > entertainment? Why is the National Anthem not made compulsory in Government > offices before the beginning of each day? And why not in the Courts of Law > before every session? The only silver lining is that the Order has come > after the completion of the Film Festival or else delegates would have had > to stand up three or 4 times a day. How absurd would that have been? In one > of its earlier Judgements the Supreme Court had said judges must remain > within the limits of the law and not peddle individual perceptions and > notions. Here, they have done exactly the opposite. Under what law of the > land should the Anthem be compulsorily played in cinemas? This Order is > clearly flawed and an attack on civil liberties. Courts are there to > interpret the law, not to act dictatorial. This is a case of Judicial > overreach by the highest Court of the land. From the Supreme Court, we > expected better! > > warm regards, > Sandeep Heble > 9326129171
