Santosh Helekar wrote: On the issue of lifestyles, it is a good thing if people do indeed choose to treat their religion merely as their lifestyle, which they can certainly do. The practitioners of this lifestyle are less likely to resort to communal violence or fall prey to sectarian propaganda. Comment: The study of history shows that so far as this sub-continent is concerned, persons who have made religion their lifestyle have caused the greatest havoc to mankind. Two of these proponents- MA Jinnah and LK Advani. Jinnah was far from religious. He ate pork, smoked a pipe and enjoyed his peg of scotch whiskey. Yet he mobilised people in the name of religion. He was the cause of partition and the resulting upheaval of people, of homes, deaths and religious strife. Similarly, LK Advani by his own admission is not a religious person.Yet he is the cause of much religious strife that we see in India today. He was the architect of the demolition of the Babri Masjid, he extended active support in the genocide of muslims in Gujarat, and he is behind the current pogrom against christians. All for polarising people and getting votes and power. Those who truly follow the tenets of their religion are unlikely to indulge in violence, as no religion condones violence.It is those who have made religion their 'lifestyle' that are the greatest threats. Because 'lifestyles' are like fashion. They can be changed and discarded at will without any qualms of conscience. See how the BJP shelved the Temple issue solely for the sake of pursuing power. I would make a distinction between 'lifestyle' and 'way of life'. I would agree that Hinduism or Christianity are ways of life. Their tenets are made for day to day living. And that is why one will find the average hindu or muslim or christian living in peace and harmony with his neighbours. Another danger to society is from fence-sitters. By pretending to be impartial and objective, they try to obfuscate issues, by diverting attention from the critical issues or to avoid taking a stand.The Babri Masjid could have been saved had Narsimha Rao been proactive and not sat on the fence.The Orissa carnage could have been avoided, had Naveen Patnaik not sat on the fence to avoid displeasing his coalition partner. There are times when one has to take a stand and speak out against injustice and there are times when one can debate issues dispassionately. But one has to be able to recognise these times.
Regards, Marshall -- Will the all new Indica Vista zip ahead of the Suzuki Swift? Read the expert review on Zigwheels.com http://zigwheels.com/b2cam/reviewsDetails.action?name=Ro11_20080829&path=/INDT/Reviews/Ro11_20080829&page=1&pagecount=9
