Santosh has misinterpreted the provisions of law and has drawn wrong conclusions.
Nowhere in the Constitution of the land does it say that "All religions are equally good or equally bad". Religions have their own distinct features and characteristics and can therefore never be equal. From different standpoints, some are bound to be either superior or inferior to the other. Even using elementary logic, it is easy to show how from different standpoints, some religions are bound to be either better or worse than the other. For instance, from the standpoint of equality of human beings, Christianity is superior to Hinduism while it is inferior to Buddhism. >From the standpoint of "Freedom of expression", Hinduism will be much superior since Christianity and Islam have a history of intolerance in this regard. >From the standpoint of rationalism, Buddhism is much superior to many other religions while Jainism will probably be the best when it comes to respecting "Animal Rights" and so on and so forth. So even an elementary comparative study on religions will easily demonstrate how two different religions can never be equally good (or equally bad). >From the legal perspective, “Equality of Religion” does not mean all religions are equally good or equally bad. All it means is the State must adopt neutrality towards religions; that there must not be a State Religion, that it must not give preferential treatment to any one religion over the other; that all religions are equal before the eyes of the law and must be treated equally. Here is the precise observation from the relevant para from the S. R. Bommai v. Union of India Supreme Court Judgment: “Secularism is one of the basic features of the Constitution. While freedom of religion is guaranteed to all persons in India, from the point of view of the State, the religion, faith or belief of a person is immaterial. To the State, all are equal and are entitled to be treated equally. In matters of State, religion has no place. No political party can simultaneously be a religious party. Politics and religion cannot be mixed. Any State Government which pursues unsecular policies or unsecular course of action acts contrary to the constitutional mandate and renders itself amenable to action under Article 356.” Cheers Sandeep * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ISSUES BEING DEBATED: In East Africa, despite colonialism, the British afforded the Goan a sliver of a socio-political voice. Read *Into The Diaspora Wilderness* by Selma Carvalho. Soon to be available in Toronto. Pp 290. Via mail-order from [email protected] http://selmacarvalho.squarespace.com/
