Re: [Goanet] Supreme Court's Order on National Anthem a case of Judicial overreach
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 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
Re: [Goanet] Supreme Court's Order on National Anthem a case of Judicial overreach
Too much patriotism turns people into blind hypocrites of the worst order. The August Supreme Court Justices should know better. Wonder what is the reaction to this from Justice Markandey Katju. I am sure he will want these justices who passed such stupid judgement to be shot or hanged. :-) I agree with you Sandeep. What a load of nonsense, in deed. On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:06 PM, Sandeep Heble 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 >
[Goanet] Supreme Court's Order on National Anthem a case of Judicial overreach
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
