Print

Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

[ramshorns]

Fever:You are way off base comparing these intellectuals to Hitler and the Halocaust.  I repeat these folks can do no worse than the present set of politicians.  Again I never claimed anywhere I support them or I oppose them.  If they are fair enough IMO I suggested I am willing to give them a lookin.  Again you are taking shots at me personally.  I chose to not go in that path. 

Ofcourse I think everyone if they read ten commandments once every day it is good.  I believe in it.  Show me where there are harmful rather than saying who among both of us are cool or better debaters.

No one is jamming anything down anyones throart.  The scriptures teach a lot of things and they helped us sustain us a country for 7000 years of recorded history.  I think if you consider them any time in your life they will do you a world of good.  I gaurantee that.

Rams, sorry if I came across differently, but I don't think I was in anyway making personal slights. All I said was that your choices are yours just as mine are, well, mine... so we should not make claims for universality based on subjective considerations.

As for counting these number-crunchers as intellectuals, I reserve my judgement. And if even in your opinion they can do no better than those already existing, why add to our woes? As I've said before, so long as the present system is in place, even Buddha would be forced to pay bribes to reach his Bodhi-tree!

As for the scriptures, I have no problem with them, or with anyone who believes in them as long as someone is not forced to follow them not out of their own choice! I say, live and let live!

Finally, the ten commandments:
1. Why the ten commandments of Christianity and not the similar stuff in all other religions as well...
You see... the problem is, every religion at its core sets some codes for living life and for governance of society. And all of them have admirable qualities. Unfortunately, a religion is not a philosophical abstract, but a living thing with its historical baggage... you detach one from the other, and it loses its potency! And NO religion is free of its own history of massacres, zealotry etc. I say, its better to leave religion out of the public sphere and in only the personal realm.
2. A question for you: Why is it that the Ten Commandments, of all religious edicts, holds you [and others like you] in thrall — to such an extent, that reflexively, that is the first example that comes to mind?

I will not claim myself being a devout Hindu by any stretch of imagination.  I live in the US and if you remember what happended in TN where they made a big deal of a judge wanting to have the 10 Comm. in the hallway of the court room.  Harmless stuff IMO.  This country has bigger problems to deal with.  Guns. Drugs etc.  But they made a big deal of a thing that is so benign.  They made the Judge resign.   The way I look at it is as long as the statue does not interfere or influence court matters leave it alone. On the same token I am not advocating Idols in the Indian court rooms.  That is why I brought up the 10 comm., not that I am enthralled ot what ever.  Again I like you do not believe in State and Religion mixed up together.  Religion like you said help one become better when practiced for self.  That in turn contributes indirectly to a better state.

Now to the first part of your response.  I am a believer in no human is perfect.  So sure these gents who want to start a new party probably have some hidden agenda's as well.  But trust me it will blow up in their face if they are a redundant group.  Also it is not easy to make inroads in a country like India that has so many complexities with hollow ideas.  We have seen enough of them come and go.  Let us wait and watch.

Also don't worry about what I feel.  Trust me I do not take things very personally.  I learnt to live well. 
"Living well is the best form of Revenge".

[feverpitch]

I will not claim myself being a devout Hindu by any stretch of imagination.  I live in the US and if you remember what happended in TN where they made a big deal of a judge wanting to have the 10 Comm. in the hallway of the court room.  Harmless stuff IMO.  This country has bigger problems to deal with.  Guns. Drugs etc.  But they made a big deal of a thing that is so benign.  They made the Judge resign.   The way I look at it is as long as the statue does not interfere or influence court matters leave it alone. On the same token I am not advocating Idols in the Indian court rooms.  That is why I brought up the 10 comm., not that I am enthralled ot what ever. 

Why are the TenCommandments OK in an US courthouse, but idols not OK in an Indian courthouse?

Now to the first part of your response.  I am a believer in no human is perfect.  So sure these gents who want to start a new party probably have some hidden agenda's as well.  But trust me it will blow up in their face if they are a redundant group.  Also it is not easy to make inroads in a country like India that has so many complexities with hollow ideas.  We have seen enough of them come and go.  Let us wait and watch.

Sure wait and watch is not a bad policy. If we can add armchair pontification to that! And I'm guilty of this as much as anyone else! Point is, it should not be extended to become 'sleep over it'!

[ramshorns]

Why are the TenCommandments OK in an US courthouse, but idols not OK in an Indian courthouse?

I said I will not advocate idols into the court house just like I would not advocate TenCommandments into the court house.  However if some does it I will not go haywire and make a big deal of it as the ACLU's of the world do.  As long as it does not interfere with the job at hand and there is a conflict of interest.  I hope I made my stand clear.   

[ramshorns]

This is pretty much what I said in my previous posts.  And you called me naive for that,

Okay, first off, I did not see naive as a derogatory word. Hence my opologies since it seems offensive to you.
Second, to clarify here is precisely what I termed you naive with regards to:

ramshors.....
As I see it today except for the Govt. categorising them(Low caste/Upper caste) for the sake of reservations there is nothing the UPPER caste enjoys or take advantage over the others as you claim today.  Or is it a case of you getting confused that rich and powerful are UPPER CASTE.  That's why if can give me the specifics I can show you numerous example and bring them to light that enjoy and have more power and money you feel fall under LOW CASTE.
end ramshorns....

I did not take it personally at all.  No need to apologise.  I maintain there should be a socio-economic division to address the problems than a upper/lower caste division as the govt. advocates.  I know that is very tough but IMO that is the path the country should take in order to prosper.  Easier said than done.

[feverpitch]

I said I will not advocate idols into the court house just like I would not advocate TenCommandments into the court house.  However if some does it I will not go haywire and make a big deal of it as the ACLU's of the world do.  As long as it does not interfere with the job at hand and there is a conflict of interest.  I hope I made my stand clear.   

So you mean if idols of Hindu gods and godesses are placed inside Indian courts, you're fine with it, as long as the job is being done? How do you judge whether the job at hand is being carried out with precision?

Why not place the idol of Ravana in the Supreme Court.. sure some people worship him too!

[feverpitch]

When you continue can you give me who the so called UPPER CASTE people are and who fit in there.  As I see it today except for the Govt. categorising them(Low caste/Upper caste) for the sake of reservations there is nothing the UPPER caste enjoys or take advantage over the others as you claim today.  Or is it a case of you getting confused that rich and powerful are UPPER CASTE.  That's why if can give me the specifics I can show you numerous example and bring them to light that enjoy and have more power and money you feel fall under LOW CASTE.

I dont have immediate stats to back this up, but any survey of Indian labour records or stats from the Mandal commission reports will show you the tremendous correlation between high ranks in public/private jobs and upper castes. Or check the stats of immigration to the US. If immigration to the US is perceived as a privilege, and we can agree that it is, you will find another strong correlation between high castes and immigrants. Now there can be two immediate [and admittedly reductive] readings that can be made from this:

1. Upper Castes are genetically/academically/socially/culturally superior.
2. Upper Castes enjoy unfair benefits and privileges that those lower down the hierarchy do not.

Now you take your pick.

[ramshorns]

I said I will not advocate idols into the court house just like I would not advocate TenCommandments into the court house.  However if some does it I will not go haywire and make a big deal of it as the ACLU's of the world do.  As long as it does not interfere with the job at hand and there is a conflict of interest.  I hope I made my stand clear.   

So you mean if idols of Hindu gods and godesses are placed inside Indian courts, you're fine with it, as long as the job is being done? How do you judge whether the job at hand is being carried out with precision?

Why not place the idol of Ravana in the Supreme Court.. sure some people worship him too!

I think you are interpreting things a little differently.  My basic take religion should not interfere with state.    But I am also against people who instead of concentrating on the bigger problems trivialise them and spend their energy on something like a Ten Commandements to gain political mileage.  So please do not get all the Gods and Godesses into picture and sidetrack the main debate.  I am sure you understand what I am getting at.

[ramshorns]

When you continue can you give me who the so called UPPER CASTE people are and who fit in there.  As I see it today except for the Govt. categorising them(Low caste/Upper caste) for the sake of reservations there is nothing the UPPER caste enjoys or take advantage over the others as you claim today.  Or is it a case of you getting confused that rich and powerful are UPPER CASTE.  That's why if can give me the specifics I can show you numerous example and bring them to light that enjoy and have more power and money you feel fall under LOW CASTE.

I dont have immediate stats to back this up, but any survey of Indian labour records or stats from the Mandal commission reports will show you the tremendous correlation between high ranks in public/private jobs and upper castes. Or check the stats of immigration to the US. If immigration to the US is perceived as a privilege, and we can agree that it is, you will find another strong correlation between high castes and immigrants. Now there can be two immediate [and admittedly reductive] readings that can be made from this:

1. Upper Castes are genetically/academically/socially/culturally superior.
2. Upper Castes enjoy unfair benefits and privileges that those lower down the hierarchy do not.

Now you take your pick.

Then call these so called low caste people as socio-economiclly weak and have schemes for their betterment.  Sorry upper caste/lower caste does not cut it for me.  So to the contrary the socio-economically weak that happen to belong to this upper caste, then what happens to them.  Treat them as dog meat.  See the flaw in dividing the people based on caste.   That is what has gotten us into this situation.  You are confusing between the people who made it big either coming to US or being in India without taking shortcuts and the downtrodden who I believe in deserve a lift.  One can be addressed without bringing down the other.

[feverpitch]

When you continue can you give me who the so called UPPER CASTE people are and who fit in there.  As I see it today except for the Govt. categorising them(Low caste/Upper caste) for the sake of reservations there is nothing the UPPER caste enjoys or take advantage over the others as you claim today.  Or is it a case of you getting confused that rich and powerful are UPPER CASTE.  That's why if can give me the specifics I can show you numerous example and bring them to light that enjoy and have more power and money you feel fall under LOW CASTE.

I dont have immediate stats to back this up, but any survey of Indian labour records or stats from the Mandal commission reports will show you the tremendous correlation between high ranks in public/private jobs and upper castes. Or check the stats of immigration to the US. If immigration to the US is perceived as a privilege, and we can agree that it is, you will find another strong correlation between high castes and immigrants. Now there can be two immediate [and admittedly reductive] readings that can be made from this:

1. Upper Castes are genetically/academically/socially/culturally superior.
2. Upper Castes enjoy unfair benefits and privileges that those lower down the hierarchy do not.

Now you take your pick.

Then call these so called low caste people as socio-economiclly weak and have schemes for their betterment.  Sorry upper caste/lower caste does not cut it for me.  So to the contrary the socio-economically weak that happen to belong to this upper caste, then what happens to them.  Treat them as dog meat.  See the flaw in dividing the people based on caste.   That is what has gotten us into this situation.  You are confusing between the people who made it big either coming to US or being in India without taking shortcuts and the downtrodden who I believe in deserve a lift.  One can be addressed without bringing down the other.

If you have followed my prior posts, you should have some idea by now that I am in no way fully in support of this system. My only objective is to show that there is indeed ground for making a caste based consideration of +ve discrimination. It should not be the only parameter however.

As for the poor Brahmin in a say cow belt village, he'd still have the benefit of going into the inner sanctorum of a certain temple which the lower caste would not have, and the lower caste would still be living outside the main village in their own ghetto! When the job of a peon or village headman comes up, it would most likely go to the upper caste representative. Or if it doesn't, then that would most likely be because of the fact that certain lower castes in certain areas have become political forces by organising into caste parties.

Problem is, within a generation or less, the more influential/powerful, within this lower caste formation will most likely have ensured that he'd get most benefits. Call it human nature, call it the impact of the wider social structure... so the benefits, if any, of such a system, will always be partial and not absolute. But they are benefits nevertheless.

Is this the best solution? Not by any stretch of imagination! But show me a perfect full proof system, and I'll show you an outright liar.

Can this be improved upon. Yes! How? I do not have a ready made answer.

Will this be improved upon... ... ... 

[feverpitch]

I said I will not advocate idols into the court house just like I would not advocate TenCommandments into the court house.  However if some does it I will not go haywire and make a big deal of it as the ACLU's of the world do.  As long as it does not interfere with the job at hand and there is a conflict of interest.  I hope I made my stand clear.   

So you mean if idols of Hindu gods and godesses are placed inside Indian courts, you're fine with it, as long as the job is being done? How do you judge whether the job at hand is being carried out with precision?

Why not place the idol of Ravana in the Supreme Court.. sure some people worship him too!

I think you are interpreting things a little differently.  My basic take religion should not interfere with state.    But I am also against people who instead of concentrating on the bigger problems trivialise them and spend their energy on something like a Ten Commandements to gain political mileage.  So please do not get all the Gods and Godesses into picture and sidetrack the main debate.  I am sure you understand what I am getting at.

Macha, the supreme court is a symbol of many things, one of them being an arbiter of justice. Would there be any respect left in an institution openly promotes a particular cause — esp if you are not part of that cause?

[ramshorns]

I said I will not advocate idols into the court house just like I would not advocate TenCommandments into the court house.  However if some does it I will not go haywire and make a big deal of it as the ACLU's of the world do.  As long as it does not interfere with the job at hand and there is a conflict of interest.  I hope I made my stand clear.   

So you mean if idols of Hindu gods and godesses are placed inside Indian courts, you're fine with it, as long as the job is being done? How do you judge whether the job at hand is being carried out with precision?

Why not place the idol of Ravana in the Supreme Court.. sure some people worship him too!

I think you are interpreting things a little differently.  My basic take religion should not interfere with state.    But I am also against people who instead of concentrating on the bigger problems trivialise them and spend their energy on something like a Ten Commandements to gain political mileage.  So please do not get all the Gods and Godesses into picture and sidetrack the main debate.  I am sure you understand what I am getting at.

Macha, the supreme court is a symbol of many things, one of them being an arbiter of justice. Would there be any respect left in an institution openly promotes a particular cause — esp if you are not part of that cause?

Hence my support for seperation of state and religion which I uttered a few times.  The only other thing I said is people turning harmless things into something vile for political gains which is what happended with the Ten commandment issue and that is what I am opposed to.

[feverpitch]

Macha, the supreme court is a symbol of many things, one of them being an arbiter of justice. Would there be any respect left in an institution openly promotes a particular cause — esp if you are not part of that cause?

Hence my support for seperation of state and religion which I uttered a few times.  The only other thing I said is people turning harmless things into something vile for political gains which is what happended with the Ten commandment issue and that is what I am opposed to.
[/quote]

I think we're going round in circles. Anyway, my point is [though I have not followed the particular case you're referring very closely], that by my logic, putting up the ten commandments in a court would bring the court to disrepute, and so fighting against it is a worthy cause.

[ramshorns]

Macha, the supreme court is a symbol of many things, one of them being an arbiter of justice. Would there be any respect left in an institution openly promotes a particular cause — esp if you are not part of that cause?

Hence my support for seperation of state and religion which I uttered a few times.  The only other thing I said is people turning harmless things into something vile for political gains which is what happended with the Ten commandment issue and that is what I am opposed to.

I think we're going round in circles. Anyway, my point is [though I have not followed the particular case you're referring very closely], that by my logic, putting up the ten commandments in a court would bring the court to disrepute, and so fighting against it is a worthy cause.
[/quote]You are right we are going circles.  Basically the people went out of the way to fight(and it was not even inside the courtroom, some side hall or side entrance) and have it removed when they could have used the same energy to get some guns out of the streets and save lives.  We both agree on one thing though seperation of State and Religion.

[tombaan]

fever
are you an atheist

[feverpitch]

fever
are you an atheist

How does that have any bearing on this debate?

[feverpitch]

Also one question and I am always puzzled with this.  What defines a high caste and who belong to this.  The last I checked it is the govt. that defines this and give them some reservations based on the castes.

The govt did not suddenly cook up this whole story about castes from the thin air. It was there for centuries. The govt. recognized that all along too. All it did during Mandal'89 was to institutionally promise support towards reversing certain trends in society. And they did it because the lower castes had formed into, and become a large enough power block to demand it. Just as corporations demand obliteration of labour laws, tax breaks etc. Just as the BJP/Sangh has, if not on paper, at least in deed, promised to deliver the goods for caste Hindus [though that is not their only agenda]. Evidently they did not fulfill the promises as they became more and more embroiled in the daily realities of Indian politics. So now our lokparitran indirectly promises to fulfill the promise that BJP/Sangh failed to deliver.