Readers’ comments: ‘In India, being secular means criticising Hinduism’

I think the need to change the name is a bit exaggerated (“Maybe it’s time to change my child’s name”: the new reality of being a Muslim in India “) Most of these are feelings. Confidence issues manufacturers get.

In reality, these decisions are not courageous, but act offensively, because they know they are not alone. On the other hand, the observation of the decreasing Muslim families seems unnecessary. If this is the case for any other person, the number of children we choose to have. – Umar Farooq

This article has surprised me for one reason: the brilliant way we can handle the situation at home and paint a picture that is far from the truth. Before I am accused of being pro-BJP or Hindutva, I would say that I am neutral and not biased toward either party.

I agree that violence on behalf of the protection of the cow has created fear among many people who eat beef, including Hindus, but the projection of the plight of Muslims in the country in such a light is incorrect.

How can one deduce the fate of the Muslims crossed the country by a single incident? Do you follow social media? If so, do you have an idea of ​​how ordinary people, especially young people, feel about these incidents?

I can understand that if political parties fool the public by taking these incidents and painted a false image of using their polling station, but assumed a neutral place like yours is that you are aligned with a political party or have a program against Of a particular community. Ashwin Kumar

His article, although humanistic, did not address some important things. Hindu generations grew up with Muslims everywhere in India who supported Pakistan, whether it be cricket or the Kargil war.

When some young Muslims are lynched (which of course is an unforgivable crime), the liberal media are the national political discourse. But why the mother when they were brutally hundreds and thousands of Kandmiri Pandits, raped and expelled from their homes?

Where Hindus are a minority in Muslim-majority countries, homicides, rapes and murders are the norm, but English media in India never publish anything about it. – Shiv

The problem is much more important than what you say. The history of India is well documented and is in the origin and solutions to this “new reality” that writes.

This is not new, this was even when the invaders came to India and many millions were beheaded.

Gandhi offered love. That may be the solution. Minorities in the world must be sensitive to the needs of the majority. It is peace, brotherhood and march together under an umbrella that saves the day.

Moral of love is the way to go. Certainly, the early invaders of India do not have a mindset like Mahatma. God bless his soul. – MBV

This article is partial and represents India as the most intolerant nation. Ours is the only country where the majority of the population has to struggle with the government to preserve its identity and continue to live.

If Muslims in India feel they are discriminated against and denied basic rights, they may choose to live in Islamic countries. Do not make articles expressing these partisan views and society hurt. – R Sivasankaran

For Budgam 2017, lessons from 1984

The article by the Prime Minister of Punjab Minister Amarinder Singh (“applauded Mayor Gogoi” IE, May 20) reminded me of the dark days of 1984, when Indira Gandhi launched Operation Blue Star. The damage to Sikh’s holiest sanctuary had a horrible impact on Sikhs. Emotions were high.
Anger went mainly to Indira. A high priority was given to protecting and securing. There were two Sikh armed guards on their security staff. He was informed that they were transferred from the Prime Minister’s residence.
Indira refused, claiming that the Sikhs were part of the country. To maintain the Prime Minister’s home, just because of his religion, we will emphasize our secularism and our constitution. The impact on the Sikh psyche would be disastrous. She prefers her faith in her Sikh guards. Horribly, it has become a national tragedy. They killed her. But in the process, India’s commitment to a plural society was reaffirmed, even in a deep crisis surrounding Amritsar’s attack and death in Delhi. This is perhaps the most important contribution of Indira Gandhi in the country.
Amarinder Singh’s article should be read carefully. Written by a congressional head of government, and as a Sikh, he called for a Distinguished Service Medal by the “bold” officer Major Nitin Gogoi. Its fulfillment is to use an innocent civilian Kashmir as a human shield, tied to the hood of a jeep, which leads to an army column in a hostile zone. The good captain later called an aggressive role vis-à-vis the enemy. But this poor man, fear and fear, an enemy? Certainly not.
Indira calls the citizens of India and processes accordingly – with dignity and respect.