Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Noted. But irrelevant from my POV, since the topic discusses India, and it's social problems. I had compared Hinduism and Buddhism, with the former being on the far repressive side of the scale. Both religions originated from the same country, and yet one is not like the others. I was calling attention to the fact. You chose to make it a crusade of whether or not Hinduism is 'just another repressive religion' or some such and to be quite frank, I'm uninterested in fighting this trivial point with you. If you want to pretend like you've 'won' and gain XP, by all means.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
This is simply not true.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Specify if this is your stance.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Perhaps. But I'm not speculating on urban development; I made a judgment call based on things I had seen as of recently.
You make judgement calls based off anecdotal evidence?
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Then enlighten us. You appear to have your thumb on the truth. Bring it to the table.
Google is everybody's friend. 🙂
You of all people should know that, considering the amount of anecdotal evidence(which is clearly not subject to publication bias) you rely upon to "validate" your points.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
This was never my argument. I referenced a specific example, and used it as a direct comparison, saying I was not aware of a similarl status quo elsewhere.In your zeal to white knight Hinduism, you committed a:
But nice attempt to once again deny your own words and deflect from your own point.
Originally posted by Stealth MooseRead slower. It might help you.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Actually, on a few documentaries on the ills of Hinduism that I watched perhaps two years ago. Not a news article.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Which is part of the problem of the Dalit; especially in rural areas, they can't aspire to something better because they don't have the opportunities. This problem isn't exclusive to the Dalit, but it affects how they are treated and it shapes the prejudices of the equally ignorant surrounding them, who still cling to their traditions. There's a correlation between availability of education and the ability to shape your country.
Originally posted by Stealth MooseLOLNOPE. Arguing against tone much?
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
It's pretty simple, but I'll use small words this time:I didn't know of a similar situation in the Abrahamic world to the poor children forced to clean latrines in rural India because they were Untouchables
I even asked you if you had some examples to educate me. Way to avoid that responsibility and continue to argue as if you're an authority with generalizations to counter my general statement.
I already did, and in case you hadn't been partaking in non-sequiters, continuous deflection, and strawmanning, you might have noticed. Although I am willing to wager you already know much of what I know, but simply for the sake of this argument you choose to ignore that evidence, simply to vindicate your misplaced idea that Hinduism is the stuff of evulz.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Actually, you need to tighten up your reading skills here. At no point did I make exclusive or absolute statements comparing Hinduism to Abrahamic religions; this was your interpretation of what you thought I said, and I attempted to clear this up by reminding you of the openness of my words. "ONE of the most repressive religions" is not the same as "THE worst religion ever, etc.". Furthermore, I said in a nutshell I could not think of a comparative social status. I did NOT say "A comparative social status DOES NOT EXIST."So your argument, which you have derived from misreading my words or assuming my intent without asking for clarification (RE: "Is this your argument, sir?"😉 lead to a whole lot of strawmanning and hot air over nothing.
Lawl, again with the projection of strawmanning on me, when, between the 2 of us, we both know who's actually strawmanning here. 👆
Wow, Epicurus, I have to give you credit for re-strawmanning. That takes some serious forum-blinders. But hey, I'll honor you with a line-by-line rebuttal tomorrow. Maybe you can reread my posts and tell me again where I said the Dalit were 'more repressed than woman in Muslim countries".
It should be right between Jimmy Hoffa and a unicorn. Kudos to your long and tiresome effort of doing a line-by-line and then completely ignoring what I've been saying in plain English. At least when I was wrong about dadudeman's post, I admitted it. You're just stubbornly reasserting something I didn't say, reaching for victory.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Wow, Epicurus, I have to give you credit for re-strawmanning. That takes some serious forum-blinders. But hey, I'll honor you with a line-by-line rebuttal tomorrow. Maybe you can reread my posts and tell me again where I said the Dalit were 'more repressed than woman in Muslim countries".
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
While you could argue that Abrahamic religions repress women and nonbelievers, the extent to which they do so is often limited and in many places did not stand the test of time. India, despite legal rulings to the contrary, still victimizes the Dalit. I've seen videos of small children, living and playing in filth, being forced to scrap feces out from under toilets that non-Dalit use on a daily basis.I'm not sure an equivalent social standing exists in the Abrahamic world.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
It should be right between Jimmy Hoffa and a unicorn. Kudos to your long and tiresome effort of doing a line-by-line and then completely ignoring what I've been saying in plain English. At least when I was wrong about dadudeman's post, I admitted it. You're just stubbornly reasserting something I didn't say, reaching for victory.
Originally posted by Epicurus
What is it with you and projecting? Btw, you can't even remember what you said a page ago, so keep the honors to yourself:Between repeated derailing of the thread with childish gifs/memes and projection of your enormous e-butthurt onto me, there is literally no way I can't see this as a blatant concession. 🙂
What is it with you and not reading? Let's go over this again:
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
India birthed Hinduism, ONE of the most repressive continuous religions in the world, and Buddhism, probably the most progressive and lenient. But the majority still favor the former and people have lived and died under it for centuries.
Initial statement basically says: India spawned two religions, one of which is one of the most repressive continuous religions in the world, and the majority still favor it.
Originally posted by Epicurus
Hinduism is no more repressive than any of the Abrahamic religions. You can pinpoint as much towards casteism and the (now defunct) sati movement, but truth is that most of the original vedic tenets from which modern day hinduism is derived are at a level of philosophical and intellectual sophistication which western religions would only dream of ever being.
Your reply states this: Hindu is no more repressive than any of the Abrahamic religions. You downplay the bad parts and talk up the 'philosophical good parts'.
Underlying assumption here: You think Hinduism is being unjustly reviewed and consider it to have more merit because it has good parts if you just totally ignore the bad parts which are the whole reason it's a repressive religion.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Eh, I'm not so sure I want to give those laurels to ancient Vedic texts. There's a great deal of subjectivity that comes into play when you just start considering the mystical esoteric blah blah that comes with some spiritual beliefs and I'm not inclined to debate one over the other at this point. Suffice to say that Buddhism has, for the most part, been a huge improvement over the pre-existing Hindu religion and in fact seems to be a knee-jerk reaction to some of the latter's worse tenets.
I reiterate my point regarding contrasting Hinduism and Buddhism. I make it rather clear that I'm not inclined to debate subjective merits of Hinduism when it comes to its 'philosophical strengths', because my statement is reflective of the whole of Hinduism. To make this more relevant, you find it okay to characterize Islam by its worst offenses, but when Hinduism comes under the microscope, you attempt to dismiss or downplay its faults.
Also, the issue of the Dalit is what I had in mind when I considered repression. While you could argue that Abrahamic religions repress women and nonbelievers, the extent to which they do so is often limited and in many places did not stand the test of time. India, despite legal rulings to the contrary, still victimizes the Dalit. I've seen videos of small children, living and playing in filth, being forced to scrap feces out from under toilets that non-Dalit use on a daily basis.I'm not sure an equivalent social standing exists in the Abrahamic world.
^ This statement is key to the largest misunderstanding between us. Either through careless words or tone, you've come to the conclusion that I have stated "The plight of the Dalit is worse than women in Muslim countries". The problem with this manyfold:
1. Abrahamic religions comprise of Christians, Muslims, Jews, and other related sects. It is a large group of people, and the majority of those people do not oppress on the same scale or level as what I had seen of the Untouchables.
2. I noted you could argue for Abrahamic oppression, but I noted that I 'wasn't sure an equivalent social standing exists in the Abrahamic world'. This is DIRECT CONTRAST to my previous statement of "I've seen videos of small children, living and playing in filth, being forced to scrap feces out from under toilets that non-Dalit use on a daily basis." To reaffirm yet again, at no point did I make an absolute argument. I left room open for debate.
3. If you really intended to argue that women in Muslim countries (which is not the whole of Abrahamic religious bodies) suffer worse than children living and working with latrines, by all means... make your case. I never argued absolutely to the contrary and your insistence that I did just reaffirms your need to be heard and "E-WIN DEM FIGHTS", both of which are adorable adult behaviors.
In your attempt to secure e-dignitas and pretend to be a powerhouse intellectual, you just come off as a boor who thinks he is awesome because he strawmans and goes 'lawl' when people say things he doesn't quite agree with.
But your amusement is cheap and therefore I encourage you to continue. You might even learn a few things.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
What is it with you and not reading? Let's go over this again:Initial statement basically says: India spawned two religions, one of which is one of the most repressive continuous religions in the world, and the majority still favor it.
Not to mention that this statement that India spawned two statements is partially incorrect; India actually birthed at least 4 major religions that I know of(Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism), and a shit ton of other religions which are no longer practiced today, like Din-e-Ilahi.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Your reply states this: Hindu is no more repressive than any of the Abrahamic religions. You downplay the bad parts and talk up the 'philosophical good parts'.Underlying assumption here: You think Hinduism is being unjustly reviewed and consider it to have more merit because it has good parts if you just totally ignore the bad parts which are the whole reason it's a repressive religion.
Nope, I told you before and I'll say it again; I don't consider your claims regarding the Hindu religion as some disingenuous falsehoods or that you're representing a biased review. I clearly mentioned that I find it totally redundant to bring up religion in a thread which discusses the parochial and backward approach of the Indian judicial system, and then go on to claim that it is among the most repressive religions in a world dominated (by and large) by repressive religions.
Get it now?
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
I reiterate my point regarding contrasting Hinduism and Buddhism. I make it rather clear that I'm not inclined to debate subjective merits of Hinduism when it comes to its 'philosophical strengths', because my statement is reflective of the whole of Hinduism. To make this more relevant, you find it okay to characterize Islam by its worst offenses, but when Hinduism comes under the microscope, you attempt to dismiss or downplay its faults.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
^ This statement is key to the largest misunderstanding between us. Either through careless words or tone, you've come to the conclusion that I have stated "The plight of the Dalit is worse than women in Muslim countries". The problem with this manyfold:1. Abrahamic religions comprise of Christians, Muslims, Jews, and other related sects. It is a large group of people, and the majority of those people do not oppress on the same scale or level as what I had seen of the Untouchables.
2. I noted you could argue for Abrahamic oppression, but I noted that I 'wasn't sure an equivalent social standing exists in the Abrahamic world'. This is [b]DIRECT CONTRAST
to my previous statement of "I've seen videos of small children, living and playing in filth, being forced to scrap feces out from under toilets that non-Dalit use on a daily basis." To reaffirm yet again, at no point did I make an absolute argument. I left room open for debate.3. If you really intended to argue that women in Muslim countries (which is not the whole of Abrahamic religious bodies) suffer worse than children living and working with latrines, by all means... make your case. I never argued absolutely to the contrary and your insistence that I did just reaffirms your need to be heard and "E-WIN DEM FIGHTS", both of which are adorable adult behaviors.
In your attempt to secure e-dignitas and pretend to be a powerhouse intellectual, you just come off as a boor who thinks he is awesome because he strawmans and goes 'lawl' when people say things he doesn't quite agree with.
But your amusement is cheap and therefore I encourage you to continue. You might even learn a few things.
[/B]
1. I know that, and currently muslims comprise the largest single religion in terms of the number of people which adhere to it. All the current stats show that before 2050 is over, they'll surpass Christianity as the largest religion in the world. Not to mention that majority of the Christian population of the world doesn't reside in the West, which is where track record for human rights is the best both on paper and in real life.
2. Yes, which is exactly what I have issue. The fact that you think there is even room for debate as far as the Abrahamic oppression of women is considered, is downright horrendous, and a case of blatantly ignoring a real-life fact, which is all too well-documented for any "room for debate" to be left open. Relying on anecdotal evidence(which you're yet to cite properly) to claim how horrid the plight of the Indian Dalit is, and not even knowing for sure whether those are actual Dalit children, or just some random poor kids(hint; India has one of the largest population of children that are stricken with poverty, and a pretty bad track record when it comes to child labor), all the while claiming that there can be "room for debate" when discussing Abrahamic oppression, clearly reeks of bias.
3. I can argue the same for women in third-world, Christian majority nations. Like some African nations, where things like child labor, women's oppression, communal disharmony etc. are every bit as bad as in India or any of the various Middle-Eastern states. Try having acid thrown in your face just for going to school, or honor killings, being subjected to medieval era punishment for being a rape victim, or apartheid-lite sex segregation. And the truly scary part is, all that is just the tip of the iceberg.
I think you should change your username to KingofProjection, seeing how every one of those things is what you're been doing ever since our little spat started on this thread.
For some reason, I can't view this latest image that you spammed. For curiosity's sake, tell me, what does it showcase?
Just a quick search of Indian news on castes and women netted me some curious results. Posting them so you can digest them as you prepare to spit more vitriol.
[list]The 20-year-old woman has been admitted to a hospital in a critical condition.
Unofficial courts in India's villages often sanction killings of couples deemed to have violated local codes.
Scrutiny of sexual violence in India has grown since the 2012 gang rape and murder of a student on a Delhi bus.
The government tightened laws on sexual violence last year after widespread protests following the attack.
But violence and discrimination against women remain deeply entrenched in India's staunchly patriarchal society.
--
Correspondents say rape is a common occurrence in India with many cases still going unreported, despite the heightened media attention in recent months.
Although India has tightened its anti-rape laws and society is more openly discussing cases of violence against women, women across India still live with the daily fear of sexual assault and victims still often have to deal with police apathy.
In 2010, village elders in Birbhum ordered at least three tribal women to strip and walk naked in front of large crowds in West Bengal, police say.
The women were being punished for "having close relations" with men from other communities.[/list]
[list]A court in India has begun hearing a case involving a man who has filed a defamation case against his son for marrying a woman of a lower caste.
Sidh Nath Sharma, a lawyer in northern Bihar state, is suing Sushant Jasu for 10 million rupees ($162,650; £99,260).
He has asked his son not to use his surname, which can be a caste marker.
Caste is deeply rooted in Indian society and those marrying outside their caste are often ostracised by their family and the wider community.[/list]
81% of northeast women harassed in Delhi: Survey (Times of India)
[list]NEW DELHI: Sixty percent of women, who have migrated from northeast India to the four metros — Delhi, Mumbai, Kolkata and Bangalore - have reported harassment and unfair discrimination on a daily basis, says a recent survey.
While 23% of respondents said they have been harassed by landlords, 42% said they faced verbal abuse. A total of 26% reported heckling and molestation. Alarmingly, there seems to be little trust in police as 80% of those who were harassed did not approach them. But those who did didn't have a good experience.
The survey was part of a study conducted by Centre for North East Studies and Policy Research, Jamia Millia Islamia, and commissioned by National Commission for Women. It began in May 2012. A random sample group of students and young professionals was interviewed. The aim of the study was to find out the challenges lying before women from the northeastern region who are living and working in metropolises.[/list]
Murder and Gang-rape of 23 year old software engineer (Times of India)
[list]The city crime branch, conducting a parallel probe into the murder of software engineer Esther Anuhya (23), whose body was found in mangroves near the Eastern Expressway between Kanjurmarg and Bhandup, suspects it is a case of gangrape.
[/list]
[list]The UN’s human-rights chief calls rape in India a “national problem”. Rapes and the ensuing deaths (often from suicide), are routinely described in India’s press—though many more attacks go unreported to the public or police. Delhi has a miserable but deserved reputation for being unsafe, especially for poor and low-caste women. Sexual violence in villages, though little reported, keeps girls and women indoors after dark. As young men migrate from the country into huge, crowded slums, their predation goes unchecked. Prosecution rates for rape are dismally low and convictions lower still—as in many countries.
Indian women also have much else to be gloomy about, especially if they live in the north. Studies and statistics abound, but India is generally at or near the bottom of the heap of women’s misery. A UN index in 2011 amalgamated details on female education and employment, women in politics, sexual and maternal health and more. It ranked India 134th out of 187 countries, worse than Saudi Arabia, Iraq or China. India’s 2011 census confirmed an increasingly distorted sex ratio among newborn babies in many states, as parents use ultrasound scanners to identify the sex of fetuses and then abort female ones. India is missing millions of unborn girls. Discrimination continues throughout life. Boys in villages are typically fed better than girls and are more likely to get an education. Women are routinely groped and harassed by men on buses and trains. Many Indian brides still pay dowries. The misery of daughters-in-law abused after moving in with their husbands’ extended families is a staple of crime reports and soap operas.[/list]
Let's cover what you said again:
Nope, I don't. Though there is indeed a sharp contrast between the 2, as Islam has historically [b]been defined by the offenses that it committed against non-muslims, while Hinduism, for all its lows, does have a rich cultural history of being the heart of a society that was at the forefront of its time in terms of maths, astronomy, philosophy, trade, commerce etc. Instead of having to leech off such traits from well-established, and more culturally well-refined civilizations like Islam did during most of the early periods of its expansion.[/b]
Originally posted by Epicurus
There is no misunderstanding at all, just you trying to twist your words when backed into a corner after I pointed out how you claimed that Dalits are treated worse than women in muslim countries.The fact that you think there is even room for debate as far as the Abrahamic oppression of women is considered, is downright horrendous, and a case of blatantly ignoring a real-life fact, which is all too well-documented for any "room for debate" to be left open. Relying on anecdotal evidence(which you're yet to cite properly) to claim how horrid the plight of the Indian Dalit is, and not even knowing for sure whether those are actual Dalit children, or just some random poor kids(hint; India has one of the largest population of children that are stricken with poverty, and a pretty bad track record when it comes to child labor), all the while claiming that there can be "room for debate" when discussing Abrahamic oppression, clearly reeks of bias.
3. I can argue the same for women in third-world, Christian majority nations. Like some African nations, where things like child labor, women's oppression, communal disharmony etc. are every bit as bad as in India or any of the various Middle-Eastern states. Try having acid thrown in your face just for going to school, or honor killings, being subjected to medieval era punishment for being a rape victim, or apartheid-lite sex segregation. And the truly scary part is, all that is just the tip of the iceberg.
So let me make sure I understand you entirely..
1. You are championing Hinduism because of its achievements in antiquity, which are unrelated to the moral benefit it has on the present. Also, Islam introduced a lot of concepts to the West and had achievements in poetry, mathematics, the compass, the very concept of chivalry, etc. Then I could go on about Christian this and Jewish that, but it's besides the point. What you accomplish as a religious body does not in any way negate repressive traditions, end of.
2. You are further strawmanning that I am dead-set on defending this position of "Dalit have it worse than Muslim women", which is still as false now as it was last time I pointed it out, and the time before. I said I couldn't think of a similar situation to the one I specifically mentioned, and left it entirely open. But you know, it would hurt your e-dignitas to admit as much. Also, I love the CYA approach of 'all too well-documented for any "room for debate" to be left open'. This is utterly adorable, when you consider that at no point did I make this absolute statement you are implying.
3. You are attempting to say that Hinduism is on equal footing with repressive religious communites around the world, but then you accuse me of bias because I singled out Hinduisms flaws in a thread about... India?
4. Ultimately, what is your point, is what I am asking. I mean, I heard you twice on the "redundancy" of calling Hinduism repressive. Sorry if that hurts your feelings, but that's precisely what I think of the religion, and that's why I said it. Then you say I am projecting and misleading and twisting etc. etc. but when I made a general observation, and then left the floor open, you chose not to accept the burden of proof for your counter views. Instead, your views are seemingly evident and mind are flawed, horrendous, depraved, what-have-you, and then you must attack my person.
Bottom line is, you took an argumentative, aggressive posture, and then you didn't deliver. You just focused on me instead of what I was saying, and you let it derail the thread (even accusing me of such) and you refuse to back down.
Keep reaching, bro.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
snip:{for post length reasons}
All these cherry-picked examples of how Dalits, minorities and women are treated awfully in India notwithstanding(and most of these aren't even half as bad as the stuff which goes in parts of Africa and the Middle East, not to mention that similar treatment is meted out to women in the more undeveloped parts of Israel as well), tell me again what's so relevant about all this? Especially when I never, not once denied that the group known as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is still subject to discrimination despite the legislature officiating fully functional laws, or the Parliament passing numerous Bills etc.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Let's cover what you said again:
So let me make sure I understand you entirely..1. You are championing Hinduism because of its achievements in antiquity, which are unrelated to the moral benefit it has on the present. Also, Islam introduced a lot of concepts to the West and had achievements in poetry, mathematics, the compass, the very concept of chivalry, etc. Then I could go on about Christian this and Jewish that, but it's besides the point. What you accomplish as a religious body does not in any way negate repressive traditions, end of.
2. You are further strawmanning that I am dead-set on defending this position of "Dalit have it worse than Muslim women", which is still as false now as it was last time I pointed it out, and the time before. I said I couldn't think of a similar situation to the one I specifically mentioned, and left it entirely open. But you know, it would hurt your e-dignitas to admit as much. Also, I love the CYA approach of 'all too well-documented for any "room for debate" to be left open'. This is utterly adorable, when you consider that at no point did I make this absolute statement you are implying.
3. You are attempting to say that Hinduism is on equal footing with repressive religious communites around the world, but then you accuse me of bias because I singled out Hinduisms flaws in a thread about... India?
4. Ultimately, what is your point, is what I am asking. I mean, I heard you twice on the "redundancy" of calling Hinduism repressive. Sorry if that hurts your feelings, but that's precisely what I think of the religion, and that's why I said it. Then you say I am projecting and misleading and twisting etc. etc. but when I made a general observation, and then left the floor open, you chose not to accept the burden of proof for your counter views. Instead, your views are seemingly evident and mind are flawed, horrendous, depraved, what-have-you, and then you must attack my person.
Bottom line is, you took an argumentative, aggressive posture, and then you didn't deliver. You just focused on me instead of what I was saying, and you let it derail the thread (even accusing me of such) and you refuse to back down.
Keep reaching, bro.
1. As pointed out before to you, and as you so colorfully ignored said point, Islam's so called "contributions" to the West is such a hilariously false statement, that I don't know whether to laugh at your or pity you. Islam's "contributions" are a result of it leeching stuff from the better cultures that it plundered during the early phase of its conquest and expansion. I am willing to bet that you already knew this, yet you make this retarded claim simply for the sake of arguing with me. Yes, in modern times people from Judeo-Christian background have certainly surpassed the achievements of prehistoric Vedic intellectuals, though it is certainly not to such a large extent that scientists of Indian background become a footnote compared to them, as is evidenced by the modern day examples of C.V Raman, Srinivasa Ramanujan, Homi Bhabha etc.
2. You made that claim and have so far flip-flopped from first denying altogether that those were your words, then reiterating it like a bumbling moron.
3. Oh how generous of you to notice that this is a thread about India. Now I can only hope that you make some further progress by noticing the fact that the topic of this thread is the parochial attitude of the Indian judiciary regarding the rights of the LGBT brigade, instead of it being about how repressive and awful the Hindu religion is towards the minority Dalits of the nation. I should know, after all I created this thread. 🙂
4. I could ask the same of you. Because proclaiming the Hindu religion as one of the modern evils that plague Indian society(and I am not arguing here that such isn't the case) isn't at all related to the dickish move that Indian Supreme Court pulled off recently by repealing the law which granted non-heterosexual people the same rights as straight folk. Oh please, don't flatter yourself by claiming that negative criticism of religion hurts my feelings. I am one of the first people who will slap down your ugly mug and tell you what a blatant lie you're stating if you try to argue that religion hasn't brought far more ills upon humanity than it has any actual, long-term benefits. With that being said, I do find your argument with respect to Hinduism as fairly nonsensical, disingenuous and off-topic.
So thoroughly deconstructing each and every one of your claims on a point-by-point basis such that you're reduced to projecting, red herrings, image-spamming the thread and flip-flopping from post to post, is equitable to "not delivering"? Then fine, I didn't deliver. Happy?
Originally posted by Epicurus
Wow. Talk about penning down heinously obvious red herrings.
Well, since you seemed to be talking about the all progressive changes India was making on behalf of the scheduled castes and comparing it strongly with evil Muslim strongholds (which was never my intent or my expressed point) and then fellating their ancient traditions and the stuff they didn't 'leech' from other cultures (because we should always fellate cultures that develop things in isolation, regardless of how they treat their own people, lawl) I figured all these very recent cases of human rights abuses and backwards traditions needed airing. If you dismiss them out of hand, whatever. I'm sure other people reading this probably don't do as much, because they don't have a hard-on for all things ancient Hindu.
All these cherry-picked examples of how Dalits, minorities and women are treated awfully in India notwithstanding(and most of these aren't even half as bad as the stuff which goes in parts of Africa and the Middle East, not to mention that similar treatment is meted out to women in the more undeveloped parts of Israel as well), tell me again what's so relevant about all this?
See above. Also, lol @ cherry picked. These were top 20 stories from the sites above. I barely took any time in finding them. Clearly, the progressiveness and philosophical foundation of Hinduism has made India not only a bad place for gays, but a bastion of poverty, a dangerous place to be a woman, and a shitty place to be if you happen to be born the wrong parents.
Tell me more about this ancient woo woo mystical originality and how it translates into all these obvious social issues.
Especially when I never, not once denied that the group known as Scheduled Castes and Scheduled Tribes is still subject to discrimination despite the legislature officiating fully functional laws, or the Parliament passing numerous Bills etc.
Right, but you took exception to my statement where I couldn't think of an equivocal social status to the specific situation I had in mind. You then took this specific statement and ran with it, because you didn't like the non-love I was expressing towards Hinduism, which is why you've harped on the redundancy and its great ancient virtues and innovations.
I get that you have a knee-jerk reaction to Abrahamic religions. I got it when you shoe-horned in the idea about the omnipotence paradox disproving God in another thread (as if this was some kind of philosophical revelation). Pretty sure a guy previously called 'Godkiller' has a chip on his shoulder when it comes to religion. Got it. But I'm not white knighting Islam or Abrahamic religions here. You repeatedly fail to realize this is the case. And you furthermore seem to be avoiding the responsibility of educating me in social statuses worse than the one I had related, since that is so keenly your point.
You clearly don't. Because pointing out that claiming how Hinduism is one of the most repressive religions in a world dominated by repressive is redundant,
The more you say this, the more true it becomes!
or explaining how treatment meted out to females in Abrahamic religion majority states is in many cases worse than the Dalit conditions in India somehow equates to championing Hinduism.
Well, I wouldn't have suspected as much if you hadn't had such a big visceral reaction to my rather blah comment in a sea of comments, and furthermore felt it vital to the utmost to repeat over and over how it's "redundant" and how Hinduism has all these great virtues, etc. While somehow maintaining that your stance on their repressiveness is somehow the same as mine.
If you can't see how blatantly double-sided that is, I'm afraid you got some in your eye.
1. As pointed out before to you, and as you so colorfully ignored said point, Islam's so called "contributions" to the West is such a hilariously false statement, that I don't know whether to laugh at your or pity you. Islam's "contributions" are a result of it leeching stuff from the better cultures that it plundered during the early phase of its conquest and expansion. I am willing to bet that you already knew this, yet you make this retarded claim simply for the sake of arguing with me.
I brought up apparent contributions simply to emphasis that who gives a **** within the context of the conversation.
Now you're further deepening the chasm at your feet by pretending I'm hardlining Islamic contributions when I mentioned it specifically to reference... get this - their apparent contributions are unimportant to the idea of being repressive
How are you this bad at reading?
Yes, in modern times people from Judeo-Christian background have certainly surpassed the achievements of prehistoric Vedic intellectuals, though it is certainly not to such a large extent that scientists of Indian background become a footnote compared to them, as is evidenced by the modern day examples of C.V Raman, Srinivasa Ramanujan, Homi Bhabha etc.
The 'virtues' of ancient Hinduism woo woo advancements, none of which appear to prevent it from being full of repressive social issues and traditions, is irrelevant. Why are you continuing to slip this in, if you apparently don't have bias?
Or do you have a semantic failing when it comes to determining bias?
2. You made that claim and have so far flip-flopped from first denying altogether that those were your words, then reiterating it like a bumbling moron.
Blah blah derp ad hominem.
K.
3. Oh how generous of you to notice that this is a thread about India. Now I can only hope that you make some further progress by noticing the fact that the topic of this thread is the parochial attitude of the Indian judiciary regarding the rights of the LGBT brigade, instead of it being about how repressive and awful the Hindu religion is towards the minority Dalits of the nation. I should know, after all I created this thread. 🙂
You started arguing with me about a comment which warranted very little discussion, especially in relation to the topic at hand. If your intent is to keep this thread pure, you did a bang-up job by gargling Hinduism's balls and then proceeding to antagonize me with your eighth grade internet toughness.
4. I could ask the same of you. Because proclaiming the Hindu religion as one of the modern evils that plague Indian society(and I am not arguing here that such isn't the case) isn't at all related to the dickish move that Indian Supreme Court pulled off recently by repealing the law which granted non-heterosexual people the same rights as straight folk.
Considering India is largely a Hindu society, and much of its existing social structure, traditions, and divisions are derived from that religion, yes. Yes it is related. It isn't the whole point, but no one should be surprised that India is recriminalizing gays when it hasn't yet stomped out the other BS it's had on its plate for thousands of years.
But insulting Hinduism made your knee jerk, so here we are.
Oh please, don't flatter yourself by claiming that negative criticism of religion hurts my feelings. I am one of the first people who will slap down your ugly mug and tell you what a blatant lie you're stating if you try to argue that religion hasn't brought far more ills upon humanity than it has any actual, long-term benefits. With that being said, I do find your argument with respect to Hinduism as fairly nonsensical, disingenuous and off-topic.
But relevant enough to repeat yourself ad nauseam and launch into song about Hinduism innovation and preach about redundancy and leeching, as if it was ever in contention.
K.
So thoroughly deconstructing each and every one of your claims on a point-by-point basis such that you're reduced to projecting, red herrings, image-spamming the thread and flip-flopping from post to post, is equitable to "not delivering"? Then fine, I didn't deliver. Happy?
Quite.
The echo in your colon must be what makes you say the same stuff over and over again.
But bonus points for actually breaking my statement up instead of just posting a big block of whatever at the end.
Keep that reaching, bro.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Well, since you seemed to be talking about the all progressive changes India was making on behalf of the scheduled castes and comparing it strongly with evil Muslim strongholds (which was never my intent or my expressed point)
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
and then fellating their ancient traditions and the stuff they didn't 'leech' from other cultures (because we should always fellate cultures that develop things in isolation, regardless of how they treat their own people, lawl) I figured all these very recent cases of human rights abuses and backwards traditions needed airing. If you dismiss them out of hand, whatever. I'm sure other people reading this probably don't do as much, because they don't have a hard-on for all things ancient Hindu.
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
See above. Also, lol @ cherry picked. These were top 20 stories from the sites above. I barely took any time in finding them. Clearly, the progressiveness and philosophical foundation of Hinduism has made India not only a bad place for gays, but a bastion of poverty, a dangerous place to be a woman, and a shitty place to be if you happen to be born the wrong parents.
The Scheduled Castes and Tribes (Prevention of Atrocities) Act, 1989 was enacted by the Parliament of India (Act 33 of 1989), to prevent atrocities against scheduled castes and scheduled tribes. The Act is popularly known as POA, the SC/ST Act, the Prevention of Atrocities Act, or simply the Atrocities Act.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scheduled_Caste_and_Scheduled_Tribe_%28Prevention_of_Atrocities%29_Act,_1989
Dalits, as the ex-untouchables prefer to be called, are a very distinct social group. While belonging to a broad class of have-nots they suffer an additional disability of social oppression. Economically, most of them are still the poorest of poor. The balance minuscule minority has managed to escape poverty limits and to locate itself on to a continuum ranging up to a reasonable level of prosperity. The main factor that has catalysed this transition is the reservation policy, which has provided them a basic opportunity to enter the modern sectors of economy.
http://www.angelfire.com/ak/ambedkar/BRanand2.html
PALIGANJ, INDIA, June 30, 2007: A low-caste Hindu has been appointed priest of the Ram-Janki Devi temple at Paliganj, 60 kilometers from Patna. Janardan Manjhi, the newly appointed priest of the temple, was earlier serving in a Dalit temple. Traditionally, priesthood is restricted only to brahmins. But the temple authorities, by law, have broken the tradition and allowed Manjhi, a Mushar tribal, to take to priesthood. It took temple administrator Kishore Kunal six months to select Manjhi, who is not well versed in Sanskrit. During this period, temple authorities checked his credentials and his devotion to God. "I am feeling very nice and excited. I had never thought of this. I used to dream of this day when I would distribute the prasad here. Now my dream has come true," said Manjhi.
http://www.hinduismtoday.com/blogs-news/hindu-press-international/low-caste-hindu-hired-as-priest/print,6898.html
Five couples - four of them Dalits - were betrothed amidst Vedic chants Five couples - four of them Dalits - were betrothed amidst Vedic chants by Tirumala priests
http://www.hindu.com/2007/01/07/stories/2007010705080200.htm
Dalit literature forms an important and distinct part of Indian literature. One of the first Dalit writers was Madara Chennaiah, an 11th-century cobbler-saint who lived in the reign of Western Chalukyas and who is also regarded by some scholars as the "father of Vachana poetry". Another early Dalit poet is Dohara Kakkaiah, a Dalit by birth, six of whose confessional poems survive.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dalit_literature
Mayawati's rise from humble beginnings has been called a "miracle of democracy" by P. V. Narasimha Rao, former Prime Minister of India.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mayawati"I explained that Mayawati was actually the most presentable candidate by far. If she becomes PM, India can claim to be the most empowering democracy in the world. Nowhere else has a woman from the bottom of the social and gender ladders risen to the top."
http://swaminomics.org/the-world-will-love-mayawati-as-pm/"Mayawati has asked her supporters to be wary of a Congress move to field a Dalit Prime Ministerial candidate. She said this at a rally at Lucknow on Wednesday, on her birthday."
http://articles.economictimes.indiatimes.com/2014-01-16/news/46264184_1_cm-candidate-lok-sabha-polls-mayawati
Impressed by 17-year-old Shridhar's theory of galaxy evolution, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) has invited the farm labourer's son into their fold as a junior scientist.
http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2008-05-15/pune/27757030_1_dalit-boy-young-scientist-award-village-in-kolhapur-district
'I was one of India's unclean Dalits ... now I am a millionaire'
Mr Pippal is a Dalit, a member of the outcast community once known as untouchables. Born at the bottom of Hinduism's complex social ladder, that meant he could not eat with people from higher castes or drink from their wells.
He was not supposed to aspire to a life beyond that of his father, an illiterate cobbler. Years later, he still will not repeat the slurs that people called him.
Now, though, people call him something else. They call him rich.
http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/south-asia/i-was-one-of-indias-unclean-dalits-now-i-am-a-millionaire
Union Minister K.H. Muniyappa has exhorted Dalit entrepreneurs to make best use of the schemes and support systems of the government as they embark on a mission to make their mark as captains of industry.At the first annual meet of the Dalit India Chambers of Commerce and Industry’s (DICCI) Karnataka chapter here on Sunday, Mr. Muniyappa said he was enthused by the charter of the DICCI which aims to transform Dalits as job givers and not merely job takers. It is also the DICCI’s stated position that Dalits should stop seeking affirmative action and State support.
http://www.thehindu.com/news/national/karnataka/dalit-entrepreneurs-told-to-make-best-use-of-schemes/article5058827.ece
Originally posted by Stealth Moose
Tell me more about this ancient woo woo mystical originality and how it translates into all these obvious social issues.
Edit: Damn, this character limitation on KMC is an annoying little b1tch. Anyways, rest of my response is continued in the next post.
