On Friday 29 Feb 2008 2:05:18 pm Divya Sampath wrote: > There is some basis for the argument that the legal > framework of the Republic of India is not entirely > secular - in the absence of a uniform civil code for > people of all religions, for example.
Absolutely!! And I am certain you know that this is not the only reason why the Indian constitution is not totally secular. The basic argument revolves around the clause that allows the complete freedom to practise any religion in India. This is the one clause that is stated as actually weighted against Hindus and I believe the logic of the argument is correct. The argument is as follows. The freedom to practise any religion means that all religions may be practised as required. It is considered a requirement that evangelists must "save souls" and convert people, and a similar need to convert to Islam is part of the free practice of Islam. The Hindu "religion"(?) does not call for any such compulsion and under the circumstances the free practice of all religions in India necessarily means poaching on Hindus as potential converts and a gradual decrease in the number of Hindus. It is legal and constitutional in India for evangelists and Muslims to demand a constant increase in the numbers of Christians and Muslims by conversion. However it is "not secular" to say this out openly. It is not secular for Hindus to complain that the constitution is skewed in this way. Saying it makes one a "right wing Hindu fundamentalist" by many people's standards. This in fact is the cause of at least some communal strife in India. shiv
