Shri Anand Gangoli,
Providing succour to those persecuted for religious reasons is definitely noble. But is there a need for CAA? Those who have come to India to escape religious persecution have already been here for 5 years or more and surely have integrated into the main stream. Give them citizenship as special cases without the need for CAA. Surely, there is more to the CAA than providing early citizenship....perhaps votes?
There could be muslims too suffering religious persecution if they are liberal and not following certain religiously imposed tenets. Why leave them out? Our society could benefit from their liberal outlook.
Jai Hind,
Dr. Rajan
From: indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net <indiaresists-request@lists.riseup.net> on behalf of Anand Gangoli <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 4:46 PM
To: Radha Krishnan RN <rnrkrish@gmail.com>; indiaresists@lists.riseup.net <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] OUR INDIA NEEDS TO BE ETERNALLY SECULAR
Sent: Tuesday, March 10, 2020 4:46 PM
To: Radha Krishnan RN <rnrkrish@gmail.com>; indiaresists@lists.riseup.net <indiaresists@lists.riseup.net>
Subject: Re: [IAC#RG] OUR INDIA NEEDS TO BE ETERNALLY SECULAR
I am entirely in agreement with you. To put it simply, I am also of
the view that the CAA is good, but those opposing the CAA are doing
so only to instigate the public against the ruling government. Those
opposing the CAA have caused immense damage to life and property, and,
as important , to our national image. I have not heard any of them
explaining what exactly is wrong with the CAA, other than vague and
unsubstantiated allegations that CAA is communal and
unconstitutional. I am very clear that those responsible must be held
accountable for their actions.
You have made an interesting point ( if I understand you correctly);
whether or not an elected government has the moral authority to make
laws if it does not have a majority vote share . On this I would like
to state that no government in India since our Independence has ever
had a vote share of more than 50%. Even Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's
Congress got a vote share of just 45% in 1952 general elections- when
there was really no opposition party to talk about! NDA in 2019 won a
vote share of 44.9%. Surely we can not question their the moral
authority to make laws.
Of course that does not mean that the opposition should let bad laws
be passed unopposed. Opposing a bad law is a right, and a duty of the
opposition. But opposition to a bad law should be peaceful, and as
important, the opposition should clearly spell out what specifically
is wrong with the law. On both these counts the opposition appears to
be at fault.
Regards
Anand Gangoli
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:19 PM Anand Gangoli <anandgangoli22@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
the view that the CAA is good, but those opposing the CAA are doing
so only to instigate the public against the ruling government. Those
opposing the CAA have caused immense damage to life and property, and,
as important , to our national image. I have not heard any of them
explaining what exactly is wrong with the CAA, other than vague and
unsubstantiated allegations that CAA is communal and
unconstitutional. I am very clear that those responsible must be held
accountable for their actions.
You have made an interesting point ( if I understand you correctly);
whether or not an elected government has the moral authority to make
laws if it does not have a majority vote share . On this I would like
to state that no government in India since our Independence has ever
had a vote share of more than 50%. Even Pandit Jawaharlal Nehru's
Congress got a vote share of just 45% in 1952 general elections- when
there was really no opposition party to talk about! NDA in 2019 won a
vote share of 44.9%. Surely we can not question their the moral
authority to make laws.
Of course that does not mean that the opposition should let bad laws
be passed unopposed. Opposing a bad law is a right, and a duty of the
opposition. But opposition to a bad law should be peaceful, and as
important, the opposition should clearly spell out what specifically
is wrong with the law. On both these counts the opposition appears to
be at fault.
Regards
Anand Gangoli
On Tue, Mar 10, 2020 at 2:19 PM Anand Gangoli <anandgangoli22@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
No comments:
Post a Comment