Author: Editorial
Publication: News Today
Date: August 2, 2008
URL: http://newstodaynet.com/newsindex.php?id=9671%20&%20section=13
Secularism is fine as long as it remains a
political philosophy, but gives a confused picture when it includes the social
order, for the society is mostly made up of people following religious faiths.
If secularism means rejecting all forms of
religious faith and worship, then it becomes synonymous with 'atheism'.
So, in this context, it would be better for
any sensible government to either keep itself away from religions or treat
all religions equally with a neutral perspective from an equidistant place.
In India, 'Nehruvian secularism' since independence,
has paved the way for its transformation into 'cheap minorityism'.
The Congress and the Communist parties have
played a vital role in this process, supported ably by the regional pseudo-secular
satraps (some of them are avowedly atheists), leading to the deterioration
of the unique Indian ethos.
Indian secularism also means anti-majorityism.
Hinduism, which forms the core of the Indian society, is 'secular' in itself,
as evidenced by the establishment of the 'revealed' religions, which have
come from outside, on Indian soil.
But, unfortunately, the Indian polity has
followed a tradition of dividing the majority and appeasing the minority.
The governments (both central and state) give
a free hand to minorities to pray, preach, propagate and proselytise, allow
them to run their own educational and religious institutions without State's
interference, facilitate them to amass wealth by receiving huge financial
assistances from foreign powers, which follow their respective faiths.
On the contrary, the majority community is
treated as secondary citizens, without any religious freedom to run their
own institutions and they are made to depend on the State for everything.
Even their religious contributions are utilised
by the States for different administrative and minority oriented purposes.
This has its roots in the Constitution itself,
which was rather naively framed by an assembly of stalwarts, who unfortunately
did not foresee the aftereffects of their deed.
The independence movement and the freedom
there after must have been properly utilised by the constituent assembly to
reestablish the Hindu nation with its magnificent religious traditions and
marvelous cultural heritage, which even now has great respect for all other
religious denominations.
A stage has come where in, the freedom of
religion is taken for granted and is being totally misused.
The various 'Articles' (14, 15, 25, 26, 27,
and 30 etc) enshrined in the constitutions have been literally mocked at by
vested interests through their acts of subversion.
All these 'Articles' in connection with the
Freedom of Religion have to be re-looked and necessary amendments have to
be brought in, for a peaceful and harmonious future of India that is Bharat.
