Temples should allow non-Hindus, agree?

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

441597

Suspended

Posted: 15 years ago

#101

Originally posted by: souro

You mean changing the law and making it mandatory for all religious places to allow entry for people of other religions?

turn this a little around- take up an egalitarian policy and take steps to end this sort of regressive rules in the 21st century.😛

Quote

souro

@souro

Alumni

+ 2

Posted: 15 years ago

#102

Originally posted by: krystal_watz

turn this a little around- take up an egalitarian policy and take steps to end this sort of regressive rules in the 21st century.😛

Hmmm... nice thought. Anyone who wants to visit the bedroom of the President of India in the Raj Bhavan should be allowed to do so. Anyone who wants to go inside the Parliament should be allowed to do so, even if that person is not an MP, MLA or doesn't hold a pass. And those are places owned by the people we are talking about.

Quote

Looks like you are new here. Register for free, learn and contribute.

3365

Suspended

Posted: 15 years ago

#103

Originally posted by: PhoeniXof_Hades
Just to clarify a point, mosques actually allow[s?] women. But the women are made to pray in a corner unlike the men, who takes over the whole mosque. The place where women pray is covered heavily with drapes and all (so that men's eyes do not reach them, lest they commit a sin). (Take it from someone who frequents mosques almost every week).
Reason given is that since visiting/going to the mosque isn't compulsory for the women as it is for the men, women seldom goes to mosques, as such, men are given more spaces unlike women.

Personally, mosques or any other place of worship can be a great way of socialization for people. As such, I feel these things need to be reformed. But can you actually change things that were practiced for over a thousand years?

and for us it has been for N number of years, you know uncountable number of years and still we are constantly changing and updating ourselves. inspite of which we are still called discriminating. so if we can change then y cant others?

Quote

sudesh kumar

@qwertyesque

Rocker

Posted: 15 years ago

#104

Originally posted by: krystal_watz
race and religion is not practically equivalent to being a "member of an Organisation", if im not wrong. Religion, and spirituality are matters of the heart and soul and cannot be drawn parallels with any organized sect or anyhting of similar nature.

No religion and race are equivalent to making groups based on similar characteristics... if you believe in jesus you can be christain.. if you believe in islam u could be muslim.. but however hard you try unless you are born one you cant be a hindu....

the bold line is wrong.. religion spirituality is a community act.. otherwise you wouldnt have religions in first place.,....

if you feel you can have a private view of "your" religion thats fine... but then why would you voice opinions in these matters....when others wont have the same view as yours...😊

Quote

441597

Suspended

Posted: 15 years ago

#105

Originally posted by: souro

Hmmm... nice thought. Anyone who wants to visit the bedroom of the President of India in the Raj Bhavan should be allowed to do so. Anyone who wants to go inside the Parliament should be allowed to do so, even if that person is not an MP, MLA or doesn't hold a pass. And those are places owned by the people we are talking about.

now you are giving me one😉😆

you know that....debate to kab ke kahatm ho gaya from your end...i rem that now😆

Quote

souro

@souro

Alumni

+ 2

Posted: 15 years ago

#106

Originally posted by: krystal_watz

now you are giving me one😉😆

you know that....debate to kab ke kahatm ho gaya from your end...i rem that now😆

That part of the debate has already ended regarding private property and admission rights. You started a new one saying that why not change the law.

Quote

441597

Suspended

Posted: 15 years ago

#107

but still then a temple will never ever be equal to anyones bedroom so no point dragging in such absurd points just for the sake of it, aint it?😉

Quote

souro

@souro

Alumni

+ 2

Posted: 15 years ago

#108

Originally posted by: krystal_watz
but still then a temple will never ever be equal to anyones bedroom so no point dragging in such absurd points just for the sake of it, aint it?😉

Prove it is absurd and then say that it is absurd.

Quote

441597

Suspended

Posted: 15 years ago

#109

comparison of a temple of worship and spirituality with someones BEDROOM is absurd because it sounds so....eheh.

i dont know anybody of the human species who'll say otherwise.🤣

Quote

souro

@souro

Alumni

+ 2

Posted: 15 years ago

#110

Btw, Krystal you must know the fact that the word mandir actually also meant house. If you take the word devalaya then it means house of the god. The people who coined these words were very much human beings.
Even today, the sanctum sanctorum (garbhagriha) is treated as the bedroom of the god (except for maybe in case of Shiv mandirs, I'm not sure of that).

Still feel that comparing temple with house or bedroom is absurd?