Is a higher birthrate the solution?

First Previous

Page

Next Last

Frequent Posters

@K.Universe.

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

#41

Originally posted by: return_to_hades

I am not talking about doing away with reservations completely. The system currently is flawed though. It makes certain people feel entitled because of their minority status. It is exploited by politicians for vote bank politics. Shifting to a needs and merit based support system would greatly benefit the nation.

We cannot talk about everything under the Sun. So, while this is not a red herring, it does take away from the main topic. Isn't reservations a topic unto itself?

Turkey is by no means perfect. No nation is. Even the United States can be backward for women's rights.

There are what are called freedom indices. Turkey is only partly free; for instance, the freedom of press in Turkey is considered to be in a "difficult situation"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_freedom_indices

What is US doing here? Are we seriously comparing US with Islamic states now? What kind of faulty analogy is this?

The point is that not all Muslim majority nations are theocratic nor are they like Saudi Arabia. As long as Islam can be gradually made to accommodate progressive reforms, there will be no threat if it is a majority.

Well, no problem is insurmountable as long as we prefix a sentence with a "as long as".

Would you rather propose we eradicate Islam as a solution instead?

RTH, can we postpone discussing solutions for just a little while longer?

Could you please elaborate by what you mean exactly by "what would happen to the nation"? I'm not sure I understand you completely.

Oh, sorry, I thought I made myself clear with my very first post in this thread. I am more interested in analyzing the impact of a Muslim-majority situation on India as a whole (from the standpoint of democracy, freedom of religion, women and economy) rather than it's impact just on Hinduism.

Democracy doesn't come with any guarantees. As you explained, just about anything can threaten democracy. A charismatic leader could seize power overnight and change it. Most threats are also unforeseen. So doesn't it make more sense to focus on strengthening democracy as a whole rather than try to focus on Islam alone?

The state in which most Islamic nations find themselves now in 2015, indicates to me that Islam and democracy is (almost) an impossible union.

Why is it a red herring? Why is my explanation of the correlation unacceptable to you.

I was going with the forcefulness in the following paragraph of yours:
"Christianity also was once a pretty shitty religion. Their inquisitions are infamous in history for unimaginable cruelty. The spread of Christianity actually brutally wiped out more cultures than the spread of Islam did. "

To me, a discussion on Christian brutality of the past is a misdirection from where we are. In the 21st century.

----------

Eh in the end I'm not breeding. I should leave the fretting about the future to those who care about populating it. 😆

😆 😆 Awww...

Quote

souro

@souro

Alumni

+ 2

Posted: 10 years ago

#42

Originally posted by: return_to_hades
Muslim population in India is rising rapidly. There is a remote probability that Muslim population will become the probability. What happens to Hindus and other religions then?

India is a democracy. The constitution of a democracy is supposed to be secular and stand the test of time. Separation of church and state ensures that no matter who the majority is, everyone is treated fairly and equally.

Create a secular uniform civil code. Abolish reservations based on religions and minorities, and create needs based reservations. Eliminate religion data from all public records. Focus on spreading education into conservative hard lining communities. Islam seems threatening because of appeasement politics. If we focus on a solid separation of church and state, I don't see a problem in increasing Muslim population.

India is a democracy and it is secular. Separation of state and church is already there. Let's say it also gets in place a uniform civil code. But then what? How can you be sure that if Muslims become majority, they won't change the constitution? And if they do, who is going to stop them, the minorities?

I don't see any reason in this post, just some khayali pulao, that everything will be alright if a country is secular, democratic and has UCC, but no explanation as to how that is going to stop anyone from changing those very things.

Quote

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

@K.Universe.

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

#43

What would a majority do?

http://www.pewforum.org/2013/04/30/the-worlds-muslims-religion-politics-society-beliefs-about-sharia/

http://www.pewglobal.org/2012/07/10/most-muslims-want-democracy-personal-freedoms-and-islam-in-political-life/

Quote

@K.Universe.

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

#44

Originally posted by: souro
[

no explanation as to how that is going to stop anyone from changing those very things

Usually, there are checks and balances already in place to prevent an overthrow. If you look at US constitution, there are 3 branches (legislative, executive and judicial) with a division of power; no single branch is more powerful than the other.

I don't know of any Islamic nation that has such a structure so I have valid doubts that we could have anything remotely close to safeguarding a constitution in their regime.

Quote

souro

@souro

Alumni

+ 2

Posted: 10 years ago

#45

Originally posted by: K.Universe.

Usually, there are checks and balances already in place to prevent an overthrow. If you look at US constitution, there are 3 branches (legislative, executive and judicial) with a division of power; no single branch is more powerful than the other.

I don't know of any Islamic nation that has such a structure so I have valid doubts that we could have anything remotely close to safeguarding a constitution in their regime.

Those checks and balances count only if a majority of the population or the people in power want to continue with that constitution. If they feel like doing away with it altogether, nobody can stop them.

Constitutions do get changed and moreover man made books like constitution, have no value in comparison to Quran, Hadith etc. for Muslims. So, what guarantee is there that they won't rewrite the constitution to suit their religious needs? In our two Muslim majority neighbours, Pakistan and Bangladesh, the constitution was revised during the rule of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto/ Zia ul Haq and Ziaur Rahman respectively, to make the constitution and therefore the country even more Islamicized. In fact, Bangladesh when it was formed was a secular state, but Ziaur Rahman removed the secularism clause from Bangladesh's constitution and declared it to be an Islamic state. A person has to be really naive to believe that the same won't happen in India if it remains a secular democracy with a UCC before the Muslims form the majority of the population.

Quote

@K.Universe.

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

#46

Originally posted by: souro

Those checks and balances count only if a majority of the population or the people in power want to continue with that constitution. If they feel like doing away with it altogether, nobody can stop them.

Constitutions do get changed and moreover man made books like constitution, have no value in comparison to Quran, Hadith etc. for Muslims. So, what guarantee is there that they won't rewrite the constitution to suit their religious needs? In our two Muslim majority neighbours, Pakistan and Bangladesh, the constitution was revised during the rule of Zulfikar Ali Bhutto/ Zia ul Haq and Ziaur Rahman respectively, to make the constitution and therefore the country even more Islamicized. In fact, Bangladesh when it was formed was a secular state, but Ziaur Rahman removed the secularism clause from Bangladesh's constitution and declared it to be an Islamic state. A person has to be really naive to believe that the same won't happen in India if it remains a secular democracy with a UCC before the Muslims form the majority of the population.

True, constitutions are living documents that can be amended and have been amended over time across the globe. In US and in India there are procedures in place but as you said it is neither impossible nor inconceivable to rewrite it or alter it beyond recognition.

But that being the case, anyone can do it, not just Islamic nations.

What we need to establish then is that Islamic nations have the propensity to do it over non-Islamic nations. I think you brought up good examples of Islamic nations doing it in the past. Also the fact that Islamic world has a high incidence of authoritarianism lends credence to the claim that a Muslim-majority India too could have its constitution altered to suit the regime's agenda.

Edited by K.Universe. - 10 years ago

Quote

Believe

@-Believe-

Stunner

+ 2

Posted: 10 years ago

#47

Higher birth rate Unconstitutional???😕

If someone say Hindus should be allowed to have 4 wives? then what will happen😛 Pope has ordered catholics to produce more children for demographic dividend. Mulla's have issued fatwas to produce 12 children. It is always easy for "sadhu","mulla","pope" without responsibilities to direct women about their "role", "duty", and to be under men's rule...Polulation is not merely a number... Like any statistical population, it is a group, and has many attributes attached to it... like religion,age ratio and sex ratio etc. Proportion of male - female...As female live longer generally there should be 1050 women per 1000 man. In india it is 930 so 12% already missing. If you see census data for the children born in last 3 years, you will be surprised to know that sex ratio has come down...and the other side developed nations are already worried about decrease in population. ...Japan's declining population is a serious problem...,as a one solution to the declining population problem...they plan to lifting the female employment rate,another reason ,85% population are skilled workers...unskilled hey tho they have time ...

In india...birth control pills should really be made for men... It makes more sense to unload a gun than to shoot a bulletproof vest...😊

Quote

Bazigar

@Bazigar

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

#48

On topic, in fact just like their counter part muslim fanatics encourages such thoughts same wise it is not a surprise when we hear from such things from hindu fundamentalist , after all both of them doing competition, so best solution as per them is increase population in already an overly populated country. Even its easy to sale these narrations when we have still 35% illiteracy level in many states. Best way to create influence among followers is create islamophbia and fear factor aka narration of us vs. them.

1. Lets Instances of scaremongers myth vs. fact :

Muslim polygamy for population explosion :

This is the most abused myth for all problem . The best way to create hatred is to accuse their religion. After all its best way to create envy among us ,how we are only getting one and they are getting four . After all ek ka ek vs ek ka char , simple fanatic calculator convert it 2 kids vs. 8 kids.
Fact is male female ratio among muslim is just like any human at best it is 50:50 and few difference depend on other external factor.

When ratio among them is 1000 male vs. 930 female then where they bring the so called extra producing machine ? Here it is difficult to have one female and we are speaking about 4 each. Even forget everything for simplicity just take muslim majority country like pakistan after all there also i am certain female ratio also low the way the patriarchy society is.

I dont know what koran says , religion says but i observe that they are as much as dedicated to their girlfriend and wife just like anyone else. Rotten eggs are there in every religion albit only law is different. Even for polygamy marriage law take action only when one wife make complaint in hindu marraige.

Here is an example of polygamy among communities :

Exact data on the subject is hard to come by, primarily because the 1961 census was the last one to look at marriages by religion and community. That survey, in fact, found that incidence of polygamy was the least among Muslims, with just 5.7% of the community likely to practice it. Hindus actually had a higher incidence rate of polygamy, at 5.8%, although other communities, including Buddhists and Jains, were proportionally even more likely to practice polygamy. At the top were tribals, 15.25% of whom were polygamous.

Even countries like Iran , turkey , Indonesia and even Bangladesh and many countries have low TFR compare to India. It is more to do with other factors less to do with difference in religion .
No doubt this absurd law should change for dignity and equality to woman and we need UCC , but saying it is create population explosion is fallacy. Its a twisted law of rich/influential populace in the name of religion to favour themselves for more marriage .

Wherever they are in large number they create conflict in india ,more of this narration directed by politics and whoever take them as issues for eg. even in place like Delhi where christian have negligible population church burning incident can happen and attempt to create communal conflict can happen during election, lets take instances like West Bengal , kerala where muslim constitute large population still did not witness major riots when whole india face major riots in near history eg 1992. Albit the story is different like many northern states or say Mumbai riots.

2. Will Muslim becomes majority.

Fact is TFR decreasing continuously among both hindu and musim , albit it is little higer than hindus. Still slowly TFR will decrease among them after few decades and will become more or less same among both hindu muslim . So a stage will come when it reaches towards 2 TFR which will more or less normalise population .

There are many reason for this high TFR like poverty , illiteracy , education, culture values and blind faith on religious ideas as kids are god gift etc. Just like TFR in states like Bihar, UP , Rajastan , MP etc. are more than 3.5 compare to India average of 2.5 . Out of that as sub group , In religion demographic profile illiteracy , poverty , less education etc. is more rampant among Muslim so also TFR is also high in those state. When we think extra kid is a burden a poor think its asset with additional work force. Another one is Muslims more concentrated in cities ,urban areas where reach of health care is high which also contribute to lower infant morality rate. The first solution is first control TFR among these major populace states and simultaneously take steps for literacy, awareness of birth control , target poverty, contraceptive pill condom and sex education etc. and lastly drive against these fundamentalists and fanatics of all religion who encourages more kid .

The next we should move towards first from two child policy and later a compulsory one child policy rather then this all these kids kwak kwak explosion. Which will automatically solve these conflict among religion on the basis of TFR.

There is a reason when i am right to oppose these fanatics. When in developed countries narration is concentrated in jobs, education , health etc. in developing countries these issues like religion issues , conversion, love jihad , tera religion mera religion are prominent . May be for every other issues we have harry puttor wala broom , no doubt we will witness more issues like these in broom raaj when even a Christmas day observed as good governance day.

Edited by Bazigar - 10 years ago

Quote

Bazigar

@Bazigar

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

#49

Last scrap with some facts :)

Here is the reality that consider facts and all hypothesis , even the irrational one. Even considering all hypothesis muslim population will be less than 20% and we should worry about overall population rather than religion. The real fact is even if current trend will continue then after a time population will stabilise , eg. its not like among hindu it will decrese less then 1.5 so also muslim will near to reach 1.5 TFR in future. simultaneously it will stabilize in all religion and it is decreasing.

NUMBER THEORY

With current trends, it will take 220 years for India's Muslim population to equal Hindu numbers

The more sensible conclusion about our population is that those growth rates will slow and our population will eventually plateau and even decline.

Dilip Dsouza
Dec 16, 2014 06:30 am

69.9K

Total Views

Photo Credit: Wikimedia Commons

The problem is, the numbers simply do not add up. Or project out. Religious data from Indian censuses often appears to be made public later than the rest of the data from them, and this fuels all kinds of fearful and jaundiced speculation about rising tides of non-Hindus. But when it is indeed made public, the conclusion is inescapable: the speculation is uninformed. Foolish and absurd, really.

But designed to be dangerous, nevertheless.

For example, take just the numbers of Hindus and Muslims in India. In 1991, the census counted 106.7 million Muslims and 690.1 million Hindus. Ten years later, those numbers had risen to 138.2 million and 827.6 million, respectively. Put another way, there was a 29.5% increase through that decade in the number of Muslims, corresponding to an annual growth rate of 2.62%. Hindu numbers increased by 19.9%, with an annual growth rate of 1.83%.

Certainly, the count of Muslims increased faster than that of Hindus through that decade. There are reasons for that that are worth exploring, but that is for another article. They do not change this analysis materially. Some pretty elementary arithmetic will show you that at those growth rates, it will be nearly 220 years before the Muslim population equals the Hindu population. 2233 AD, to be precise. Stop a moment to digest that number. Are our resident demagogues and pontificators really trying to get you perturbed about something that may come to pass in the year 2233?

Scratch that question. After all, they have tried hard to get us perturbed about a mosque that dated from the 1520s, nearly 500 years ago.

Still, a distant future is the least of it. If we actually maintain the growth rates of the 1990s mentioned above, consider that in the year 2233, there will be nearly 56 billion Indian Muslims and 56 billion Indian Hindus. Sixteen times the current population of the entire world crammed into this one country. If that does not seem impossibly bizarre, think of this: where you sit today, reading these words in relative peace, there will be about 100 people, evenly divided into Hindus and Muslims. Over 100 Indians for every single Indian today.

And we have not even taken into account the Christians, Jains, Sikhs, Parsis, Buddhists and others you can find in this country, and their contribution to the population.

In fact, if you crunch the numbers in the same way for Christians, also the target of scaremongers, they turn out even more ridiculous. In 1991, India had about 19 million Christians, a number that rose to 24 million in 2001. That is an annual growth rate of 2.36%. With those figures, India's Christians will take about 670 years to catch up to their Hindu brethren's count - and what will that count be? About 195 trillion (yes, trillion) Hindus and 195 trillion Christians. (We're not even considering Muslims and the others here). About 60,000 times the world's population crammed into this one country. About 400,000 Indians for each Indian alive today. Talk about imploding.

Such is the absurd logic that the scarifiers seem to believe - or do they really? - and would have us swallow. Such is the absurd spectre that your garden variety demagogue is working hard to put in your mind. And it is absurd above all because if we do keep up those growth rates for 220 or (some god forbid) 670 years, we will implode under ourselves long before we get there.

Which leads us to the more sensible conclusion about our population: those growth rates will slow and our population will eventually plateau and even decline. In fact, the signs of such slowing are already visible in the census data, if you are willing to look without being blinded by prejudice. We will probably plateau sometime later this century. This is no surprise: a declining population growth rate is, after all, one of the fruits of development.

And if that is what is really in our future, the Muslim and Christian populations will never catch up to the Hindu population. Far from it: what is a given is that Muslims will remain some distance below 20% of the Indian population, and Christians will remain under 2.5%. For every Indian Muslim, there are now and will remain about five Indian Hindus. For every Indian Christian, there are now and will remain about 35 Hindus.

Not much of a spectre, is it? So do not fall for it.

http://scroll.in/article/694975/With-current-trends,-it-will-take-220-years-for-India%27s-Muslim-population-to-equal-Hindu-numbers

Edited by Bazigar - 10 years ago

Quote

@K.Universe.

Voyager

Posted: 10 years ago

#50

Bazigar, I concur with you that a Muslim-majority India is not happening anytime soon.

But if we are looking at it from all angles, we can't overlook other factors that might boost Muslim populations - factors such as forced conversions and refugees from other countries (Afghan, Bangladesh, Rohingya, etc.)

This is not a thread to disparage Islam or Muslims. At least, I don't see it that way. What is worth debating, however, is whether a Muslim-majority situation, which would potentially turn India into an Islamic state, is good or bad for India. Yes, we are armchair theorizing but there is nothing wrong peeking into the future once in a while. Things need not always be about the short term.

Quote

1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 14

Is a higher birthrate the solution? - Page 5

Related Topics

Explore Topics