#India beef ban
Text
this piece is written so well, reads just like a story, that i'm struggling on which excerpts to showcase for this post. please read the whole thing when you get the chance!
“They forbade us from feeding our own before we went to feed their children. They never prohibited us physically,” she said, her jaw clenched, adding that the fear they inculcated was enough for them to obey. “They didn’t want their children nursing from the breast of a woman who had just fed an untouchable child.”
Driving her stick farther into the ground, she added: “Sons of b******.”
“I was distressed about starving my child, but I always went along with it because that is how it worked,” Narsamma said. She would be compensated sporadically. “I was paid with a sack of grains or 10 or 20 paise [less than 1 cent].”
She looked around, before adding: “Soon as I reached their premises, I was provided with a piece of soap and was asked to take a bath near the cattle shed. Which human being would want to be treated that way? I left my baby starving in the house to feed their child. And while we slaved away our bodies for them, they saw it as nothing less than their birthright to treat us like that.”
...
The women began to speak about Madiga food habits and, in particular, eating beef.
Most Hindus who are not Dalits do not eat beef because cattle are considered sacred animals, but it is a staple food for many Dalit communities like mine.
For Madigas, meat from the dead cattle our community disposed of was often our only source of food, and we became associated with consuming beef. Non-Dalits have long humiliated people who eat beef by saying they are impure. But beef was not only an easy, protein-rich source of food for my community, it also played a significant role in our nutritional customs.
Such customs have faded as our community has tried to dissociate itself from a cultural practice that we were shamed for. The marginalisation of those who eat beef has only grown since 2014 after Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government came to power and banned the slaughter of cattle in many states, fuelling the rise of violent vigilantism against beef-eating minorities.
Beef played a particular postpartum role for Madigas. “For about 12 days following childbirth, our elders made sure we ate a nutritious diet of a different assortment of beef parts every day,” Narsamma said. “The elders carefully chalked out every day’s diet to make sure we had the strength to sustain ourselves after giving birth and to produce sufficient nutritious milk for our babies. All the castes knew about this custom and hence had a popular opinion that our women produce nutritious milk.”
The sun had nearly set, and the women fanned themselves to keep the mosquitoes away. They would soon return home to tend to their families and the evening chores.
“They humiliated us as impure and dirty every day for eating beef, but they wanted the milk of the beef eaters,” Narsamma said. “They say we polluted the air they breathed, but they wanted our bodies to feed their children.”
#dalit#resources#intersectional feminism#bipoc#madiga#narendra modi#india#casteism#caste abolition#Ramavaram#Telangana#religion#hinduism#reaux speaks#dalit feminism
110 notes
·
View notes
Text
French farming unions are taking aim at the European Union’s free-trade agreements, which they say open the door to unfair competition from products arriving from overseas. At a time when the EU is urging farmers to adopt more sustainable – and sometimes more costly – agricultural practices, unions say these trade deals are making it hard for them to stay solvent.
French farmers say that one of their biggest fears is that Chilean apples, Brazilian grains and Canadian beef will flood the European market, thereby undermining their livelihoods. France’s farmers continued to demonstrate on the country’s motorways on Wednesday, protesting against rising costs, over-regulation and free-trade agreements –partnerships between the EU and exporting nations that the farming unions say leads to unfair competition.
The EU has signed several free-trade agreements in recent years, all with the objective of facilitating the movement of goods and services. But farmers say the deals bring with them insurmountable challenges.
"These agreements aim to reduce customs duties, with maximum quotas for certain agricultural products and non-tariff barriers," said Elvire Fabry, senior researcher at the Jacques Delors Institute, a French think-tank dedicated to European affairs. "They also have an increasingly broad regulatory scope to promote European standards for investment, protection of intellectual property, geographical indications and sustainable development standards."
South American trade deal in the crosshairs
Some non-EU countries – such as Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland – maintain comprehensive free-trade agreements with the EU because they are part of the European Economic Area. This allows them to benefit from the free movement of goods, services, capital and people.
Other nations farther afield have signed more variable agreements with the EU, including Canada, Japan, Mexico, Vietnam and Ukraine. The EU also recently signed an accord with Kenya and a deal with New Zealand that will come into force this year; negotiations are also under way with India and Australia.
However, a draft agreement between the EU and the South American trade bloc Mercosur is creating the most concern. Under discussion since the 1990s, this trade partnership between Argentina, Brazil, Uruguay and Paraguay would create the world's largest free-trade area, a market encompassing 780 million people.
French farmers are particularly concerned about the deal’s possible effect on agriculture. The most recent version of the text introduces quotas for Mercosur countries to export 99,000 tonnes of beef, 100,000 tonnes of poultry and 180,000 tonnes of sugar per year, with little or no customs duties imposed. In exchange, duties would also be lowered on exports from the EU on many “protected designation of origin” (PDO) products.
At a time when the EU is urging farmers to adopt more sustainable agricultural practices, French unions say these agreements would open the door to massive imports – at more competitive prices – of products that do not meet the same environmental standards as those originating in Europe. French farmers are calling out what they say is unfair competition from farmers in South America who can grow GMO crops and use growth-promoting antibiotics on livestock, which is banned in the EU.
Trade unions from various sectors went into action after the European Commission informed them on January 24 that negotiations with Mercosur could be concluded "before the end of this mandate", i.e., before the European Parliament elections in June.
The FNSEA, France’s biggest farming union, immediately called for a "clear rejection of free-trade agreements" while the pro-environmental farming group Confédération Paysanne (Farmers' Confederation) called for an "immediate end to negotiations" on this type of agreement.
A mixed record
"In reality, the impact of these free-trade agreements varies from sector to sector," said Fabry. "Negotiations prior to agreements aim to calibrate the opening up of trade to limit the negative impact on the most exposed sectors. And, at the same time, these sectors can benefit from other agreements. In the end, it's a question of finding an overall balance."
This disparity is glaringly obvious in the agricultural sector. "The wine and spirits industry as well as the dairy industry stand to gain more than livestock farmers, for example," said Fabry. These sectors are the main beneficiaries of free-trade agreements, according to a 2023 report by the French National Assembly.
"The existence of trade agreements that allow customs duty differentials to be eliminated is an 'over-determining factor' in the competitiveness of French wines," wrote FranceAgriMer, a national establishment for agriculture and maritime products under the authority of the French ministry of agriculture in a 2021 report. The majority of free-trade agreements lower or abolish customs duties to allow the export of many PDO products, a category to which many wines belong.
However, the impact on meat is less clear-cut. While FranceAgriMer says the balance between imports and exports appears to be in the EU's favour for pork, poultry exports seem to be declining as a result of the agreements. Hence the fears over the planned treaty with New Zealand, which provides for 36,000 tonnes of mutton to be imported into the EU, equivalent to 45% of French production in 2022. France,however, still has a large surplus of grains except for soya.
‘A bargaining chip’
Beyond the impact on agriculture, "this debate on free-trade agreements must take into account other issues", said Fabry. "We are in a situation where the EU is seeking to secure its supplies and in particular its supplies of strategic minerals. Brazil's lithium, cobalt, graphite and other resource reserves should not be overlooked."
The agreement with Chile should enable strategic minerals to be exported in exchange for agricultural products. Germany strongly supports the agreement with Mercosur, as it sees it as an outlet for its industrial sectors, according to Fabry.
"In virtually all free-trade agreements, agriculture is always used as a bargaining chip in exchange for selling cars or Airbus planes," Véronique Marchesseau, general-secretary of the Confédération Paysanne, told AFP.
Michèle Boudoin, president of the French National Sheep Federation, told AFP that the agreement with New Zealand will "destabilise the lamb market in France".
"We know that Germany needs to export its cars, that France needs to sell its wheat, and we're told that we need an ally in the Pacific tocounter China and Russia. But if that is the case, then we need help to be able to produce top-of-the-line lamb, for example," she said.
Finally, "there is a question of influence", said Fabry. "These agreements also remain a way for the EU to promote its environmental standards to lead its partners along the path of ecological transition, even if this has to be negotiated," said Fabry.
Marc Fesneau, the French minister of agriculture, made the same argument. "In most cases, the agreements have been beneficial, including to French agriculture," Fesneau wrote on X last week, adding: "They will be even more so if we ensure that our standards are respected."
Mercosur negotiations suspended?
As the farmers’ promised “siege” of Paris and other major locations across France continues, the French government has been trying to reassure agricultural workers about Mercosur, even though President Emmanuel Macron and Brazilian President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva relaunched negotiations in December. "France is clearly opposed to the signing of the Mercosur treaty," Prime Minister Gabriel Attal acknowledged last week.
The Élysée Palace even said on Monday evening that EU negotiations with the South American bloc had been suspended because of France's opposition to the treaty. The conditions are "not ripe" for concluding the negotiations, said Eric Mamer, spokesman for the European Commission. "However, discussions are ongoing."
Before being adopted, the agreement would have to be passed unanimously by the European Parliament, then ratified individually by the 27 EU member states.
#nunyas news#eco stuff all these countries passing their#pollution off to other countries#then adding in transport#making it far worse
6 notes
·
View notes
Note
So you are saying you read these lyrics:
It’s yellow, spicy, / and although does not smell nice, TAJ MAHAL / Add onions and potatoes / but not beef, NAMASTE
and did not realise that adding random words from indian culture and saying shit like "oh it doesn't smell nice" they are racist? You must live under a rock babe. Also the fact that curry is not even fucking Indian and a british concept???
personally ? no because when i read the lyrics, my mind immediately traveled to the fact that korea and india have different palates and the lyric can allude to the fact that the smell of curry itself is different from what they're used to and for lyrical purposes, such words were chosen
like i said, the song was made before cultural awareness is a thing and if you look at norazo's songs and genre and target audience, ignorance is expected. I'm not saying it's okay or excusable or should be brushed off, heck even norazo apologized for writing and publishing the song when years after its released, people were finally calling him out and the song is now banned from broadcasting stations. but to just call the song writer racist is... wow... and no, i don't live under a rock but where i come from, we don't have much desis or desi culture so it's still a learning curve for me. but it's amazing that you just called someone "living under a rock" for not knowing something. and yeah i do know that the word curry is british but i have absolutely no idea why or how or when it became an issue because like i said, no one here is talking about it. that being said, did you know that sushi is not originated from japan ?? did you know raw fish weren't consumed in japanese sushi until a norwegian or someone scandinavian came to japan and convinced people that their salmon, unlike the japanese one is not pumped with mercury ?
don't use that fucking tone on me unless you understand and know about every single fucking cultural issues on earth. you're allowed to educate but you're not allowed to get all high and mighty when you can't even get off anon because you're scared that me or others might find out how ignorant you really are about other cultures and you just want to feel justified due to this unfortunate situation. you're taking advantage over someone's mistake to make yourself seem better and you even took this opportunity to find self justification and for one short second feel good about yourself because you know when you're off anon you're nothing but a cowardly hypocrite with inferiority complex
8 notes
·
View notes
Text
Look I understand the sentiment of "what will China even use our information for", and you're right, for the average person who lives outside of China there really isn't anything about your information being sold/used in China that's oh so different from your information being sold/used in the US, or Japan, or India, or anywhere else in the world.
But like. My family has been repeatedly targeted by the CCP for literally decades now. Even if I live in the States, I have close family members in mainland China who have been and continue to be targeted by the CCP. "What will China even use your information for"? The Chinese government can and will use anything I post online to target the people closest to me and take absolute glee in doing so.
And yeah not everything on the Internet is about me yadda yadda but that's why this is on my personal blog. It's a vent for myself and the people who know me and follow me and know my history.
So, no, I don't support TikTok. But even more than that, I also don't support the US banning a social media website or literally any website at all. Just because I personally have beef with TikTok and the CCP, has nothing to do with the fact that what the US government is trying to do is racist, sinophobic, and absolutely a form of censorship. And I'll clench my jaws and ball my hands into fists because I believe our government, the one I live under, should not have the right to declare where and how we get our information, and they should not have the authority to outright ban content from another country.
4 notes
·
View notes
Note
Do you think beef should be banned from India? State reason for your answer.
Idk? I think everyone has a right to eat what they want, but eating beef can harm the sentiments of a major part of this population, so maybe it should be ok to ban it, or ban it in some specific regions where most people are against eating it. We have our rights, but we cannot hurt someone's sentiments using our rights yk
19 notes
·
View notes
Text
india is a really good example of animal rights being used to harm minorities. it's been used to uphold casteism for years. vigilantes lynch people who are suspected of slaughtering or selling beef, of course almost all of these people are poor working dalits or muslims. eating beef is literally stigmatized. this is the society that western ARAs uphold as an ideal one, an example to follow, where you fucking die if you have anything to do with producing of eating beef. cattle slaughter is banned in most states btw so all old and sick cattle are just left to suffer in the streets!!!!!! Wow such welfare!!!!!!!!!!!! Now everyone can crash their cars into livestock and die!!! So cool! Truly an exemplary society!
#the amount of times my dad had almost crashed the car into a calf because this society is so fucking stupid.#anyways i hope all ARAs either get better or die painfully :3 :3 :3
3 notes
·
View notes
Note
Aww anon, I am a practicing Hindu and your ask made me tear up 🥲 thank you so much! That's so sweet of you ❤️ yes we don't eat beef, it's not expressly banned in our religion (well nothing is mandatory it's all based on your choice) but majority of practicing Hindus don't eat beef and that is why any Indian outlet of multinational food chains don't sell any beef based dish in India, they won't gain much profit if they do so even though a lot of people here consume beef but still majority of us don't.
Like McD, KFC etc in India only sell chicken, egg and meat based dishes, no beef.
now it makes so much sense to me why whenever i visit an indian restaurant, the top dishes are always chicken (and i love every part of it)!
thank you for sharing that, i had no idea 💖💖
2 notes
·
View notes
Note
according to alex, its going to be beef. banned everywhere except china... and russia. "i was right about the west going to war with russia, i was right that thered be inflation, i was right about pedophilic drag queen story time (???????) and i'll be right about this". starting in aus and nz and spreading to america, then europe then africa and asia like a virus
Australia is gonna ban beef? sounds questionable! although immigration from India is rising…
2 notes
·
View notes
Text
How do you attract yourself to deer?
what does a deer eat in the wild?
Grasses, sedges, the leaves and shoots of trees and other woody plants are all on the menu. Fruit and berries are sometimes eaten too, while tree bark is taken when other food is scarce.
Deer are large animals that have a white patch on their head, long legs, and slender body. Some also have brown stripes or spots. They live in woodland, savannas, and grasslands and can be seen by the roadside, grazing on leaves. In the evening, they sleep in the shade of trees or shrubs.
Is deer meat is halal?
This means that most herbivores or cud-chewing animals like cattle, deer, sheep, goats, and antelope are considered halal to consume.
Is deer meat good to eat?
Venison's health benefits are many. For starters, it's one of the leanest, heart-healthiest meats available — low in fat, high in protein and packed with zinc, haem iron, and vitamin B. It's also economical. “If you get two deer a year, you have enough food for the entire year,” Czerwony says.
What is a deer meat called?
In current usage, the term venison is used to describe the meat of a deer or antelope. Venison comes from animals such as our native whitetail deer, reindeer, moose, elk, and several non-native animals such as red deer, axis deer, fallow deer, sika deer, blackbuck antelope, and nilgai antelope.
Is deer meat legal in UK?
The UK has extremely high standards in relation to deer management and food safety, as well as legal protections which ensures that our deer are humanely culled. All venison must meet rigorous handling and processing requirements before it is allowed to be passed on to the consumer.
Yes, Deer is halal! Deer meat is confirmed to be Halal by the Quran and the Sunnah. This is because it does not fall under the category of prohibited animals - It is no swine but rather a cow animal. The deer is only halal if it is hunted and slaughtered according to Islamic laws for meats.
What does deer taste like?
When people describe venison taste and texture, they often use words like rich or earthy; this is a festive-tasting meat, often imbued with hints of the acorns, sage and herbs that the deer enjoyed during its life. It's also considered to be less juicy and succulent than beef, but also smoother and firmer.
Why is deer meat banned in India?
Eating deer is widely forbidden and often even criminal in India, also known as Bharat. This is the reason why: Protected Species: The Wild Life (Protection) Act, 1972, provides protection for the majority of deer species found in India, including the Chital, Sambar, and Muntjac.
What are the disadvantages of deer meat?
While deer meat can be pretty nutritious, you should be aware of the risks of consuming venison. Certain wild animals can carry infectious diseases like: Brucellosis. As a hunter, you increase the risk of this disease when you come in contact with the deer's blood and organs.
1 note
·
View note
Text
The question of whether it is acceptable to ban beef in a secular country like India on religious grounds is a complex and debated issue. India, as a secular nation, upholds the principle of separating state affairs from religious influence, as enshrined in its Constitution. However, the matter of beef consumption intersects with cultural, religious, and ethical considerations, leading to diverse opinions.
Secularism in India: India's commitment to secularism implies that the state does not favor any particular religion and respects the freedom of individuals to practice their beliefs. It aims to ensure equal treatment of all religions under the law.
The Beef Ban Debate: The beef ban in some Indian states is often rooted in cultural and religious sentiments, particularly concerning the sacred status of cows in Hinduism. For many Hindus, the cow is revered, and its slaughter is considered offensive. States that have implemented beef bans often cite these cultural and religious sentiments as a basis for their legislation.
Arguments in Favor:
Respect for Religious Sentiments: Supporters of the beef ban argue that it aligns with the cultural and religious sentiments of a significant section of the population, particularly Hindus.
Preservation of Cows: Proponents contend that banning cow slaughter contributes to the preservation of cows, which are considered sacred by many.
Arguments Against:
Religious Pluralism: Critics argue that imposing a beef ban based on religious grounds contradicts the principle of religious pluralism and freedom of choice.
Economic Impact: Some critics highlight the economic impact on communities involved in the cattle trade, as well as the potential loss of livelihoods.
Balancing Secularism and Religious Sentiments: The challenge lies in finding a balance between respecting religious sentiments and upholding the principles of secularism. Striking this balance involves crafting policies that respect diverse beliefs while safeguarding individual freedoms.
Legal Landscape: The legality of beef bans has been challenged in various courts, with judgments often emphasizing the need for a nuanced approach that respects religious sentiments without infringing on individual rights.
The question of whether it is acceptable to ban beef in a secular country like India on religious grounds reflects the ongoing dialogue between cultural, religious, and legal considerations. Achieving a harmonious balance that respects diverse beliefs while upholding secular principles remains a complex challenge for policymakers and society at large
0 notes
Text
me: "okay, i could talk forever about how nationalism in india, whether indian nationalism or hindu nationalism, is destroying the country, there are literally homes being raided because extremist groups search them for beef, manipur is burning, churches in india are being bombed and destroyed and christians and muslims are being attacked by extremists for "forcing religion on people", the consumption of beef has been banned by modi in favour of a hindu majority however india is one of the world's biggest producers of beef"
also me when jana gana mana is playing: ‼️ 🎵 💕 ⭐ 🤩
1 note
·
View note
Text
Forage Seeds Market Analysis and Insights 2023, Size, Scope, Growth Factors, Business Revenues till 2033
Rising demand for meat and poultry products across the world is a prominent factor expected to drive the global forage grass seed swiftly during the projection period.
According to Future Market Insights (FMI), the global forage seeds market is likely to be valued at US$ 12,132.9 million in 2023 and is anticipated to reach US$ 30,996.9 million by 2033. Overall forage sales are poised to surge at a CAGR of 9.8% from 2023 to 2033.
In recent years, forage crops have gained immense traction, especially across cattle and poultry sectors. They are being grown specifically for grazing by livestock or making animal feeds. These crops provide the bedrock for sustainable agriculture.
View Free Sample Report@ https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/sample/rep-gb-199
Increasing consumption of meat products worldwide coupled with growing preferences towards natural and organic animal feeds is expected to generate high demand for pasture seed during the forecast period.
According to the Institute of Food Technologists (IFT), a new study has found that global meat consumption will surge by 1.4% per year through 2023. This in turn will positively influence forage seeds market.
Rising demand for organic productsdue to growing health consciousness among consumers is another key factor impacting the forage grass seed industry. To meet consumer needs, forage seed-producing companies are trying to offer high-quality, organic forage seeds at lower costs for animal consumption.
Subsequently, preference for organic beef and livestock products, which have no antibiotics, and no growth-promoting hormones are increasing the demand for organic products. Regular red beef consumption can cause diseases such as cancer, cholesterol strokes, and heart disease. Owing to these factors, the leading forage product companies are also focusing on organic products such as beet pulp or hay for feeding livestock.
Introduction of new government regulations is also prompting manufacturers to choose forage seeds. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration modified its regulation to reduce the use of antibiotics used for growth enhancement.
Similarly, the use of antibiotics is banned in Europe, and this has created immense growth for other organic forage grass seed products and related products. Owing to this, more product differentiation through innovation is required to create market growth and increase the profitability of companies.
Nowadays, certification programs are widely utilized as the norm for seed quality control. The necessity to certify the identity of these varieties for buyers by conducting field inspections of the seed crop arose in the middle of the 20th century as a result of the growing number of varieties resulting from plant breeding initiatives.
These programs were frequently voluntary and created by manufacturers who intended to improve the reputation of their seeds in the marketplace. This was done in several nations, with the Crop Improvement Associations in the USA serving as a good example. Manufacturers who have the certification have a competitive advantage over the other manufacturers.
Key Takeaways from the Report:
Global forage seed sales are slated to surge at a CAGR of 9.8% during the forecast period.
In terms of product type, alfalfa segment is expected to register a CAGR of 7.2% from 2023 to 2033
Based on livestock type, cattle segment holds a prominent share of the global forage seeds market and is projected to expand at a CAGR of 7.0% during the forecast period
The United States forage seeds market is forecast to reach a valuation of US$ 3,251.6 million by 2023.
Germany forage seeds market is anticipated to expand at 9.5% CAGR throughout the forecast period.
Forage seed demand in India is slated to rise at 8.1% CAGR between 2023 and 2033.
"Growing focus towards increasing meat production to meet the global demand will have a profound influence on forage seeds market during the projection period. Besides this, rising prevalence of deficiency diseases in livestock and high demand for natural animal feeds will boost forage seed sales,” says a lead analyst at Future Market Insights.
Who is Winning?
Leading frozen ready meal companies profiled in the report include Germinal GB, Allied Seed, LLC, S&W Seed Company, BASF SE, Hancock Farm & Seed Co. Inc., Heritage Seed Company, Dow Agro Sciences LLC, Northstar Seed Ltd, and Central Garden & Pet Company
Get More Valuable Insights
Future Market Insights, in its new offering, provides an unbiased analysis of the forage seeds market presenting historical demand data (2018 to 2022) and forecast statistics for the period from 2023 to 2033.
The study provides compelling insights into the forage seeds market based on product type (alfalfa, clover, ryegrass, chicory) and livestock type (poultry, cattle, pork/swine) across several regions.
Key Segments
By Product Type:
Alfalfa
Clover
Ryegrass
Chicory
Others
By Livestock Type:
Poultry
Cattle
Pork/Swine
Others
By Region:
North America
Latin America
Europe
East Asia
South Asia
Oceania
Middle East & Africa
To see Full Report, Click@ https://www.futuremarketinsights.com/reports/global-forage-seed-market
About the Food & Beverage Division at Future Market Insights Expert analysis, actionable insights, and strategic recommendations- the food & beverage team at Future Market Insights helps clients from all over the globe with their unique business intelligence needs. With a repertoire of over 1,000 reports and 1 million+ data points, the team has analyzed the food & beverage industry lucidly in 50+ countries for over a decade. The team provides end-to-end research and consulting services; reach out to explore how we can help.
0 notes
Quote
In Indian villages, one cow, when killed, can feed many families over days especially when dried or pickled. While banning cow slaughter in one fell sweep, has the government made alternative arrangements for these families? Are they somehow of lesser consequence than the cows of the state? It is no coincidence that it is these very same communities that will be targeted by brutal lynch mobs. While on the one hand farmers face the prospect of economic downturn because of the anti-cow slaughter Bill, extortion, harassment and exploitation by vigilante gangs are also being enabled by the government.
Dr Sylvia Karpagam, 'The Karnataka anti-cow slaughter bill is against the poor', Round Table India
#Round Table India#Sylvia Karpagam#India#Indian villages#beef consumption#cow slaughter ban#lynch mobs#economic downturn#extortion#harassment#exploitation#vigilante gangs#Government of Karnataka#Karnataka Prevention of Cow Slaughter and Cattle Preservation Act
3 notes
·
View notes
Text
The Political and Religious Nexus in India
In 1976, the Forty-second Amendment of India’s Constitution rendered it a secular nation. Although the most commonly accepted definition of “secular” is the separation of religion from civic affairs and the state, India’s version of it is a little different – here, the constitution has explicitly allowed for state interference in religious affairs and vice versa.
India’s version of secularism:
So what does India’s definition of secularism mean? With a country as religiously, culturally, and linguistically diverse as India, religion is a huge part of many constituents’ identities. Like most developed nations, India has no official state religion, and all government educational institutions are prohibited from imparting religious instruction. However, what sets it apart is the fact that many of India’s laws vary depending on an individual’s religion. This means that the laws pertaining to marriage, divorce, inheritance, and alimony could literally be different, depending on whether a person follows Hinduism or Islam. Although this may sound bizarre, it’s important to remember that separate laws on the basis of religion have been accepted in India for centuries – even the British Raj, in an attempt to honor their non-interference policy with respect to religion, permitted Muslims and Hindus to govern themselves differently for certain matters. After independence, the Muslim community in particular insisted that India keep the policy intact as it was significant to their Muslim identity and religion. Historic precedent won over.
The impacts of religious influence in legislation:
This system creates a myriad of problems – first, the country does not have a uniform civil code. Under this system, equality before the law does not exist because individuals are held to different standards depending on the religion they follow. Second, for citizens who don’t follow the same religion as their families, it’s unclear which set of laws they will be held to. Forcing people to prove that they follow a particular faith is a slippery slope, because even within a religion, everyone practices differently and there’s no real way to test faith. The entire process of having to prove religious belief inherently infringes on the right to religion.
However, proponents of the system in place argue that since Hinduism is by far the most dominant religion in the country, by enacting one set of laws for everyone, it’s likely that non-Hindus will have Hindu sensibilities and ideals imposed onto them. There are many differences between India’s religions, which makes legislation difficult.
How has religion bled into legislation?
For example, while Hindus, Christians, and most other religions view marriage as both a legal and civil contract between two individuals, Muslim marriage is seen as a purely civil contract. Under their laws, if a man wants to annul his marriage, all he has to do is say the word “talaq” three times, while if a woman wants to divorce her husband, she must go to the court and prove that he’s violated one or more of the marital duties outlined in the Quran. The triple-talaq system was outlawed in 2019, intended to improve circumstances for Muslim women who would suffer as a result of these meager divorce proceedings. However, the Muslim community viewed it as another attack on their beliefs.
Hinduism, too, is capable of extremism. The Bharatiya Janata Party, a Hindu-majority party currently holding office in India, made one of their first moves in power implementing an all India ban on beef. Beef is a rich source of protein that’s widely consumed by Muslims and Christians, especially in the South, so the ban was obviously met with a lot of resistance and protest. Although the official reasoning behind the ban was to prevent animal cruelty, most cattle given up for slaughter are old and have reached the end of their productive lives. By selling old cows, farmers are able to recover a crucial part of the value of their cattle – a study from India’s National Dairy Development Board reported that 47% of dairy farmers’ profits come from selling old cows. Cows are considered sacred in Hindu culture, so it’s likely the law was only intended to further Hindu ideals in the country, as called for by the Hindu nationalist group Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, of which Prime Minister Modi was once a member.
What’s the solution?
This perspective poses a new question – what place do religious morals have in legislation? Since Hindus and Muslims believe in different values, the idea that a uniform civil code would impose on Muslims is conceivable, considering the fact that Hindus make up about 80% of the population. But the concept of having separate laws based on (loosely-defined) religions is unethical too. The honest answer is that India’s definition of secularism doesn’t work. We need a uniform civil code, but we also need to hold it to certain standards and keep it free of religious influence. The right to religion already protects the interests of each group in India as long as nobody is imposing their religious views on anyone else. In the case of the beef ban, there’s no reason to ban cattle slaughter when the slaughter of chickens and fish is still legal, and just because the cow is holy to Hindus, doesn’t mean everyone needs to refrain from eating beef. Similarly, when you look at Islam’s marriage, property, and alimony laws, it’s evident that they are discriminatory towards women. Practices like child marriage, unequal inheritance rights, and unequal divorce rights constitute gender discrimination, which is unconstitutional. They could never be passed under a uniform civil code. Although a Muslim parent may choose to abide by Islam law and award their son twice of what they award their daughter anyway, this doesn’t necessarily need to be enforced via the law. Similarly, if a Muslim husband wants to get a divorce, he can always just go to the courts and get it done legally.
Religious conflict has been prevalent in India for centuries. It serves to be the greatest divider even in the most educated of societies, and one of the first steps towards eliminating religious conflict is by ensuring equal treatment for everybody in the eyes of the law. Unfortunately, political parties still try to ignite these tensions in attempts to win elections (M.K. Stalin controversially criticized the BJP in an open letter for using the brute majority to pass laws). The only way to even begin the process of restoring peace is to redefine secularism in India. When you allow religious laws to supersede state laws, you set the stage for conflict and inequality.
#religion and politics#religion#hinduism#islam#muslim#triple talaq#hindu#hindutva#india#politics#narendra modi#divorce#women's rights#beef ban#article#writing#analysis#extremism#secular
1 note
·
View note
Text
India Cattle Trade Ban to Halt Beef Exports, Lead to Job Losses
Reuters, May 29, 2017
NEW DELHI--India’s ban on the trade of cattle for slaughter threatens $4 billion in annual beef exports and millions of jobs if the government does not revoke the stoppage decreed last week, according to two industry officials.
In the latest setback to the Muslim-dominated meat industry, Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government decreed animal markets will only be able to trade cattle for agricultural purposes such as plowing and dairy production.
The ban is likely to further alienate Muslims, who make up 14 percent of India’s 1.3 billion people, and raise communal and religious tensions. Hindu hardliners and cow vigilante groups have been increasingly asserting themselves since Modi’s Hindu nationalist government came to power in 2014.
Most of India’s beef comes from water buffalo rather than cows, which are considered holy by Hindus, but local cattle traders and slaughterhouses have repeatedly come under attacks from activist groups that oppose the meat trade.
“In the garb of the order that prohibits the trading of cattle at organized markets, the government has tried to impose a ban on the meat industry,” Abdul Faheem Qureshi, head of the Muslim All India Jamiatul Quresh Action Committee, told Reuters.
“Meat supplies will very soon grind to a halt in India and abroad if either the government does not repeal this draconian order or a court does not step in,” Qureshi said.
Indian meat traders, under the aegis of the Quresh Action Committee and other trade and industry associations, plan to petition India’s Supreme Court in the next couple of days to get the government order rescinded.
“Exports will come to a halt because slaughterhouses will find it extremely difficult to buy cattle and we also apprehend widespread job losses in the sector, which supports millions of people,” said Qureshi.
Abattoirs across India on March 31 called off a strike after four days when the most populous state of Uttar Pradesh, ruled by Modi’s party, gave assurances that it would renew the licenses of slaughterhouses and protect them against the attacks from cow vigilante groups.
The slaughter industry stabilized after the strike but the latest order has unsettled trade again, said Priya Sud, partner at Al Noor Exports, which operates abbatoirs in Uttar Pradesh.
The impact on exports will be more evident after a couple of months when the supply chain dries up, Sud said.
India exported 1.33 million tonnes of buffalo meat in the 2016/17 fiscal year to March 31, worth about $3.9 billion. The exports were slightly up from the 1.31 million tonnes exported in the previous year.
1 note
·
View note
Note
Hi... I'm a person who doesn't even know the ABC of politics or Social Stuff... Can you tell me what is a Genocide and how is it going on in India? Also...the Kashmir thing...from what I've seen on news etc... It is said Kashmir was India's part since forever (also...I know from second hand accounts that there was a time when Kashmiri Pandits were scoured and tracked and killed)... ...but the Pakistani govt wants it so it is instigating the people....whats the whole thing? Tbh I've never understood the whole Kashmir debate till date
Being the most politically informed person I know, Can you please explain all this in layman/dumb language to me please?
Genocide is the heartless massacre of a specific set of people with a distinct ethnic/cultural identity from the majority population with a malicious and evil intent. The action need not be violent, but can also involve erasing said group's history and culture. eg - Hitler murdering Jews, Europeans murdering Romanis etc. The BJP-RSS coalition, in power in India for 6-7 years with their openly casteist, islamophobic, nazi agenda have unleashed volley after volley of horrors on muslims and SCs/STs in India. Whether it be the CAA bill, which stated that foreign Muslims can't get Indian citizenship and made it harder and harder for Indian Muslims to prove their identity. Be it the cow vigilantes, who murdered muslims on a whim on "suspicion of carrying beef". Be it attempting to destroy the cultural fabric and harmony of the Lakshadweep islands, where 98% of the population is Muslim, by trying to sell it off to contractors and banning beef there.
Kashmir has been a part of India since yore. However, when the Partition took place, there was an issue with Kashmir - Indians and Pakistanis both wanted it to be a part of their territory, however the king of Kashmir Raja Hari Singh wanted Kashmir to be it's own independent country much like the other royals in South Asia since Britain's exit. While things were being contemplated, Pakistan chose offense and attacked Kashmir. When Raja Hari Singh approached the Indian govt for help, he was asked to merge with India if he wanted it's protection, which he did, albeit reluctantly. Since then Kashmir had enjoyed a special protected status, wherein even though it was a part of India, it followed it's own separate constitution and non-Kashmiris were banned from owning land in the state. In the 1980s, following political and religious unrest, a genocide took place against the Hindu Kashmiri Pandits, most of whom fled and scattered throughout the country to save themselves, leaving behind their lives. Heaven on Earth, Kashmir has since never been left at peace, always at war constantly, along with Pakistan attacking it repeatedly in attempts to conquered it. The parts it has conquered are called PoK, or Pakistan Occupied Kashmir. After the 5 years my father's spent in the state on behalf of a project, extensively touring it to the extent he has even worked on the Pakistan side, he says that all Kashmiris want is peace. In the villages especially, one can forget all about war since there is absolutely no tension or religious violence and people all live harmoniously. The BJP-RSS, in it's direct attack on Kashmir, had revoked it's special status immediately after their re-election in 2019, placed all Kashmiri politicians in house arrest, and put the state in a total lockdown, which is yet to be fully lifted. Jammu and Kashmir had no internet, no communication, no schools for around 18 months. Journalists were banned from entering, and we all know why.
So if you didn't know, now you know. You can verify the Kashmir-India integration thing, because I have only recounted what I have been told.
And remember - hating on BJP-RSS and all of their supporters is our duty as citizens :D
81 notes
·
View notes
Last Seen Blogs
foxagenxytango
🦊FoxAgency🦊
miraculous-rewrite
Miraculous! Rewrite
winter2468
Book Addicts Unite
mythicalgeek
Mythical Geek🦋
peacefulreverence
I'm a free bird