According to Minister of Women and Child Welfare Harshavardhan Patil, "We found that despite the 1934 Devdasi Security Act, the tradition is still prevalent...Therefore, we have passed a more stringent Bill, which will soon come into force." The government is yet to give a firm commitment on exactly when the Act will come into force.
RE:BONDED SERVANT OF LORDS - DEVDASIS OF HINDUISM
by Secular Indian on Mar 15, 2007 05:38 PM Permalink
Is that why MuhaMAD married a 6 year old when he was 53.
RE:BONDED SERVANT OF LORDS - DEVDASIS OF HINDUISM
by JATIN HALDANKAR on Mar 16, 2007 12:10 PM Permalink
That again show how in Hindu dominated India ..women rights are protected by consitution ...!!! good information ..
In 2004, the state government appointed a study committee to take stock of the Devdasi system in Maharashtra. Based on the committee's recommendations, the Maharashtra government recently passed the Anti-Devdasi Bill to "provide for a comprehensive law to abolish the practice of dedication of women as Devdasis to Hindu deities, idols, objects of worship, temples for religious institutions and to protect the women so dedicated against exploitation". The Bill will abolish the Devdasi system; penalize perpetrators of the crime with a fine of Rs 10,000-50,000; and rehabilitate Devdasis through alternate employment and homes. There is also a provision for the formation of district-level and state-level Devdasi control groups, consisting of persons from civil society organizations. These groups will have the power to make recommendations to the government towards abolishing the Devdasi system.
RE:BONDED SERVANT OF LORDS - DEVDASIS OF HINDUISM
by Secular Indian on Mar 15, 2007 05:38 PM Permalink
Is that why MuhaMAD married a 6 year old when he was 53.
People of India always confused about the history of Great Emperor "AURANGZEB". The safran gang fabricated false hitory about him and blamed him as temple destroyer. Why north India does not have DEVDASI practice ?? The answer is simple. North India was ruled by mostly magnificiant Muslim rulers like SHAHENSHAH AURANGZEB. The latest researches, facts and truth unearthed and people of north India, espicaly law cast hindus are very much thankful for the Emperor Aurangzeb who destroyed the TEMPLE BROTHELS and abolished this atrocities against the low cast hindus which was practicing in the name of LORDS.
well ravan was considered a devil by fact and fiction but one school of thought makes him out to be the most devout and upright son of his religion.whats more popular and readymade suits all concerned and no one is spared. aurangazeb is no different.he ruled at a time which in todays context can never be compared.try talking his religion and way of life today you would be booted or better still one should have tried talking democracy rather than monarchy to him then and he would have been beheaded.these sensationalist authors have no biz to rake up the past which india has accepted and live with. in the end the balance sheet will be balanced and life will go on. his convoluted logic of facing the past in todays world when an average indian is busy providing roti,kapada or makan for himself is more pervasive. let him keep his french madness to himself as they are a race who are literally jobless and they dont need to pontificate to us on our past.
RE:Muslims around the world
by Rasheed on Mar 15, 2007 03:06 PM Permalink
Hello Mr. Iyer Up, the Iyer you go, the lower your mentality. Since you agree that you have to bear with the "locusts," perhaps you need to bear with their views too.
The world would be a much better place without your venomousity, your mono-track, religio-centric vision of everything in life.
RE:RE:Muslims around the world
by Secular Indian on Mar 15, 2007 03:16 PM Permalink
It's the muslims that bring religion into the debate, if someone criticizes a criminal (who happens to be a muslim) they are the first to put the gates up and go into "Islam is under attack" siege mode.
Friends let us not forget Kabir, who was equally dear to Hindus and Muslims and always taught that the two should never fight. He had many followers both Hindus and Muslims.
In more modern times Sai Baba of Shirdi also had many Muslim and Hindu devotees. Members of both communities revere him. He also preached unity and acceptance of two faith. Please whatever has happpened cannot be changed, but if we keep on attacking each other's faith, it is bound to create disharmony
RE:why the fighting
by Secular Indian on Mar 15, 2007 03:55 PM Permalink
You are quite right, unfortunately Kabir would probably be seen as a heretic by the standards of "true" Islam.
