This is a fact - there is no historical evidence to prove Lord Ram. Being a Muslim, I say LORD Ram and in full reverence. But is there any historical proof? No! Sentiments and history are two different things. The government is not talking about any temple to be demolished but a bridge that was supposed to be a historical representation.
Lord Ram, according to some historians cam from Afganistan. But that again is an assumption but not a fact.
Christ was a historical figure. No denying this. His being son of God was not. Similarly, Hazrat Mohammed was a historical figure but him being a messenger of God is not.
As Marx righly said: "Religion is the opium of the masses."
But historical or not, Lord Ram is the apostle of virtue. Why dumb down his relevance over a mere bridge? Or a temple?
