Please dont compare Sethu Bridge with Temples, Mosque or Church. Seth Bridge yet to be proved as man made or naturally formed. Moreover its not a place of worship.
RE:Seth Bridge - Not a Holy site!
by Ankita Gupta on Sep 14, 2007 02:21 PM Permalink
did you checked your DNA thread? does it have any link with Italy?
RE:Seth Bridge - Not a Holy site!
by ashwani sharma on Sep 14, 2007 02:29 PM Permalink
Dear Ankita! I am pleasantly surprised to read fire in your remark.Ram Sethu may not have been place of worship till now.It is the time now to declare it a national heritage,it should be developed as a first world class site for under sea pilgrimmage!
RE:Seth Bridge - Not a Holy site!
by Sunjey L on Sep 14, 2007 02:26 PM Permalink
Hey hey hey... Wait up Mr. Congress...!!! The main issue is the statement in the affidavit.. that there is no evidence the Ram existed!!!! Ask Ms. Italy to provide the proof that Jesus existed or to provide prove that Prophet Mohd. existed. These are issues of faith and Ms. Italy as clearly crossed all lines... We certainly cannot blame Manmohan Singh, who sadly is missing a spine!
RE:Seth Bridge - Not a Holy site!
by Govind on Sep 14, 2007 02:33 PM Permalink
Mr.Balamurugan, Do u agree that we now come to know about a bridge - may it be man made or natural is there between India and SriLanka. In this scientific world why you are not logically correlating it to the Ramar Sethu bridge. Our Epic does say that the Ramar Sethu bridge was between India and SriLanka and not between Italy and France.
RE:Seth Bridge - Not a Holy site!
by King of India on Sep 14, 2007 02:24 PM Permalink
Please understand something. A temple or a mosque is respected not because it's a man made structure but since people have religious sentiments towards it. If people have religious sentiments to a "naturally formed structure", then it has to be protected.
