938 Why Mr. Subramaniyan Swamy stresses on only one part of Article 48 of Constitution, ignoring the remaining part?

There is no political party in India, which can truly be called SECULARIST. Even Communist Parties cannot be considered really secular. Postures of political parties, depend on the vote-banks they address to at any particular given point of time. Consequently, the same political party can take different positions, in different States and different Regions, depending on the demographic mix of castes, religions, language, occupation, etc. at the specific place of the meeting / rally. We know Mr. Asaduddin Owaisi, and his Majlis Party depends for its survival on its highly communal Muslim base in Hyderabad Old City, whose religion that Party wants to exploit, but is not concerned about the backwardness, bigotry, illiteracy, poverty of the people living there, and consequently it thrives by enflaming communal hatred, though its leaders officially proclaim to abide by the Constitution of India. Mr. Asaduddin Owaisi, its leader, has a strong urge to become a National Leader. Such ambitions may not be wrong, as long as ethically supportable means are used to reach those goals.

After spectacular success in Uttar Pradesh Elections, BJP leaders and rulers all over the country have become rejuvanated

Though there is nothing wrong in trying to implement agendas and manifestos of the winning political party, it is to be done, with due care, after thoroughly examining pros and cons. Any hasty step can land countries in endless civil wars, and communal strife. Today, the world itself is in the midst of inter-religious wars.

Just as lot of foreplay takes place before a truly orgasmic sexual intercourse, lot of preparatory work will be necessary, before initiating reforms of any kind, howsoever beneficial they may be to the Nation. In this context, we can see how the Gujarat Government is bringing out a legislation to prescribe a punishment of min. 10 years, maximum lifer, to those who are caught in cow-slaughter. Madhya Pradesh Chief Minister also seems to be a person in a hurry.

Mr. Owaisi is such a politician who wants to take advantage of even a slight disparity which he finds as enough to instigate those who believe him. Ban on beef is one such opportunity to him. The lacuna he found is: BJP wants to enforce ban on cow-slaughter only in some states, and wants to be lenient in some other states like Goa, North Eastern States. To derive communal benefits from this variance, Owaisi has come up with some hasty observations, which may benefit him electorally, but does great damage to the communal harmony of the country. Here is a link to what he is reported to have said: Click here to go to: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/bjps-yummy-mummy-problem-according-to-asaduddin-owaisi/articleshow/57958978.cms.

DeccanChronicle.Com link: Click here to go to DeccanChronicle.Com.

We shall have some quotes of Mr. Asaduddin Owaisi:

"BJP's hypocrisy is that in Uttar Pradesh cow is mummy but in the Northeast it's yummy."

"...while the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) holds the cow in high regard in Uttar Pradesh, the party considers it to be part of the delicacy in northeastern states. ..."

"...One should note that India gains Rs 26,000 crore from buffalo meat exports, out of this Uttar Pradesh gains 11,000 crore. The Government of India promotes buffalo meat exports. These kinds of contradictions are there..."

"...And one last thing, In Uttar Pradesh, cow is considered mummy (mother), while in northeast it's yummy. If this is not the BJP's hypocrisy then what is it? The BJP spreads Hindutva wherever it suits them. Elections are going to take place in three of the northeastern states, they are allowing beef because of this reason..."

"...We have been hearing this for the past 55 years and we are tired of it. I urge him to leave this patronising attitude and instead focus on the issue where because of his government's policies 15 lakh people have lost their livelihood. I hope, being the Chief Minister, he would show some concern towards people whose family business has been running slaughterhouses..."

We shall now see what Mr. Subramanian Swamy has to say about the Owaisi's comments

Link to what Mr. Subramanian Swamy is reported to have said: Click here to go to http://zeenews.india.com/india/whats-this-mummy-yummy-thing-subramanian-swamy-slams-asaduddin-owaisi-for-accusing-bjp-of-hypocrisy-on-cow-slaughter-1992001.html

"...What's this mummy, yummy thing. Owaisi says he has faith in the Indian Constitution. Article 48 of the Constitution says cow slaughter will be prohibited. Let him say he has no faith in some articles of the Constitution, then we will see..."

"...Article 48 of the Constitution says, 'The State shall endeavor to organise agriculture and animal husbandry on modern and scientific lines and shall, in particular, take steps for preserving and improving the breeds, and prohibiting the slaughter, of cows and calves and other milch and draught cattle.'

ybrao-a-donkey's observation, not intended to be imposed on others

Compassion to animals, is an ancient trait in India. Before they became hunters, Ancient Indians were vegetarians. Though they had resorted to agriculture and animal husbandry, to derive benefit from milk, slaughter of miltch animals and draught animals was not a commercial activity for them. In ancient India, white animals seem to be rare species, till Aryans had apparently brought them from Europe (more evidence is required: both in case of cows and horses). Buffaloes (black animals) outnumbered the white animals.

In Sanskrit Vyasa Mahabharata's Yudhishthira's Horse sacrifice, there are verses which indicate bullocks were sacrificed.

In Sanskrit Vyasa Mahabharata, there are verses which indicate that King Ranti Deva fed Brahmins with 2000 cows every day, during 'cAturmasya vrata' (four months special worship).

Whatever be their past practices, Aryans have, may be by Buddhist/Jain influences, gradually started to revere cow as 'Mother', and tried to avoid cow-slaughter. There is nothing wrong in it. Had Muslim invasions not taken place, and had the European subjugation of India not taken place, probably we might have had by now, turned into a beef (of white animals) avoiding nation. Had we turned into cattle-compassionate Nation, aged and diseased cattle might have been allowed to die their natural death in villages, though that might have been a burden on rural economies. An alternative practice of dropping the dry/diseased/aged animals in forests- natural habitat, might have started as a via media solution.

This did not happen. Unfortunately, the Turkish, Moghul Islamic Invaders, the European Invaders, have complicated the problem, by making beef selling and exporting a profitable business.

Mr. Subramanian Swamy has ignored the second part of Article 48: (See above quote)

and other milch and draught cattle.. The other milch and draught cattle, mentioned in Article 48 of Constitution refers to black animals such as she buffaloes, and he buffaloes, camels.

Now, Mr. Subramanian Swamy, the Great Harvard Professor should answer: "Why only cows are mothers? Why not she buffaloes? Why he-buffaloes are not fathers?" . Why does not he seek a ban on slaughter of black animals i.e. BUFFALOES which outnumber cows. They are our real mothers and fathers, when compared to cows and bullocks.

If at all 'compassion towards animals' is to be encouraged, and Indians are to cultivate PITY AND EMPATHY, that must be done without discrimination of color 'white and black'. Justice should be done to all animals, whether they are cows or buffaloes or bulls or he-buffalos, camels. Then, the element of RELIGION can be removed. The quality of COMPASSION is expected to be SECULAR, GENTLER, AND NOBLER. In bringing this change, one should not forget that lot of intellectual upgradation of INdians will become necessary. SLOW AND STEADY WINS THE RACE.

To continue adding / deleting / modifying. और जोडने लायक चीज हैं। ఈ విషయాంశము పై ఇంకా వ్రాయాల్సినవి ఉన్నాయి.