[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: New site needs your point of view
In article <4iidms$s03@babbage.ece.uc.edu>, Editor editorh@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu> writes:
|> On 15 Mar 1996, Vijay Sadananda Pai wrote:
|> > I heard a joke the other day -- the only religion that Hindus
|> > aren't willing to accept is Hinduism....
|>
|> Takes me back all the way, when several people, unfortunately, claimed
|> that Vaishnavas were not necessarily Hindus ...
Quite humorous, but not surprisingly, also quite inconsistent.
Why the big deal about Vaishnavas and not a similar outcry about
the Sikhs? After all, if you believe that both groups are by definition
Hindus, then you should behave similarly when dealing with both.
I notice that there wasn't any sort of attempt to derail the voting
for soc.religion.sikhism by the "Hindu Unity" crowd, and there isn't
any carping now about srs, although there still is carping about srv.
Similarly, at least one Sikh has posted on srh that Sikhs aren't Hindus,
so shouldn't there by messages complaining "several people, unfortunately,
claimed that Sikhs..."
So, why the inconsistency?
-Vivek
References:
