[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: ARTICLE : The Re-Organisation Mess
[will be posted to srh separately, in addition to news.groups
and sci]
In article <4skjqc$aa4@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
Sabberwal Suraj <sabberwa@NCSMSG02TR.ntc.nokia.com> wrote:
>The moment you bring in BIZZARRE rules and regulations, as is the case with
>some faiths and religions, you bring in the issue of "" RELIGION for the
>sake of promoting POLITICAL FORCE and BRUTE MIGHT.""
my impression is that you have misunderstood Shrisha Rao. he probably
arugues *your* case. Shrisha Rao and some others made a detailed
reorganization proposal. this proposal basically asks for having
*three* separate news groups: one news group for discussing the
relilgion *free* from purely political articles etc and focuses only
on our great hindu religion. another group for making announcements
about meetings, web links, CDs or what not, and the third group for
*unmoderated* free-for-all discussiion about politics that affect
hindus and hinduism, or whatever sundry kind. In other words, he
does *not* want religion for promoting political force and might,
but merely wants satvik discussion about hindu dharma to take place
on srh. -- after all, srh means soc.RELIGION.hindu.
> A case in point is
>Islam. It is no secret that Prophet Mohammad used Islam for making
> sweeping conquests in Arabia, the Middle-East and Asia.
>If we keep emotions
>out of the picture totally, it is not incorrect to say that Mohammad's
>islam was MORE POLITICAL and LESS RELIGIOUS.
dont you agree that these comments against islam --even if they are
valid -- are not appropriate to a *moderated* soc.religion.HINDU?
>2. Vaishnavas as Hindus
> ----------------------------------
>Ofcourse they are Hindus.
>Ask a majority of Vaishnavas spread out throughout the world and you will
>get the answer.
you seem to have doubt in your mind that not *all* vaishnavas in
the world will say yes! otherwise why else will you say *majority*?
>Hinduism enshrines religion as a PERSONAL way of becoming one with God.
>Since there is nothing DOGMATIC about this great religion, the small variety
>of Vaishnavites who say that they are not Hindus are entitled to their
>beliefs. They are free to get OUT of the Hindu fold.
>HOWEVER, IT IS GROSSLY UNFAIR TO SAY THAT "ALL VAISHNAVITES ARE NOT HINDUS."
>This is where you are "borrowing DOGMAS from religions such as Islam."
now you are forcefully arguing Shrisha Rao's case. May be you have put
better than he would have. he never says that 'all vaishnavas are
necessarily non-hindu'. he actually says *overwhelming* majority of
the vaishnavas are actually hindu. he only says there could be *some*
vaishnavas in the western world, who might not be brought up as hindus
culturally and they may call themselves as vaishnavas but not as hindus.
realize how close you both are?
>It is quite apparent to a person who can read,speak & write plain simple
>English that there is an " ORGANIZED CAMPAIGN ON to CLOSE DOWN
> soc.religion.hindu.
you feel so because -- as you yourself said -- you came to the discussion
half way. there is NO campaign to close down soc.religion.hindu. whether
the reorganization plan that creates three separate groups for hinduism
gets approval, or the present *single* group only continues, --either
way-- rest assured soc.religion.hindu moderated will exist.
>Prima facie, this is the view one gets by simply
>browsing through various messages. Even a 2nd grade child can make this out.
>
>regards
>suraj
what all is being asked is plain & simple: take a usenet vote to see
whether the *majority* of the readers want such reorganization of
hindu group or not. and do you know who is opposing to take a vote?
the current moderator!
Please also note that Shrisha Rao and other proponents offered the
current moderator to continue on the expanded moderated panel. I
have even suggested that he may even pick *majority* of the moderators
on the panel, so that he can still have *control* of the group.
he refuses the offer and blocks a vote.
the current moderator opposes taking a vote of the readership!
does it ring bells?
forget about individuals: shrisha rao, vivek or ajay... see what is
in the 'Request For Discussion' (RFD) document, and see if it is
good for us to do reorganization.
gopal
