But they can't pickup the slack if they are turned off. The east should not take the blame for emissions, when the majority of it is the proxy emission for the western consumption.
>Most Hindus wants a Uniform Civil Code in India. Not a separate legal system for Muslims(Shariat Law) and another system for the rest of the population.
Sources? Not just a thousand sampled survey, but something asked with nearly 1billion of the population?
Why a personal law of one be the point of contest with the other? Care to explain?
>Hinduism (79.8%)
Here is the problem, the different tribes and sects which were not explicitly belonging to other religions are classified as Hinduism. While the customs and laws were different. Also a large part of the said population were considered as untouchable and subhuman by the agrarian elite of the same. They only categorise all as Hindus for power, but not willing to share any of the resources without a fight. The agrarian elite wants to control everything on behalf of Hindus. And the constitution is in their way. That's the only explanation for the hate the Secular notion gets from these section of the society.
>There is thousands of years of history of Hinduism in India.
And Buddhism, and Jainism. Sikhism too. You could learn a little about how was the treatment of Jains in the past.
>India is only secular by name. Currently, there is the nation’s law and then there is the Shariat Law for Muslims.
Personal law is not at odds with the secular nature of a state. Secular does not mean all behave the same, rather the state does not grant any unequal rights. The marriage and inheritance laws are still subject to Judicial scrutiny as and when needed. Also it is a poor understanding of India as a whole to throw these at Muslims, because there are different tribes with their own customs as well.
>It is the spiritual land for over a billion Hindus(whose rights and places of worship are being trampled upon in the name of secularism while other religions are not required to follow the law of the land)
The places of worship law does not give any more rights to any specific religion.
>Why wouldn’t Hindus want a country where they have civilizational roots to be a Hindu Nation
Did you forget Nepal?
>Christian and Hindu Personal Law are not at odds with the constitutional law.
On Christian inheritance, please read up on Mary Roy.
On Hindus laws, the Hindu marriage act are applicable to Hindu, but special marriage act also can be chosen for the marriage. There are a lot of customs across sects and tribes, which are not codified. They continue to apply. If Hindu laws were to be applied, then the wife will have to kill herself when husband dies. See Sati practice. Besides Hindu Unified Family is a tax entity which can not be used by other religions to effectively reduce the tax on a family. I see no mention about that when Uniformity and equal treatment is demanded.
>There are only 5 countries that have secular baked into their constitution, India, USA, France(Laïcité), Australia and Japan
The country is plagued with such misinformation and misrepresentation of facts, now deemed as whatsapp university. The above line makes it quite clear that where you get the information from. Could you add Azerbaijan to the list? A majority Muslim country in the caucuses with secular constitution?
https://web.archive.org/web/20070928103752/http://www.un-az....
Sometimes, I think yes. But most of the time efficiency in politics is just a boogeyman
to cover up diktats, and skipping the due process and throwing away the checks and balances.
When there is nothing to talk about, talking about the leader is lame, but as we have seen is pretty effective. A democratic Republic is at its best when its institutions are independent and just. What we have seen here is the dismantling of a republic. If this become complete, it would serve as a case study.