Ayodhya verdict
I know, the net is teeming with opinions. People are displeased, happy, satisfied and a whole lot of things. The dispute was for a piece of land, not on the riots and punishing the guilty. On the whole, the verdict was balanced, to keep peace. A lot of people are arguing that the Mosque only should have been allowed. But one cannot ignore the religious sentiments of another community especially, if you really want to talk about evidence, then there was the ruined temple underneath it. I don't know if Lord Rama existed but when I see people clamoring about justice should be according to evidence and not sentiments, then I guess the temple underneath is evidence. And frankly, I am a little tired of psuedo-liberals, because it seems to be a fad. Everyone is shouting and wants to be heard. Law is about justice and I think the verdict did do justice. It respected the rights of both religions and set high standards by keeping symbols of two faiths side by side.
The people shouting against it and recognizing only the rights of a mosque are confusing sentimentality with actual justice. Here we are not judging the horrible riots that followed but the disputed site only. In fact, talking about riots and Godhra (I fail to see how some of my friends dragged Godhra into this) and thereby saying that the total right is only for a mosque, is wrong. Because you are then getting sentimentality involved. The two are very different matters. The bloodshed and claim to the land may be inter-related but cannot be clubbed as one.
I don't think it would be justice to give the whole site to Hindus or Muslims, but it was justified to divide it into parts. We honestly have more important matters to think of than argue on and on about a piece of land. And I am so tired of humbugs! There was a time I liked discussing things, I have since realized talking is easy, doing is hard. I chose to do and act and do my bit wherever I can.
The people shouting against it and recognizing only the rights of a mosque are confusing sentimentality with actual justice. Here we are not judging the horrible riots that followed but the disputed site only. In fact, talking about riots and Godhra (I fail to see how some of my friends dragged Godhra into this) and thereby saying that the total right is only for a mosque, is wrong. Because you are then getting sentimentality involved. The two are very different matters. The bloodshed and claim to the land may be inter-related but cannot be clubbed as one.
I don't think it would be justice to give the whole site to Hindus or Muslims, but it was justified to divide it into parts. We honestly have more important matters to think of than argue on and on about a piece of land. And I am so tired of humbugs! There was a time I liked discussing things, I have since realized talking is easy, doing is hard. I chose to do and act and do my bit wherever I can.