Not all conflicts have solutions, nor do they *need* to have solutions. It is merely sufficient that these conflicts be regulated in some fashion. For example, there is an inherent conflict between a thief and his victim. There is no solution to this conflict, other than to say that once the crime is committed, it must be punished.It so happens that there is a fundamental conflict between the minority right to proselytise and Hindu tolerance of peopel who claim that their is bigger than everyone else's. What solution can YOU propose to this conflict. This is a problem that exists OUTSIDE government and you are proposing that you remove religion from within government. That is no solution.
In the same way, theological discussions, debates, arguments, even propaganda deserve their place in the sun - except when force or fraud are involved.
I have argued for "individual" rights, these rights ultimately speak to the status of every citizen as a "minority of one." I don't think I have ever suggested the the removal of "hindu religous thought" from government. Where are you getting this from?and you have already argued for continued minority rights. That means that you only want the removal of Hindu < religious > thought from government.
Please explain the difference between this and religion, gods and all. Secondly, please explain what leads you to believe that there is an absence of "hindu dharma" within government.all we need is Hindu Dharma within government
Most people do not like to eat carrion.The ones that die get eaten. Lots of cows, lots of natural deaths. Lots of beef.
Shiv, I have always thought carefully about what I say, and it owes nothing to you, nor your threat, but derives from my "cultural values" about what constitutes a legitimate debate and debating environment.I am glad it was of sufficient interest to you to keep you awake. It was a carefully thought out and deliberately worded sentence and I assume that you too are carefully thinking about what you say.