vinamr_s wrote:1) I won’t argue......selected democratically?
1. Why is that other religions are allowed in by default? If majority of Hindus want them in, *then* they can use the clause you mention.
2. Allowing votes to be changed would be a nightmare in itself. How do you even verify that new vote is genuine? What if the first vote was made without any blackmailing but was changed after an unwanted influence? And how long do you wait for people to escape that blackmailing/intimidation before declaring a winner? They can't even stop vote buying/intimidation/blackmailing for RS/LS elections with all the might of EC and GoI behind them. What chance does the proposed Hindu board has?
3. Democracy/voting for Hindu board is a really bad idea especially when millions of hindus suffer from the sikular disease today. It can be introduced say 100 years from now when the brainwashing is fixed. Until then a body similar to the College of Cardinals
would be a nice little idea.
1) Again I won’t get into the debate of whether they should be allowed or not. It won’t affect any decision practically. Look at the number of Sikhs + Buddhists + Jains, they’re less than 2.5 crore. On top of that you have 40 times more Hindus.
Look at clause (9): the first head will be appointed by the PM.
From next moment, Hindus (+ Sikhs etc) above the age of 18 can file their approvals in favour of the person appointed by PM or other challengers who’ve registered their candidacy as per clause (12).
Look at clause (15): in order to replace the incumbent (1) s/he should have a minimum of 25 cr (IMO this number should be replaced with a percentage of total voters) approvals + (2) s/he should have more than 1cr (again, replace this with a percentage) approvals than the existing head. This threshold of 1cr has been added so as to avoid instability because voters can change their decision anytime.
If any challenger fulfils these requirements, the PM can appoint him/we as the new head.
It is illogical to believe that intimidation and vote buying are prevalent in both, secret ballot election and a continuous non-anonymous replacement election with an approval changing feature. There may be instances, but voter psyche to get influenced by cash or threat wrt these systems doesn’t sit well.
3) This kind of hatred for Hinduism is limited to a section of the Macaulay based schooled middle & upper-middle class. They might be a few million, but not enough to affect the democratic system. Also, most of these guys won’t even participate in such an activity. They hate being associated with Hinduism.
Considering you think the College of Cardinals is better than this type of democratic system and your expressed contentions with this proposal, I think it is better to agree to disagree. But let me leave you with one thing - if the power of selection of such posts doesn’t reside with the people, such posts won’t serve their interests. And after studying a bit of history of us Hindus, I think it is better to take Hinduism in the direction the people who subscribe to it want to take it and not a bunch of self-serving oligarchs.