I rest my case here with the following summary again as the reasons for not giving women their rights in Nepal.

• Only tax paying Nepali are allowed to raise their voice in Nepal (you don’t have to pay more than sachib’s tax but you can’t be a poor citizen who don’t pay any tax).
• We will have to wait for India to develop. Until then, sorry Nepalese ladies, you can’t have your rights. No citizenship for your kids.
• Those asking for the rights are doing for gaining POPULARITY.
• Asking to provide citizenship to kids based on their NEPALI mother is NOTHING, but a FASHION for nepalese living in western countries.
• Those women are dumb.
• Western agenda
• Threat to Nationality
• Risk to Nepali Economy
• Women like to cheat
• Women are irresponsible
• People from India will flood into Nepal and will evade Nepal
• Demographic dynamics will change.
• People will abuse the law to get citizenship ONLY through WOMEN (NEVER through men).

Unanswered questions from my last post:

you twisted somewhere to make it look like we’re asking for citizenship based on ‘verbal statement’. How did “VERBAL” come into discussion?

For this 10,000 people, you want to deny half of women in Nepal from their rights. How much of Nepalese economy is affected by giving 2-3 million citizenship to Indians?

Do you know the flow of remittance between India and Nepal?

How can you assume that I don’t help Nepal’s economy? What has this to do with current discussion?

I thought I already addressed your concern. Why’re you going around? We’re talking about kids who has NEPALI MOTHER and wants to stay their whole life in Nepal. So they want to be citizens who will CONTRIBUTE to economy, not otherwise.

Have you seen a pie chart of Nepali remittance by countries?

What has this got to do with current discussion again? Are you going to give weights based on person’s income and paid tax? What kind of logic is this?

How will I become popular?

If I say I pay tax, will you support to give women their rights

Why do you think that these WOMEN are asking to provide citizenship for someone else’s kids?

Here are my responses.

I started this thread so that people will  learn from courageous people like Nirmala and her husband. I dont see you writing anyhting ,even a word to praise them but instead used this thread to your advocacy.

-       I'm addressing one of the root causes of these discrimination against women (did that exclude Nirmala)?

-       Anything women and minority ask are western agenda/fashionable slogan/drive to be popular/foreign money/threat to nationality

-       Until you provide women with their rights, discrimination will continue.

-       What is the lesson from Nirmala and her husband? I want to hear from you.

-       Praising Nirmala, rather than discussing about the root causes of problem, will be the SOLUTION. I agree with you here.

-       What is my advocacy? I’m lost here. Am I trying to win/gain something here?

 You could have shown some decency for their action you know.To do this you dont need to pick some popular slogan. Instaed you started bashing nepals law  about citizenship.

-       Now, I’m not decent. I don't pay tax; Nepal is not my home; I'm arguing for the sake of arguing; I want to dictate Nepal; I want to write rules for Nepal; this is fashion for me; I want to be popular. What are you trying to do here?

-       How is providing WOMEN their right is POPULAR SLOGAN or FASHIONABLE or DRIVE TO BECOME POPULAR.

-       Nepal’s citizenship and many other laws discriminate against women. I think this is the first step to end the plights of women like Nirmala in Nepal. You don’t want to address the problem, do you?

 

Mentioning my tax amount was just a information but you immidiately jumped to the conclusion that it meant people who contribute  less has no right. Because it suited your point. 

-       Yes, it suited my point because TAX is RELATED with the change of our laws. That’s why I want to BOAST how much I pay in taxes to prove my point.

-       Disclosing my tax amount will help to build my case.

-       I (Not you) jumped into conclusion that I don’t CONTRIBUTE to Nepali Economy.

-       Please do some research to find the contribution of Nepalese living in western countries to total amount of remittance in Nepal

 Slogan is not yours, if somehting goes wrong you dont have to take responsibility, you dont have to face consequences,  you dont have to bear financial burden.  still you prefer to dictate your ex country which rule they should make and which they should not .LOL

-       Yes, it is my ex country. You know my status well; Can I send you my “china”? I’m impressed by your astrology skills.

-       Thanks for showing that I don’t care about Nepal. All I want to do is to make negative contribution.

-       I am working for someone’s slogan. I already wrote that I got check for writing here.

-       LOL. I want to dictate Nepal, don’t I? Thanks for the entertainment.

-       Would you like to read my 1000 page rules about what Nepal should make or not make in New Nepali Constitution?

-       Yes, LOL.

 

You dont have the right to dictate how other should run their house you know. 

If you are so much interested in womens plight why dont you start in your own adopted country?

-       Again, I’m impressed by your astrology skills.

-       Now, you want to kick me out of Nepal?

-       What is my adopted country?

-       If I say Nepal is my adopted country, will you ALLOW me to talk about women’s plight in Nepal? Can I chose Nepal as my adopted country please?

 

कर तिर्न पनि नपर्ने, सम्स्या आएमा जिम्मेबारी पनि लिन नपर्ने, तर पपुलर स्लोगन ( tyo pani afno hoina ) लिएर आफुले छोडेको  देश लाई अर्ती दिने यो गर्न पर्छ,त्यो गर्न पर्छ भनेर   

 त्यो त जस्ले पनि गर्छ नि, नेपालको सम्स्या नै धेरै अर्ती दिने बेक्ती भएर हो

-       How do you know whether I pay tax or not?

-       How much can you exaggerate? First you exaggerated about the sky falling in Nepal if we change our citizenship law. Now, you think I’m running after POPULAR slogan.

-       I didn’t know until you wrote here that it is a POPULAR slogan. If it is gaining POPULARITY, I’m glad. I’ve hope now that the law will be changed.

-       Can you please tell me what are you doing till now?

and you even dare to tell that nothing happend by giving citizenship to 2.3 million  forigners without following law. Adding people in a poor country wont effect economy, where you learned that?

 today you say Nepal already added 2.3million ppl so giving citizesnhip to another million wont have any negative effect, tomorrow another person will advocate giving citizenship to son in laws. Is there any stop in this downfall? 

  Yeah my friend when I present different possibility it is exaggregation and when you pick up others prepared slogan for your ex country it is intelligence right.

-       Can you please drop your accusation about it being my ex-country? How much can exaggerate/lie?

-       You like to exaggerate. You gave another example here by saying that next people’re going to ask the citizenship for their son-in-law. If it is not called exaggeration, I’m sorry I don't know the meaning of this word.

-       Did I say nothing happened? I think I asked what happened to Nepali economy with the new citizens of 2-3 million?

 It is interesting to observe that people who dont have to bear responsibility are interested to impose their slogans on Nepal.and nepalhas to followblindly lol,

-       You’re right here again. All the responsibilities are going to be on your shoulder. I am writing here to be popular. I’ve not heard claps yet.

-       What is my slogan? Why do I want to Nepal to follow me? We're talking about opening our eyes here, and being AWARE of our BIASES. I think this thread is an example of these unconscious biases.

 You already agreed to put restriction,actually this discussion was not necessary at all, I dont know what you want to proove. 

-       I already wrote that. I was the one who wrote first about adding restrictions. But your imaginative mind keeps on adding the twists and you wrote to make it look like I’m asking to give citizenship based on verbal statements. Who asked about verbal statement?

And above all you posted the news,  You know courts follow constitution. They didnt have papers,so it was not easy for her to get citizesnship.That is true everywhere,  if you dont have paper you have to follow some extra procedures.They did and got citizenship thats all.

-       What paper are you talking about? Don’t you get it?

-       A woman goes to get citizenship for her son with the documents of her citizenship, her marriage certificate, her son’s birth certificate, evidence of their permanent residence from municipality, her son’s entire schooling in Nepal, but she doesn’t include her husband’s citizenship. What will happen here?

-       So you expect these women to gather support of WHOLE COMMUNITY, spend significant amount of time to go to court dates, SPEND large amount of money for hiring lawyers.

-       They got citizenship very easily, didn’t they? In fact, it is very difficult to get citizenship through father, isn’t it? I’m done with this discussion now (after this post). Thank you.

 This PROVES that even if father doesnt have CITIZENSHP card kids will get citizenship if there is enough evidence. There are some restriction which were in place because of Nepals location thats all.

-       Yes this PROVES very well. Except she has to get the SUPPORT of her ENTIRE COMMUNITY, SPENT days/months/years on court dates, SPENT thousands of rupees for lawyers.

-       What is that RESTRICTION? That RESTRICTION is you need FATHER (Mother doesn’t count).

 There is no society without problem, every society has its pros and cons. Nepali society also has problems BUT  I already told in my first reply you can not chnage peoples mentality with law. there will always be some bad apple. 

-       What is your point here?

-       Shouldn’t we try to solve problems because others have problems too?

-       IMO, changing law can be the first step to SECURE the rights.

-       What is your point about bad apple?

 Yes I showed the concern about Nirmala but at the same time I also see people like herself and her husband  very corregeous people in our society. I told in my first reply that we need to encourage positive thoughts, corregaous people who will move our society forward. 

-       Please tell me how do we encourage that? By denying women from their basic rights? Blaming women? Saying they’re likely to cheat? Saying women’re dumb and not responsible? Telling men to be careful from women?

 Society will not change overnight. Discussing for the sake of discussion does not bring any fruit to the society. 

-       I think you’re discussing for the sake of discussion, not me. That’s why I’m ending my responses here.

-       I didn’t talk about changing society overnight, did I? I talked about providing citizenship through women.

 पैसा पनि दिन नपर्ने, अपजस पनि लिन नपर्ने, खाली अर्ती मात्र दिन त जस्ले पनि दिन्छ नि,  आफ्नो अर्ती आँफै सँग राखे कसो होल ?

-       I’m not giving advice. I’m asking for CHANGE in our DISCRIMINATORY LAWS.

-       Please stop your assumption of me not contributing to economy. That is irrelevant here. You’re exaggerating too much.

अरुलाई यसो र उसो भन्नेले आफुले अहिले सम्म माथि के गरि राखेको र एनामा एक पटक हेरि माथिको सुझाब आफै बाट लागू गरे कसो होला

Thanks ___ for your replies. Let's see what the constitution will write in this topic. 

Have a nice day ___!