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 exaggerate 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 ex-country?

-       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 forgot 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?

 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.

 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?

-       I make it simple here. 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.

 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?

-       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.

Have a nice day ___ !