I agree with the most of the people here who say that the state should be independent from religion. The state should be secular and should not favor any particular religion.

f22, you say that Nepal has been safe haven for people of other religion. But as Sheetalb has pointed out, Christians have always been prosecuted in Nepal. Ever since Prithvi Naryan Shah exiled the Capuchin priests from Kathmandu, Christians were not allowed to set foot in the kingdom for more than a century. Until the demise of Panchayat system, Christians in Nepal had to hold their services in small rooms with the doors and windows shut.

And calciteko, I don't agree the Hinduism and Buddhism are the same. It was only after Buddhism started spreading rapidly in India that the Hindu scholars in India, especially Vivekananda, began promoting Buddha as one of Vishnu's incarnations. I wonder if Jesus Christ was born in the Indian subcontinent he would have been another incarnation of a Hindu god. Some hindu scholars, including Chaitanya Mahaprabhu, believe that Shakyamuni Budhha and Vishnu-avatar Budhha were two different people. They believe Vivekananda made a mistake when he referred to Shakyamnu Buddha as the original Buddha.

Having said that, there is no denying that Nepal will still be known as a predominantly Hindu nation. However, the constitution and the government should be free of any religion. Secularism is the best option. And since, in these modern days when more and more people are becoming agnostics or atheists, religion should not be thrust upon anyone nor should any follower of any religion should be prosecuted on the grounds of his faith.