Posted by: arahat November 20, 2009
Login in to Rate this Post:
0 
? 
?
Since blingbling thinks I'm showing frustration from this thread, I'm again going to drag this thread.
Mr. Newlynew, I again say that I don't know the definition of 'janajatis' and I'm again accusing of being a back stabber.
What makes you think that anyone revealing and uniting with their ethnicity are supporting for the divisions. Isn't it the other way around that you're trying to instinct the hatred and fight from 'janajatis' with your irrelevant venom.
Are you in the right mind to expect having the productive discussion when you start the first sentence by accusing the other party for being the 'back-stabber'? Do you see any hypocrisy here?
Nobody is saying diversity should not be preserved. It should be. But when it comes to national unity, I am not willing to make any compromises.
-> How do you aim to preserve the diversity without recognizing the diversity and when all you can do is accuse the diverse parties.While you are free to practice your culture and customs, I am completely against anyone getting special previleges just because of his/her last name. Previleges should be made available to those in need and by merit. I don't see anything wrong with that. -> I absolutely agree that the previleges should be given to those in need. But don't you see that in some last names, everyone is in need.
If anyone supporting "Janajati thing" can respond to that without being abusive and uncivilized, that would be much appreciated.
-> Here go you preaching again. Should I again write what is the first sentence that you'd want to have this civilized conversation with?