GG News Bureau
New Delhi, 28th Oct. In a nation where identity and heritage are fiercely cherished, the Congress party’s long-standing policies have left many questioning whether the Constitution has unwittingly transformed India into a country that prioritizes Muslim interests over Hindu rights. While the party may not openly declare this transformation, a careful examination of the constitutional provisions and legislative acts enacted since independence reveals a troubling narrative.
Starting with Article 25, which legalizes religious conversion, the Congress party has set a precedent that many argue undermines the very fabric of Hindu identity. Article 28 further exacerbates this divide by allowing religious education for Muslims and Christians while restricting it for Hindus, effectively sidelining the cultural and educational rights of the majority community.
The Hindu Religious and Charitable Endowments (HRCE) Act of 1951 served as a vehicle for appropriating funds from Hindu temples, effectively looting the resources meant to sustain Hindu traditions. In contrast, the party refrained from altering Muslim personal laws, allowing practices like polygamy to flourish, which critics argue has been used to boost Muslim demographics at the expense of Hindus.
Additionally, the introduction of the Special Marriage Act in 1954 made it easier for Muslim men to marry Hindu women, often leading to concerns about “Love Jihad.” The insertion of “secularism” into the Constitution during the Emergency in 1975 marked a significant ideological shift, one that critics believe laid the groundwork for further demographic manipulation through policies that disproportionately affect Hindus.
The Minority Commission Act of 1991 officially designated Muslims as a minority, despite their significant population, creating an unjust division within a secular framework. This categorization has allowed for the allocation of special privileges, including government scholarships, based solely on religious identity.
One of the most egregious acts has been the Places of Worship Act of 1992, which legally barred Hindus from reclaiming their temples. This legislation, coupled with the repeated amendments to the Waqf Act, has enabled Muslims to secure rights over vast tracts of land, effectively making them the second-largest landowners in India.
The Congress party’s audacity reached its peak in 2007 when it submitted an affidavit in the Supreme Court denying the existence of Lord Ram. This was further compounded by the introduction of the term “Saffron Terrorism” in 2009, which not only tarnished the image of Hinduism but also served as a blatant attack on the sentiments of millions of Hindus.
Historically, the Congress party has demonstrated a conspicuous reluctance to address issues within the Muslim community, such as the superstition associated with burqas or the injustices perpetuated by triple talaq. This pattern reveals a systematic approach to disempowering Hindus, leaving them without temples, religious education, and secure land ownership. Many Hindus remain oblivious to these encroachments on their rights.
Questions linger regarding the glaring inequities in religious freedoms: Why are mosques and churches autonomous while temples remain under stringent government control? Why are there state-funded madrasas and schools, but no Gurukuls receiving similar support? The existence of a Muslim Personal Law Board without a corresponding Hindu board raises fundamental questions about the secular identity of India.
While Aurangzeb wielded the sword against Hinduism, Congress has wielded the Constitution as a tool to erode Hindu identity from within. The media often vilifies those who dare to question these discrepancies, labeling them as communal or saffron.
The parallels to the fall of the Roman Empire serve as a stark warning. In just 80 years, the powerful Roman civilization succumbed not to external forces, but to internal decay. Every Hindu must reflect on this historical lesson, recognizing that the battle for identity and rights in India requires vigilance and a unified stand against the slow erosion of their heritage and freedoms.
Comments are closed.