Re: [HumJanenge] Re: RTI challenges

It seems rajeshwar has lost his balance ..

when i am saying girls consent and her wali's consent is must.

how can rajeshwar say consent of girl's father /gardian is also invalid ??

 

more over if you have proof that girls are sold then why dont you bring those cases in open in this forum.

 

plz give details of those cases if you really have any ....

 

 

 

 

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 9:09 AM, vishal kudchadkar <vishal.kudchadkar@gmail.com> wrote:

[MODERATORS NOTE: To all persons contributing on this subject. Please
restrict yourself to RTI related discussions only]

--- young cyber indians <youn..@tightmail.co..> wrote ---

dear irfan khan

from your statements, it would seem that sole purpose of islamic marrige
is to get MINOR girls married.

In indian law, unlike islamic law, minors are not able to give consent.
so whatever "consent" is extracted from such tender and impressionable
minds is no consent at all in the eyes of the law.

There are hundreds of thousands of examples of minor muslim girls
being sold in marriage to arabs who fly in to violate their innocence.
Have you ever condemned this practice.

Shah Banu judgement only said that criminal laws of India apply
equally to all religions. Next you will get Sonia to officially pass a law
saying that Muslim criminals like Dawood Ibrahim or Kasab cannot be
tried for their crimes.

K Rajeshwar Rao

On Sat, Dec 11, 2010 at 12:15 AM, irfan khan <rtirti.khan@gmail.com> wrote:
> dear rajeshwar rao.
>
> you seems to have zero knowledge about islam .
> first of all for marriage  consent of the girl is MOST IMPORTANT. without
> her consent marriage is not marriage at all.
>
> Her consent shall have support of her WALI /gardian/father /mother  or any
> elderly person who loks after her as gardian.
>
> No rich person can marry any indian girl without her and her gardian's
> consent .
>
> There is not a single case where rich persons ,aried indian girls without
> her and gardians consent .
>
> if some one has done thios then it is no marriage at all . why dont you hang
> such persons for this crime ???
>
> Instead of hanging such persons you people start shouting against ISLAM.
>
> ISLAM never never never allows any marriage without full consent of girl and
> her wali .
>
> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 11:12 PM, young cyber indians
> <cyberyouth@tightmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Irrespective of UNIFORM Civil Code is there or not, India has a
>> UNIFORM Criminal Code.
>>
>> In Shah Banu case what did Suprem Court say? That every divorced woman
>> is entitled to a basic subsistence maintenance of just 125 rupees per
>> month from her former husband.
>>
>> What did our learned Muslim men do ?. They organized themselves and
>> pressurized Rajiv Gandhi to change the criminal law for Muslims. Today
>> old Muslim men can come from all over the world, "marry" young fresh
>> virgin Indian girls and divorce them after 4 or 5 days of enjoying
>> without even having to pay Rs. 125 per month. Truly some Prophet,
>> praised be his name has said, marriage is nothing but legalised
>> prostitution.
>>
>> Mr. Irfan Khan, you should be proud to belong to such a religion where
>> your sisters are considered prostitutes and also have freedom of
>> speech to defend it publicly in this secular Hindu nation when even
>> God via Mohammed does not.say what you say.
>>
>> K Rajeshwar Rao.
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 9:13 PM, irfan khan <rtirti.khan@gmail.com> wrote:
>> > dear sarabajit.
>> >
>> > wake up,
>> > marriage is not termination of relationships but divorce is .
>> >
>> > if your daughter marries some one she do not loose her relationship with
>> > you
>> > as daughter .You still remains her father and she still remains your
>> > daughter .
>> >
>> > If she is divorced  , she no longer remains his wife but she continues
>> > to
>> > remain your daughter .
>> >
>> > now tell me ...who shall provide her maintenance ..... one who is no
>> > longer
>> > related to her  or one who is very much related to her .
>> >
>> >
>> > most logical answer is .... one who is still related to her .
>> >
>> > so after divorce .. it is duty of father  or son or brother to look
>> > after
>> > his daughter ,sister  etc .
>> >
>> > Can supreme court say that if daughter gets divorce from her husband she
>> > SHALL NOT BE LOOKED AFTER BY HER FATHER  OR BROTHER OR SON ????
>> >
>> > On Fri, Dec 10, 2010 at 8:07 PM, sroy1947 <sroy1947@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> The Indian Constitution  is opposed to discriminatory and gender
>> >> biased personal laws like Muslim Personal law. It enjoins the Govt to
>> >> implement uniform civil codes as expeditiously as possible and uphold
>> >> the dignity of women..
>> >>
>> >> You obviously support that section of Islamists who believe that their
>> >> women are to be treated like camels and other cattle to be used and
>> >> discarded when useless.
>> >>
>> >> The Supreme Court made no mistake in Shah Bano. It is because of the
>> >> arrogance and short-sightedness of Gandhi-Nehru parivar that incident
>> >> like Shah Bano's reversal (and support to religious extremists like
>> >> Jarnail Singh Bhindranwala) have repeatedly created terror like states
>> >> in India by allowing State encouraged religious fundamentalism to
>> >> flourish.
>> >>
>> >> I think the list owner should restore posting privileges of eminent
>> >> RTIers like S D Sharma who can give a fitting reply to such kind of
>> >> arguments.
>> >>
>> >> Sarbajit
>>
>> -------------------------------------------------
>> This message sent via VFEmail.net
>> http://www.vfemail.net
>> $14.95 Lifetime accounts!  15GB disk!  No bandwidth quotas!