marahfreedom

Archive for the ‘Hindu sumptuary law’ Category

A minority of 1 – by Robert Ringer (A Voice of Sanity Blog from World Net Daily) – Posted: May 21, 2010 1:00 am Eastern Standard Time

In abstention options, advice, Apartheid, checks and balances, conscientious objection, Conscription, critical discourse, criticism, Democracy, domestic terrorists in the political sphere, dress code, drugs, electronic weapons, electrosmog, Equality, Equitable Distribution, Ethics, food prohibition, Forced Conscription, Forced Military Conscription, Freedom of Expression, freedom of speech, halal zone, halal zones, Hindu sumptuary law, Informed Consent, intent, Law, luddite, luddites, neutral spaces, one level up, organic psychedelics advocacy, political correctness, politics, privacy, psychedelics, separation of powers, social freedoms, technofascism, Technology, unique on February 20, 2012 at 2:20 pm

As BHO (FOX News Refers To Obama as “BHO”) continues to transform the United States into a socialist hell, yet another poke in the eye is the National Mediation Board’s proposal to make it easier for airline and railroad workers to unionize.

For 75 years, the rule has been that for any class of workers (e.g., pilots) employed by an airline or railroad to unionize, a majority of all employees in that class have to vote for unionization. But the proposed new rule would require only that a majority of employees who actually vote on the question of unionization would be needed to unionize.

All Democrats love unions; Republican progressives love unions; and even many conservatives believe that a worker should be allowed to join a union voluntarily, so long as those who do not want to join the union are not forced to do so.

Which probably makes me a minority of one. Why? Because not only do I believe that workers do not have a right to unionize a company through tyranny of the majority, I don’t believe that any worker has a right to join a union without the consent of his employer.

What would it look like if the federal behemoth were severely cut down to size? Read Wayne Allen Root’s prescription for the nation in “The Conscience of a
Libertarian: Empowering the Citizen Revolution with God, Guns, Gambling & Tax Cuts”

It is a basic tenet of libertarian-centered conservatism that without property rights, no other rights are possible. Unfortunately, most people do not understand this fundamental concept. They view property only as inanimate matter, separate and apart from a person’s life.

In actual fact, they are so connected that one is virtually an extension of the other. If you took everything an individual owned, the fact is that he would not own his own life, because whenever he attempted to create something for his personal gain, the fruits of his labor could again be confiscated.

The same is true of purchasing property. The money used to make a purchase presumably was earned through the purchaser’s efforts. That makes the money an extension of his life, and, therefore, the same would be true of anything purchased with that money.

A libertarian-centered conservative believes that no one has a right to any other person’s property, which includes both his body and everything he owns. When people make “humanitarian” statements about human rights being more important than property rights, they are, in a sense, correct. That’s because human rights include property rights, as well as all other rights of man.

A man has the right to dispose of his life and his property in any way he chooses, without interference from anyone else. By the same token, he has no right to dispose of any other person’s life or property, no matter what his personal rationalizations may be.

As explained in “Fundamentals of Liberty,” there are only three possible ways to view property:

No.1 ANARCHY/BARBARISM

Anyone may take anyone else’s property whenever he pleases.

No.2 ABSOLUTISM/DICTATORSHIP

Some (select) people may take property of other people whenever they please.

No.3 DEMOCRACY (One-man, one-vote) / Republicanism (Lesser Representative Democracy)

No one may ever take anyone else’s property without his permission.

It is self-evident to anyone who believes in individual liberty that the only morally valid way of viewing property is No. 3. Likewise, no one has a right to tell a property owner (property being land, buildings, a business, or anything else that a person may own) what he can or cannot do with his property.

Take a business, for example. It belongs to the owner, whether he started the business himself or bought it from someone else. No one has a right to take any part of someone else’s business, nor do they have a right to tell him what he can and cannot do with his business.

If a business grows large and has millions of shareholders, the business is the property of many people – the shareholders. Thus, size is irrelevant when it comes to property rights. When property rights are violated against a multinational corporation as opposed to a “mom-and-pop” business, it simply means that far more people become victims of government aggression. It is a moral absurdity to believe that bigness validates aggression.

Therefore, as a minority of one, I am compelled to say that regardless of the size of a business, the only way unionization is morally valid is if the owner of that business voluntarily agrees to it. Why? Because it’s his business! It’s his property! And it is his human right to set the rules for his own property!

In a truly free society, a worker has one inalienable, overpowering right with regard to his job: He can quit at any time. He is not a slave, so his employer cannot chain him to his work. If he wants to belong to a union, he is free to search for employment with a company that allows workers to unionize.

The fact that so many people reading this article will find my comments to be extreme speaks only to how far down the road toward socialism we have traveled. We no longer respect property rights, especially when the property is a business. Generations have been brainwashed into believing that abstract notions such as “the good of society” and “social justice” are more important than private ownership.

The proposed new ruling by the National Mediation Board opens a debate that is nothing more than a distraction. The real debate should be over whether or not employees should be allowed to unionize at all without the consent of the owner.

This is precisely the kind of issue that has caused conservatives to lose their way over the years. Until politicians have the courage to confront an issue such as unionization head on and stop buying into debates about whether to move further to the left or stick to what has become the status-quo left, America will continue its acceleration toward total collapse – both morally and economically.

It will be interesting to see if anyone reading this article has a strong enough belief in the absolute sanctity of property rights to agree with what I’ve said here. That would be nice, because it would instantly elevate me to the status of being part of a minority of two.

“Even if you are a minority of one, the truth is the truth.” Mahatma Gandhi

(The truth propounded in this site being, that Malaysia’s Laws and Constitution as currently standing ARE institutionalised APARTHEID from the Colonial era which neither BN nor PR, (much less the Bar Council or Judiciary of which both groups should have their degrees revoked, the earlier 2 coalitions mentioned unvotable,  for the tacit approval of APARTHEID via silence, lack of address and mention) have yet to honestly address and mention or discuss openly . . . )

  

MahatmaGandhi    Robert Ringer (article author)

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Try considering the above issue on property to social freedoms now. Even for a minority of 1 (being rhetorical here, generally such uniqueness is extremely rare), no matter how rarefied/antipathetic the meme or preference, equitable space reasonable to ‘life and liberty’ as considered against the UNHCR AND access to NEUTRAL spaces must be given, must be protected. In this the district by district concept of living space earlier discussed is the best way to apply unique and diverse mosaics of disyricts (preferably with the most incompatible districts being as seperate from the least compatible ones as possible).

Try the below groups for example in order of ease of implementation for closed districts, though with access to neutral spaces, such as traveling spaces etc.. :

i) Luddites/Anti-technology types (this district being ENTIRELY free of Electrosmog, ELF or EMF emissions)
ii) Smokers-Tobacco users/Coffee users (this district will allow use of tobacco throughout/the other coffee throughout – as we know Coffee is disallowed to Xians etc..) For more information on coffee use, see : https://malaysiandemocracy.wordpress.com/category/coffee/
iii) Fundo-religionists (wearers of Burkha to any dietarily limited persons)
iv) Conscientious military objectors (refusers of military culture, who must be offered abstention options and not punitive fines and jail terms to allow them to make a choice without being punished for making a choice)
v) LGBT (non-binary gender types – as sexual-energic exchanges appear to exceed beyond a street or neighbourhood at anytime, separate districts should be considered or dedicated living spaces in generally closed districts at night may be dedicated to these persons at a quantum suitable to the number of such persons)
vi) Red Light Districts (sex workers and sex worker patrons (nominally atheists) without religious injunctions to follow)
vii) Nudists (wearers of nothing, again the psychic-vibrancy issue arises, so dedicated places for nudists could be ensured)
viii) Organic psychedelic users (again the psychic-vibrancy issue arises, so dedicated places for organics users could be ensured)
ix) advocates of right to bear arms (they could live with others fine with the preference, though perhaps with high and thick walls to prevent any accidental misfirings – this should be at cost to the users of this district IF not a majority to warrant use of tax funds)
x) Synthetic psychedelic users (due to the sometimes permanent and undesirable mental effects synthetics cause, these persons could be required to distance themselves from certain groups again, physically or otherwise – with the very most toxic and debilitating drugs left entirely illegal unless a euthanasia or consensual waiver staying awarness of potential permanent mental debilitation is considered)
xi) Neurotech/Cybernetic/Electrosmog-causing-device Areas (the enhanced or debilitating effects may require inhibitants to give signed waivers and for service providers to give accurate readings of ionising radiation and EMF or ELF emissions on a street to street basis)

All these groups or combinations thereof should have dedicated districts or spaces appropriate to their community size for expression of self,self determinism etc.. and not be subject to discriminative disenfranchising and punitive laws or uncivilised harassment by citizens with differing preferences.

This must be assured WITH government awareness, formal recognition ofthe group, guarantees (administrators of government MUST be entirely neutral and non-judgmental and have no personal preferences or if they do have such prefeerence are very aware of the need to remain neutral in applicatio of thje law as oer professional administrators) of protection from discimination by other citizens, to ensure at least civilised treatment of the person is assured as per a responsible government.

The above suggested typifies an ideal First World Country’s conditions where any disparate group’s Human Rights may not be infringed on, via illegal electronic surveillance, secret druggings, theft of tangible or intangible property, tangible or intangible spiritual property, general harrassment or bullying by the mob-minded among the majority of citizens without consent or awareness in the most abusive cases.

Note : Building space issues notwithstanding, the above concept of separate districts was extrapolated from the ‘Nudist Colony’ and ‘Red Light Districts’ concept. So I thought why not specialised districts for every other disparate and diverse group? I have hence advocated closed districts based on a single street to a few streets (for example) since . . . with the narrow minded having condemened and smeared this one’s reputation no end with all forms of indirect retaliations from neurotech implantations/NLPs that have left some of us with no privacy, our human rights invaded upon, contrived car accidents (the last one being particularly serious), psychiatry-pharma neuro-poisonings to manipulative public reactions from people unknown no end. This world does not belong to any mob minded group, the world has enough space for everyone, the selfishness, hatred, unreasonable insularism and intolerance is a sign of a very vicious, sick, uncivilised and fundamentalist minded society. Hopefully the next generation of MPs and Senators or what not will have the presence of mind to develop a conscience and mental flexibility to appreciate the rarer mosaic parts that make up any and all societies . . . diversity is strength.

3 Articles on India and Indian Culture – reposted by @AgreeToDisagree – 1st Feb 2011

In dress code, food prohibition, Hindu sumptuary law, neurolinguistics, NLP, political correctness, racism, subtle insults, vegetarian, vegetarianism on February 1, 2012 at 4:06 pm

ARTICLE 1

Hindus sue restaurant for serving them meat; want joint to pick up tab to India for cleansing ritual – BY Philip Caulfield – DAILY NEWS STAFF WRITER – Tuesday, July 19th 2011, 3:45 PM

A group of vegetarian Hindu diners sued the Moghul Express in Edison, N.J., for serving them meat-filled pastries. The group wants the restaurant to pay for their trip to India for a cleansing ritual. The group of 16 Hindus unknowingly noshed (dined rather??? wtf using this word, you’d think they were eating through their noses . . . . the wonders of NLPs on the back of a strong vocabulary eh? A no-no if anything to be PC  . . ) on meat-filled samosas, a no-no in their religion.

A New Jersey restaurant that served meat to a group of vegetarian Hindus may have to pick up the tab for their trip to India for a cleansing ritual, a court panel ruled.

The three-judge panel reinstated a lawsuit filed against Moghul Express, an Indian restaurant in Edison that admitted serving meat-filled pastries to 16 Hindus, the New Jersey Star-Ledger reported.

The group’s religion bars them from eating meat, and the diners said the mix-up tainted them spiritually. To save their souls, the group claims, they must wash themselves in India’s Ganges River, more than 8,000 miles away. And they want the restaurant to foot the bill.

“If you follow the scriptures, it’s definitely a huge cost,” Mehul Thakkar, a spokesman for the Yogi Divine Society, a Hindu nonprofit, told the Star-Leger.

The purification ceremony can last upwards of 30 days, putting the cost somewhere in the thousands, Thakkar said. The group sued after unknowingly noshing on meat-filled samosas during an Indian Day celebration in August 2009. Moghul Express had assured them the flaky treats (ooo now they’re pets eating some cheaply manufactured crud?) were vegetarian, but after the group tasted them and complained, the kitchen admitted it mixed up their order.

A Superior Court threw the case out last year, but the diners appealed and won on Monday. Pradip Kothari, president of the Indo-American Cultural Society in Edison, called the lawsuit “a hypocrisy of the law.” “They can go to a temple here and ask God for forgiveness. God is not going to punish you for doing something unknowingly,” he told the Star-Ledger.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

Would be a good chance for the State to build bridges to India if the restaurant does not. The artful Hindus have extended their hand, typical though are the blunt and obtuse responses of the whites. The national service though costing thousands COULD have been invaluable, but true to selfish form, idiotic society, they failed to respond to a

diplomatic gift horse. And they ARE but asking for reparations based on charges rather than litiguous suits in the number of billions and such. USA fails! Some ‘agent’ from the WH could have hastened to print a stack of bills and asked the restaurant to ‘make India happy’ but nothing.

ARTICLE 2

Conscience Indians Catch The Bull By The Horns Posted on 15. Jul, 2011 by Hamid Waheed in India

They have taken on human rights and Terror issues with a zeal and determination

“Inequality is the soul of Hinduism” Ambedkar – by Hamid Waheed

The state atrocities against poor, lower class and non Hindu Indians continue under silent Indian media but conscience Indian writers, former officials along with human rights organizations keep raising their voices whenever they can. In an article by Arundhati Roy titled “Walking with the Comrades”, published in month of March, she exposes the real face of world‘s largest democracy. How thousands of innocent citizens are being ruthlessly killed in the name of so called development.

Maoist, the forgotten people of India are killed and humiliated under ‘Operation Green Hunt’, using sophisticated weapons and equipment (i.e laser range finder, thermal imaging equipment and unmanned drones) bought from Israel to kill its own poor Gondis (tribesmen). Arundhati explained during her journey to the land of Gondis, how government owned training camps are established to turn street dogs into monster to hunt poor Gondis. India-Israel nexus and Israel’s rogue role in world politics is no more a hidden factor, expulsion of her diplomat by UK on involvement in Hamas leaders murder is a recent example.

Around 60,000 peoples are forced to leave their homes and live in Xray camps. Girls and children living in hostels are not allowed to leave because state uses them as human shields. Many industrial tycoons like Tata and Essar are financing the government operation in order to attain mining contracts. Arundhati questions “When a country that calls itself a democracy openly declares war within its borders, what does that war look like? More so when they are not terrorists”. Under article 2 of resolution 260 (III) ‘A’ the United Nations Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of the Crime of Genocide, Indian state actions fulfill all qualifications to be termed as state sponsored genocide.

The political mindset can be judged from a recent statement of Prime Minister Manmohan Singh when he declared its own citizens as a threat to national security when he was talking about Maoist movement.

Another mind provoking book is “Who Killed Karkare-The Real Face of Terrorism in India”,written by Former Maharashtra Inspector General of Police S M Mushrif. According to S M Mushrif he analysed the Mumbai attacks thoroughly. All the reports that were available to him suggest that the Indian Intelligence Bureau (IB) was aware of the attack at least five days in advance. They knew the entire operation; the route these terrorists were taking. However, it is strange that they did not pass on this information to the Mumbai police.This lack of intelligence led to the Mumbai attacks and some right-wing groups upset with the investigation into the Malegaon incident taking advantage of the situation killed Karkare.

S M Mushrif also reveals that the cases against the Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI) were faked. All the boys who were arrested were found to be innocent during the course of the investigation and later court dismissed the cases against the boys. Gujrat riots still remain in memories of Indian Muslims. Famous writer Smita Narula describes Gujrat riots as Genocide of Muslims and states. According to her “What happened in Gujrat was not a spontaneous uprising, it was a carefully orchestrated attack against Muslims”. Caste system and inequality is root cause of injustice in Indian society. Prominent Indian Hindu writer Ambedkar said that “Inequality is the soul of Hinduism”. He characterized the oppressive caste system as the tyranny of Hinduism. After spending a lifetime in a crusade against the oppressive Hinduism, Ambedkar finally renounced Hinduism and converted to Buddism and exhorted his followers to do the same. Not to forget Kashmir, where security forces abuses are so common and every day we observer protest over such cases. Meenakshi Ganguly, senior South Asia researcher at Human Rights Watch said that “It is extremely rare for the security forces in Kashmir to turn over one of their own to the civilian justice system,”.

Today Sikhs, Christian, Muslims and Dalits (the untouchable humans) are victim of state policies and inequality in India. Human rights organizations are registering number of abuse cases against minorities. Although the Indian State and its proponents seek to blame past governments for human rights abuses and assert that India is no longer violating human rights but independent research by numerous organizations, indicates otherwise. International human rights organizations, such as Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International, continue to condemn India for its failure in preventing and in many cases advocating, the violation of human rights against its minority and underprivileged communities, including women. Surprisingly it is seldom that such activities get focus in Indian media. The Indian media usually remains Pakistan centric as a proactive approach to hide their own short falls. However, for the first time the intelligencia has raised questions on the role of CIA agents like David Headley Coleman & the fact that India has more than 3500 Americans unaccounted for in their country as per the records of the Home Ministry . After july 2011 attack in Mumbai, an understanding is developing where other elements are seen taking advantage of the old Indo – Pak perceptions . Use of locals by exploiting their weaknesses is a common lead behind most of the terror incidents in both countries and chances of common handler can not be ruled out.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

There may be portions unfair about Hinduism, but Hinduism is India’s only cultural-religious heritage. If every Indian converted to something else, true Indian faith and culture would die off. The abuses you mention are not from Hindus but people who claim to be Hindus and follow Hindu forms. Hinduism would never allow such abuses. Meanwhile try to rake it easier on your own ethnotype and immediate neighbours. These bombings were particularly timely if you ask, the intention is to fear monger and create distrust between Central Asian/South Asian nations so that the globalists can try to divide and conquer all of you. Remember to the whites you are always inferior, but useful to control. As cousins though adversorial at times, there is at least a measure of equality which is the only basis friendship can be built on. With enough chaos, the so-called Security council will have an excuse to re-colonize the ENTIRE region. Whatever argument between Muslim and Hindu at that point will be worthless.

ARTICLE 3

Ban likely on improperly dressed tourists in all Goa temples – via Commons – July 12, 2011

The ban on visitors wearing indecent clothes, is likely to be extended to more temples in Goa, with a right wing organisation deciding to lend its support to the campaign on the issue.

Gomant Mandir and Dharmik Sanstha Mahasangh (GMDSM), a federation of various temple committees in Goa, has said that it will convince the temple managements to ensure that the visitors are properly dressed. Goa has more than 1,000 temples across the state.

GMDSM coordinator Jayesh Thali said that the idea to convince the rest of the temple managements came up only after two temples in the state took up a dress-code initiative.

The organisation has said that the improperly dressed or short-dressed visitors should be barred from entering the temples.

Two of Goa’s leading temples have already asked the visitors, especially foreigners, to either dress properly or not to enter the temple premises. Mahalsa Narayani Temple at Mardol, 20 kms away from here, has already banned the entry of foreigners.

Thali told PTI that the steps taken by both the temples are worth appreciating. “The decision taken by the management of the temple is an ideal one and worth emulating by all temples,” he said.

The management of the temples that imposed a ban had said that indecent behaviour by the visitors was hurting the religious sentiments. They had said that since the visitors, especially foreigners, were not properly informed about the religious practices here, they indulge in indecent behaviour.

[[[ *** RESPONSE *** ]]]

This will help remind that ‘Sunday Best’ formal wear should have fair parallels based on RELIGIOUS Day formal wear (local dressing NOT Western suits). Try changing the disgracefully colonized legal system’s trappings as well.

Let it be all Indian, though ‘white’ lawyers in India should bethe only ones wearing wigs and robes. As for the major races listed here, they should wear their OWN race’s formal wear as in the general example below :

The Dhoti Kurta and Turban for Indians, to replace the Robe and Wig for HINDU COURT.

The Kain Songket and Tengkolok for Malays, to replace the Robe and Wig for CALIPH’s COURT.

The Hanfu and Guan Hat for Chinese, to replace the Robe and Wig for CONFUCIAN COURT.

A modified/’combinationally’ representative form of the Cawat and Feather Headress for Orang Asli, to replace the Colonial Robe and Wig for Orang Asli/Native Court.

Why must law be English? The architecture of Legal Institutions English? Why can’t we have our own ‘Inner Temples’ or ‘Inns of Law’ in our host countries? Why not a Maharaja’s Counsel (there are a handful of Maharajas still btw)? Why not a Sultan’s Counsel? An Emperor’s Counsel?

Why the acceptance of colonialism in dress? England hardly deserves to be the heart of the legal fraternity.