4 ms·

> If the bill was meant to be secular, it could provide asylum for everyone suffering religious persecution, regardless of their religion. It clearly is designe

> If the bill was meant to be secular, it could provide asylum for everyone suffering religious persecution, regardless of their religion. It clearly is designed to exclude muslims. Here is the document in it's entirety - http://egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2019/214646.pdf http://egazette.nic.in/WriteReadData/2019/214646.pdf. Please point out the relevant sections of the document where it is stated that Muslims will not be allowed to apply for asylum or that Muslims will not be granted asylum. It just accelerates the process for certain groups of people that are in more grave danger in the area. There's nothing wrong in that. Just because some groups are not mentioned for the accelerated process does not mean that they are excluded from the entire process.

P6Rs4r 6y ago
If the accelerated asylum process does not apply to Muslims (including Rohingyas and Ahmadiyas), why is that not discriminatory? Why is the plight of a Buddhist in Pakistan more urgent than that of a Rohingya in Myanmar?
- sbmthakur 6y ago
  Unlike Pakistan, India recognizes Ahmadiyas as Muslims[1][2]. From India's perspective, they are followers of Islam. CAA doesn't address sectarian conflicts. It only addresses religious persecution. It can be argued that it should address sectarian issues, but by that reasoning, it should also address persecution based on sexual-orientation, color, gender, etc. As for Rohingyas, this comment explains it in a better way: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23800181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23800181 I would also like to add that Rohingyas are known for some serious violence[3]. I don't think the same can be said for a Buddhist from Pakistan. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Ahmadis#Ordinance_XX_of_1984 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Ahmadis#Ordinan... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Ahmadis#India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Ahmadis#India 3. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/05/myanmar-new-evidence-reveals-rohingya-armed-group-massacred-scores-in-rakhine-state/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/05/myanmar-new-e...
  - thewhitetulip 6y ago
    > It only addresses religious persecution SO you agree that Ahmadiyas are persecuted. They are a religiously persecuted because their sect is being persecuted. so CAA clearly should have involved them because any secterian persecution is by default done via religion. They're not being persecuted for owning a PlayStation in a country of poor right?
    - sbmthakur 6y ago
      > They are a religiously persecuted because their sect is being persecuted. CAA is not the only way in which refugees can come to India. They are free to seek asylum if they want. If you want them to be included in the CAA then first ask the Indian government to recognize them as a separate religious sect that's being oppressed.
      - thewhitetulip 6y ago
        you claimed that CAA is for religious prosecution. Ahmadiyas and Rohingyas are religious sects who are facing prosecution. ergo, they are qualified under CAA. but you claim otherwise using mental gymnastics. > They are free to seek asylum if they want. If this is the case, abolish CAA and let Afghan Hindus and Pakistani Hindus seek asylum as well. since CAA isn't the only way right? > Indian government to recognize them as a separate religious sect that's being oppressed. the hell? They are facing religious prosecution because of their religion (sect isn't different from religion as sect is a part of the religion) when the self declared 'upper castes' discriminate against upper class defined 'lower class' then it is still religious discrimination because the 'lower class' are discriminated because they have a particular religious identity. you don't have a leg to stand on.
        naruvimama 6y ago
        Let Pakistan handover equivalent land to India, let us not forget Ahmadiyas created the Islamic nation of Pakistan. Rohingas trace their roots to Bangladesh and there are 50+ muslim majority countries for them to migrate to, which is not the case for Hindus and Sikhs. Moreover mayanmer has unearthed mass graves of Hindus in Rohingya areas, while it isn't surprising, that isn't comforting either.
- naruvimama 6y ago
  Ahmadiyas were the founders of Pakistan, and the butcher of non-muslims in Pakistan. Why would you invite them along with the ones fleeing? It is like inviting the fox into the coop.
  - selimthegrim 6y ago
    Citation, please. Since when did they butcher non-Muslims?
    - naruvimama 6y ago
      The mere fact that they spearheaded the kilafet movement and consequently created Pakistan, makes them the butchers. If you handout fuel & torches with an intent, that makes you the arsonist.
lvbu 6y ago
Adding to your point Rohingyas from Myanmar are not similar to Buddhists from Pakistan due to one single reason. Myanmar was not divided from India. Nor has Indian govt made any promise on protection anytime. Hence India does not have any obligation to people from Myanmar apart from Humanitarian concern. That particular concern is common to all the world. If Europe or US have that concern, I do believe that they can accept Rohigyas similar to how they accepted a large number of Syrians

P6Rs4r 6y ago

If the accelerated asylum process does not apply to Muslims (including Rohingyas and Ahmadiyas), why is that not discriminatory? Why is the plight of a Buddhist in Pakistan more urgent than that of a Rohingya in Myanmar?

sbmthakur 6y ago
Unlike Pakistan, India recognizes Ahmadiyas as Muslims[1][2]. From India's perspective, they are followers of Islam. CAA doesn't address sectarian conflicts. It only addresses religious persecution. It can be argued that it should address sectarian issues, but by that reasoning, it should also address persecution based on sexual-orientation, color, gender, etc. As for Rohingyas, this comment explains it in a better way: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23800181 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=23800181 I would also like to add that Rohingyas are known for some serious violence[3]. I don't think the same can be said for a Buddhist from Pakistan. 1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Ahmadis#Ordinance_XX_of_1984 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Ahmadis#Ordinan... 2. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Ahmadis#India https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Persecution_of_Ahmadis#India 3. https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/05/myanmar-new-evidence-reveals-rohingya-armed-group-massacred-scores-in-rakhine-state/ https://www.amnesty.org/en/latest/news/2018/05/myanmar-new-e...
- thewhitetulip 6y ago
  > It only addresses religious persecution SO you agree that Ahmadiyas are persecuted. They are a religiously persecuted because their sect is being persecuted. so CAA clearly should have involved them because any secterian persecution is by default done via religion. They're not being persecuted for owning a PlayStation in a country of poor right?
  - sbmthakur 6y ago
    > They are a religiously persecuted because their sect is being persecuted. CAA is not the only way in which refugees can come to India. They are free to seek asylum if they want. If you want them to be included in the CAA then first ask the Indian government to recognize them as a separate religious sect that's being oppressed.
    - thewhitetulip 6y ago
      you claimed that CAA is for religious prosecution. Ahmadiyas and Rohingyas are religious sects who are facing prosecution. ergo, they are qualified under CAA. but you claim otherwise using mental gymnastics. > They are free to seek asylum if they want. If this is the case, abolish CAA and let Afghan Hindus and Pakistani Hindus seek asylum as well. since CAA isn't the only way right? > Indian government to recognize them as a separate religious sect that's being oppressed. the hell? They are facing religious prosecution because of their religion (sect isn't different from religion as sect is a part of the religion) when the self declared 'upper castes' discriminate against upper class defined 'lower class' then it is still religious discrimination because the 'lower class' are discriminated because they have a particular religious identity. you don't have a leg to stand on.
      - naruvimama 6y ago
        Let Pakistan handover equivalent land to India, let us not forget Ahmadiyas created the Islamic nation of Pakistan. Rohingas trace their roots to Bangladesh and there are 50+ muslim majority countries for them to migrate to, which is not the case for Hindus and Sikhs. Moreover mayanmer has unearthed mass graves of Hindus in Rohingya areas, while it isn't surprising, that isn't comforting either.
naruvimama 6y ago
Ahmadiyas were the founders of Pakistan, and the butcher of non-muslims in Pakistan. Why would you invite them along with the ones fleeing? It is like inviting the fox into the coop.
- selimthegrim 6y ago
  Citation, please. Since when did they butcher non-Muslims?
  - naruvimama 6y ago
    The mere fact that they spearheaded the kilafet movement and consequently created Pakistan, makes them the butchers. If you handout fuel & torches with an intent, that makes you the arsonist.

lvbu 6y ago

Adding to your point Rohingyas from Myanmar are not similar to Buddhists from Pakistan due to one single reason. Myanmar was not divided from India. Nor has Indian govt made any promise on protection anytime. Hence India does not have any obligation to people from Myanmar apart from Humanitarian concern. That particular concern is common to all the world. If Europe or US have that concern, I do believe that they can accept Rohigyas similar to how they accepted a large number of Syrians