Subj: I have got a question about use of temple money?
1. Quite a few people want to get hold of temple money, and use it for purposes that are disingenuous and dishonest. Every one of them seems to want to distribute money that, does not belong to them, especially the secular & the leftist bunches. They argue furiously that this money is state property. The implication of this argument is that, it can be expropriated. I would take issue with it, it is an act of commandeering some one else's property. This approach is Anti-Temple, Anti-Hindu, and is thoroughly immoral & un-ethical.
2. But it is not only a moral question, it is a sacred question, it is also a substantial issue. It is not state property. If the money came from taxes, then it is state property, and belongs to the state. But temple offerings & contributions are not tax money. They do not belong in the state treasury. The temple money came from the devotees. How can the state lay claim to this money ? The correct approach is to hand over this money to a temple-trust, and use it for the welfare of the devotees.
3. The argument of the secularists & leftists is wishy-washy at best. What would they say if the money had been found, not at a temple, but in a church or in a mosque ? Would we be debating & arguing that this money ought to be used by the state ? The why this argument against the Hindu money ( temple-money ).? Clearly, the leftist argument is two-faced & wily.
4. Secular ought not to over-whelm the sacred. Temple-Money belongs to the temple and to its devotees. Let us respect our temples first, then argue about the money in these. The money belongs to the temples, and ought to be preserved there.
5. For the Hell of it, keep the Leftist & and the Phoney-Liberals, out of the temple money.
Surinder Paul Attri
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
1 comment:
Subj: Imran Khan
1. Imran Khan, the Pakistani Cricketeer turned politician laments
in a rally at Lahore that India cannot resolve Kashmir issue
through its military force. This should have been addressed to
the Pakistani rulers, who have always been bent upon finding a
military solution time and again. It cannot be said that he has
matured and internalised the ground realities. But there is a
visible change in his attitude. At the time of Cargil War, in a
statement in London, he did say that negotiations after negotiations
have not materialised any solution and thus supported his
country's venture in Cargill.
However, "Dair Aaye Drust Aaye"-and perhaps it would help him
and his country to refrain from waging wars against India!
Yours sincerely
2. COMMENT: Hill-Billies like Imran Khan, have been gearing up their Islamic war-machine for centuries, and doing Jihad against Kafirs of the world, to turn world into an Islamic Empire. Despite statements to the contrary, his Islam cannot co-exist with Kafirs. Let no one mistake, Imran Khan is a trusted collaborator of Islamic-Imperialists.
3. He has retreated from cricket, but not from politics. But his batting average has not been very high. Instead of dive-bombing at India, he ought to field his remarks at his Pakistani counterparts. He ought to realize that he is barking at the wrong tree. It is not India, but his Islamic-Pakistan, that has been smashing across the border into India. He needs to tell his Pakistanis that, their Islamic military ideology has not worked, and will not work.
3. To Jihad or not to Jihad, that is the question before Pakistanis and certainly before Imran Khan.
Surinder Paul Attri
Post a Comment