SarthakGanguly
BANNED
Post 12 - yes.4-13 year old kids will be visiting pronhub.?

Majority of Indians now have access to the Internet. Even if they don't have proper toilets.

Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Post 12 - yes.4-13 year old kids will be visiting pronhub.?


It is true Muslims would want Mecca to be rebuilt if that ever happened. But there's a right way of doing things and a wrong way. The right way would have been to raise public awareness. Let the community there know of the significance of that spot and the meaning it holds...along with the evidence that there used to be a Mandir here. Work with the community(Hindus/Muslims/etc) and have them sign a petition to relocate the Masjid elsewhere.
Wrong approach was to force ur will on to ppl, tear down the Masjid and build a Mandir. How different is that from what Babar did?
You are ideally right in what you are saying.It is true Muslims would want Mecca to be rebuilt if that ever happened. But there's a right way of doing things and a wrong way. The right way would have been to raise public awareness. Let the community there know of the significance of that spot and the meaning it holds...along with the evidence that there used to be a Mandir here. Work with the community(Hindus/Muslims/etc) and have them sign a petition to relocate the Masjid elsewhere.
Wrong approach was to force ur will on to ppl, tear down the Masjid and build a Mandir. How different is that from what Babar did?
If there is scientific evidence to prove that there was and ppl r unwilling to listen then take it to court and let the court decide. There is a procedure to everything.What if Hindus insist that Macca was never there & adamantly refuse to hear the Muslims side or even acknowledge it?
If there is scientific evidence to prove that there was and ppl r unwilling to listen then take it to court and let the court decide. There is a procedure to everything.
I agree with u...ideal solutions hardly ever work in real life...and this was kind of the reason I brought this whole thing up.You are ideally right in what you are saying.
But ideal things happen rarely in real life. History is testament to the fact that the end (unfortunately) often justifies the means.
Yes, I think so too. The expectation that Muslims and non Muslims will live happily together did not work out very well here. True, many Muslims (and non Muslims) can, but the faith often comes in conflict (lets be honest here). That creates an identity crisis. This could have been avoided."Hindus/Muslims of India can just coexist like they have for centuries...religion plays no part in state matters...state will protect the rights of everyone".
Isn't that a bit too idealistic? Babri Masjid incident is proof that such idealism doesn't work. It is easy to rile up crowds against each other citing whatever difference(religion, race, color, etc).
Dear cookie monster this is a civil responce for you.@Kuru @Kaushika @Rajaraja Chola I'm curious to know as why u guys r so hell bent on making the Ram Mandir in the exact same spot as the Babri Masjid.
To clarify, I'm not saying whether it's the right thing to do or the wrong thing to do. Personally I don't care.
U have the right to make a Ram Mandir anywhere u please but why must it be by hurting the sentiments of ur fellow countrymen(Indian Muslims)?
...and please don't bother citing that a Ram Mandir used to exist there before Babri Masjid. Bcuz this was during the time of a ruler(King/Monarch) and not a democracy. It was more of a might is right kinda time. If there was a Hindu monarch destroying a Masjid and erecting a Mandir then I wouldn't ask.
India claims to be a democracy and that's what the whole partition was about. The one nation vs two nation thing. Congress and its leaders were of the view that religion has no part in state matters and all the subjects will be free to practice their religion and their rights will be protected. The Muslims that stayed behind and sided with India were of that view that ur forefathers like Nehru held...so by destroying Babri Masjid and erecting a Mandir in its place...isn't that like saying "u were wrong Indian Muslims and so was Nehru and his folks...we r gonna do whatever we damn well please bcuz we r the majority"?
I'm hoping for a civil response...if u guys feel like u can't do that...just don't bother replying![]()
I'm not switching arguments based on convenience. Im just showing u all the various ways that exist other than "might is right".You can't switch from legal to moral and then back to legal arguments as per your convenience.
Why should the courts decide on a moral issue?
Does the collective conscience of Muslims disappear when it comes to rights of other religions?
Imagine if Hindus start destroying all Mosques in India, starts building temples in those places and say 'let the courts decide?'
Then that would be epicentre of religious riots.I agree with everything you said. India, as a democracy can't allow only a temple to be built there. I can't give you my source but from what I understand the Supreme Court is exploring the possibility of allowing both to be built there and has sent feelers to leaders of both communities.
This must be a secularist approach to the problem.I agree with everything you said. India, as a democracy can't allow only a temple to be built there. I can't give you my source but from what I understand the Supreme Court is exploring the possibility of allowing both to be built there and has sent feelers to leaders of both communities.


I'm not switching arguments based on convenience. Im just showing u all the various ways that exist other than "might is right".
Also I can see that in ur post u r starting to get a bit emotional citing the collective conscience of Muslims and what not. So perhaps it's better we end this discussion here.
For the record I never said that Babar did good by destroying a Mandir and building a mosque in its place...so there's no need of u telling me "Imagine if Hindus start destroying all Mosques in India". I agree that what Babar did was bad and he shouldn't have. I'm just drawing parallels:
India under a monarch -
Babar destroys a mandir and builds Masjid...that's wrong
A democratic India that champions the idea that protects the rights of all its citizens -
A mob destroys a Masjid and builds a Mandir
Do u see the parallels now? Do u not think there should've been other ways?
This must be a secularist approach to the problem.
In that case, neither the Hindu nor the Muslim will visit the places - except may be to destroy the other.![]()
Lol. Kids have the option of PornhubSlaves to whom? You guys? That's the biggest joke of the day. You guys urself were invaded and converted. Now since I converted "Hey I ruled u for 1000 years"
What a false sense of superiorty
![]()
This matter is beyond the wisdom of our judicial system, best would be by enforcement through passing a law to build Ram temple at centre & UP, rest we will take care of.In a perfect world, I agree.
A case can not go on for 150 years and when the obvious is staring in the face for everyone to see.
Masjid was destroyed because the law, Politics, Politicians & Muslims have collectively failed the Hindus. My single question is, how long is too long to wait for justice?
Do you think Hindus waiting for 150 years for courts to decide is too long?!