[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Sanjeev's allergy to the word 'socialism'

Indranil DasGupta wrote:

> Also, we ought to take out the word "secular" which by definition
> connotes an "irreligious" state, and instead put in language found for
> example in the U.S. constitution concerning the doctrine of separation
> of church and state.

I still don't see what's wrong with "secular".Can you elaborate on why you
non-religious or "irreligious" is a bad thing?

I think the US "separation of church and state" is a reference to european
monarchies where the church had considerable political power, and the
to make laws and levy taxes. The monarch was also sometimes the head of the
state church [as with the church of england], or the monarch owed some kind
allegiance to the pope.

IMO, a secular state simply describes a state that does not derive any of
its governing principles from religion. In India, organized religion has
had power on the scale comparable to Europe or the Islamic world so I don't
why we should be applying remedies to problems we never had.


This is a posting to India_Policy Discussion list:  debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/