Isn't it fair that the two largest parties form an alliance?

Is there any Proof that BJP is forced to oppose SS? or your own creation.

Both BJP and SS opposed each other in Mumbai municipal elections. That is not proof then what is it. Please wake up.

The situation is such that BJP can take a moral high ground because the alliance was not broken by them nr have they asked for any post unlike other parties would have done had they been on their position.  Of course people can criticize but the fact remains the same !

They are not in a position to ask. Saving government is more important. 

Whatever it may be, BJP is better in Saving the Government as well as the Nation.

In politics , especially in our Indian politics there are certain fixed ideas which simply don't gel with the reality of the situation. Like parties calling themselves secular because they go all out to appease minorities and secular parties like BJP called Communal because they treat all communities in the same manner. Citizens are now realising this and one can see how the communal secular parties are being booted out ..

It is fresh news that in case SP and congress alliance will not get majority they may be ask BSP supremo for support. If it is possible than alliance of BJP and SS is not a major issue.

BJP is the new secular party. What a sea change. 

vijay wrote:

BJP is the new secular party. What a sea change. 

Surely it is the most secular of the time if not fully. Prove it otherwise. Congress, a secular party is a big slap on secularism. In fact they are big slap on all the ideologies. The symbol of hand is actually a slap of a con on the face of trust of voters.

Though BJP is not clean but it is a choice of choosing a thief over a terrorist.

The sea of change comes in people realising certain ground realities and discarding some fake mindsets that were carefully cultivated by certain political parties..

BJP is though not clean, . Certainly cleaner than the Congress Party.

Arunima Singh wrote:

vijay wrote:

BJP is the new secular party. What a sea change. 

Surely it is the most secular of the time if not fully. Prove it otherwise. Congress, a secular party is a big slap on secularism. In fact they are big slap on all the ideologies. The symbol of hand is actually a slap of a con on the face of trust of voters.

Though BJP is not clean but it is a choice of choosing a thief over a terrorist.

There are always a few bad eggs in a basket so also BJP has quite a few loose cannons that keep blasting away and bring down the image of the party. However, when you have a leader who is totally non corruptible we can certainly hope to see these voices quieten down in time .

No political  completely filled with honest people. We know many  where in, a few BJP memberswere ousted becauseof their erratic behavior.

@ARUNIMA please define secularism and I shall then respond.

vijay wrote:

@ARUNIMA please define secularism and I shall then respond.

Secularism according to me is where you feel proud to be what you are and show the same respect to others. If I am a Hindu, I am proud to be so. Me being vocal or expressive about it does not make me less secular. I respect all other religions and beliefs. But I can not allow intellectuals or politicians in the garb of being minority friendly to abuse and misuse situations. In a secular state, you stay in harmony. Do not play the victim card or minority card for mere opportunities and damaging the secular thread. You have to be a law abiding citizen and not a minor community or majority.

Arunima Singh wrote:

vijay wrote:

@ARUNIMA please define secularism and I shall then respond.

Secularism according to me is where you feel proud to be what you are and show the same respect to others. If I am a Hindu, I am proud to be so. Me being vocal or expressive about it does not make me less secular. I respect all other religions and beliefs. But I can not allow intellectuals or politicians in the garb of being minority friendly to abuse and misuse situations. In a secular state, you stay in harmony. Do not play the victim card or minority card for mere opportunities and damaging the secular thread. You have to be a law abiding citizen and not a minor community or majority.

I would definitely go with that definition or concept of secularism. It is only when you practice real secularism that we can hope to have a democratic government or else it is a sham democracy like we have been having for decades..

Secularism is separation of religion from politics and from the affairs of the State. It came into vogue in Europe as a reaction to the control the Popes used to exercise on citizens. In India it started as it should have. That was the reason why Nehru objected to President Rajendra Prasad from inaugurating the renovated Somnath Temple. It was not that Nehru was against Hinduism or was pleasing Muslims. His contention was that state should not be seen identifying with any religion. However there are forces in India who want  particular religions  to be a favored at the expense of the other for variety of reasons.Today we see relgious overtones being openly and subtly used in elections and in administration. A secular person can very well practice his religion and be proud of it but  not mix it with politics or in administration. Today we are moving towards majoritirarian style under the garb of secularism. 

Well, Secularism is mandatory in a Democratic Country. Secularism is the principle of separating the Government institutions and persons mandated to represent the State from religious institutions and religious dignitaries.   

As expected a copy/ paste job by rambabu, there is a limit to shamelessness..

What is secularism?

• Secularism is the principle of the separation of government institutions and persons mandated to represent the state from religious institutions and religious dignitaries.

vijay wrote:

Secularism is separation of religion from politics and from the affairs of the State. It came into vogue in Europe as a reaction to the control the Popes used to exercise on citizens. In India it started as it should have. That was the reason why Nehru objected to President Rajendra Prasad from inaugurating the renovated Somnath Temple. It was not that Nehru was against Hinduism or was pleasing Muslims. His contention was that state should not be seen identifying with any religion. However there are forces in India who want  particular religions  to be a favored at the expense of the other for variety of reasons.Today we see relgious overtones being openly and subtly used in elections and in administration. A secular person can very well practice his religion and be proud of it but  not mix it with politics or in administration. Today we are moving towards majoritirarian style under the garb of secularism. 

Nehru was definitely not what he is made out to be by his admirers ..

http://blogs.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/lkadvanis-blog/dr-munshi-s-historic-letter-to-pandit-nehru-vp-menon-calls-it-a-masterpiece/

a paragraph from the article !

After a Cabinet meeting in early 1951, Panditji called Dr. Munshi, who was Food and Agriculture Minister in the Cabinet and said to him: “I do not like your trying to restore Somnath.  It is Hindu revivalism.”

Kanhaiyalal Munshi did not utter a word in reply.  He came back home and prepared a long letter whose text has been reproduced in his famous book Pilgrimage to Freedom. Dr. Munshi wrote to Pandit Nehru:

“Yesterday you referred to Hindu revivalism. You pointedly referred to me in the Cabinet as connected with Somnath. I am glad you did so; for I do not want to keep back any part of my views or activities….I can assure you that the ‘Collective Subconscious’ of India today is happier with the scheme of reconstruction of Somnath sponsored by the Government of India than with many other things that we have done and are doing.”

Emphasising the social reform aspect of Somnath’s reconstruction, Munshi added:

“The intention to throw open the temple to harijans has evoked some criticism from the orthodox section of the Hindu community. However, the objects of the Trust Deed make it clear that the temple is not only to be open to all classes of the Hindu community, but, according to the tradition of the old temple of Somnath, also to non-Hindu visitors. Many have been the customs which I have defied in personal life from boyhood. I have laboured in my humble way through literary and social work to share or reintegrate some aspects of Hinduism, in the conviction that that alone will make India an advanced and vigorous nation under modern conditions.”