Why does Khalistan matter anways?

[10th regiment]

ahh a clever singh replies

khalistan zindabad

[japmans]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

Excellent reply Nirgun Ji!

Just wanted to comment on one point by one sikhi. He asked what right have we Sikhs to claim Punjab as Khalistan. One simple thing, we are a majority in Punjab and the democratic norm is that the majority rules. The Muslims through their majority got West Punjab for themselves even though Sikhs owned the best lands and paid the most in taxes in these areas. As one Sikh leader said, the British have taken the Punjab from the owner and given it to the tenents! The Hindus through their majority took away Himachal and Haryana from Punjab. And now you ask what right have Sikhs got to the leftover area?

GurFateh

Bikramjit Singh

so veer.. back to my post.. what's stopping, even after a proposed Khalistan, hindus from moving into that space? making their own political parties.. populating enough to become a majority... electing in that new hindu party into power..

after all, if it's democracy that's going to be the form of government, then it's not THAT big a psplit.. as it is, the majoirty is only roughly 55-45, in favour of sikhs, right? and i'm sure there's plenty of "Sikhs" who may not even vote for the Sikh party.. do you know what i mean?

[10th regiment]

i think one sikhi has been reading too many jurisprudence books

[The Voice of the Voiceless]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

There is no such thing as learning too much. There is no such thing as questioning more than one should to find the Truth.

To all that have replied. No one has made an argument against mine.

Bikramjit Singh pointed out:

"...we are a majority in Punjab and the democratic norm is that the majority rules. The Muslims through their majority got West Punjab for themselves even though Sikhs owned the best lands and paid the most in taxes in these areas. As one Sikh leader said, the British have taken the Punjab from the owner and given it to the tenents! The Hindus through their majority took away Himachal and Haryana from Punjab. And now you ask what right have Sikhs got to the leftover area?"

This is a battle of legal land rights. You are mixing theistics with politics. Have you resorted to a Khalistan imprisoned in its own borders? Sri Guru Nanak Dev Ji envisioned everyone one the path of Sikhi, regardless of faith. That is one of the most powerful and beautiful aspects of our religion. Why bring Khalistan down to mound of dirt? The first Gurudwara is the one inside each of us. We need no borders. Khalistan is here when we naam jaap. We are unified in prayers and reverence to Waheguru. I do not ask what right we Sikhs have to any land. I do not fill my mind with trivial pursuits. Khalistan exists as a spiritual nation. It exists when us brothers and sisters pray for salvation. And anyone can be a part of that.

My argument was simply one that puts Khalistan and Punjab as one, and pursues the fact that simply that a Church and State as a unified head of a nation i

s something that deserves a lot of attention. If you are so adamant of acheiving this land in the name of Waheguru, then you must prepare for everything. Don't point me towards restated causes for Khalistan. Describe to me your rebuttal against my Church-State issue. How can you manage a nation from scripture with political ideals. It is not as simple as you are making it.

Death will occur on each side when you fight for this cause you have so diligently established for yourselves. Can you do injustice to those that will die for this land by not considering infrastructure to the greatest detail. Argue. Show me otherwize.

Your simple remarks and mass support for each other only shows irrespective responses that are not well thought out. If you are so dedicated you will approach this argument with the utmost respect and aim to reason why a Church-State, Khalistan can exist. Your insecurity is what I see when you tell me to read signatures of quotes that are context sensitive, and you fail to ellaborate on your claims.

We do not deserve the Khalistan we dream about, if we cannot comprehend the ramifications that come with its birth.

I am willing to argue.

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

[mann_kaum_layee_qurbaan]

"if we cannot comprehend the ramifications that come with its birth. "

The ramifications of the birth of Khalistan:

1. Possible mass migration, unlikely as Sikhs have no strife against Hindus or other minorities. One must remmeber that many of teh things that Sikhs fought for were Punjabi issues, such as water and lectricity. water feeds the farms, the hindus in the cities cannot run markets without farm produce. If the majority Sikhs farmers cannot get water due to teh central gov't stealing Punjab river waters, Hindus will be devastated as they are just as involved in Punjab's economy as Sikhs.

2. Sikhs could become a minority in Punjab. Right now Sikhs have a majority in Punjab. Only a major decline in Sikh birth rates and major increases inn hindu birth rates would alter the percentages, otherwise the % should remain about the same, or as we saw in the height of Sant Ji's time, many Hindus became Sikh and kept kes. Remember, assimilation works both ways, right now sikhs are in a host nation of India and are inevitably going to assimilate into mainstream Indian society, and if their was a Khalistan, the conecpt of assimilation would occur and many Hindus would adopt Sikh values and ways. Just look at how Sikhs change a bit when coming to the West.

3. Would Hindus be allowed to form parties. Maharaja Ranjit Singh, in the Sikh empire, had many Hindus in the highest posts of his kingdom. Sikhs have never showed a hatred for fellow Hindus.

4. How would Punajb protect it's border with pakistan. Ok all I can say is Canada and america share borders, America can kick the living crap out of Canada, but civilized nations

do not do such things. Pakistan would have no reason to attack a Sikh nation. the reason Pakistan has tensions with India is because of Kashmir. Khalistan would have nothing to do with Kashmir issue.

5. How would Punjab survive economically? Punjab is land-locked. Thank God Punjab is land-locked, because i can't swim and I don't know many Punjabis who can :wub: Well India has a billion people. Khalistan would not be another Pakistan with it army standing on the border ready to attack hindustan. Khalistan woul be on good terms with their neighbors, thus trade would be of no concern.

Ramifications of Sikhs staying with India:

1: well, Punjab state was not made until 1966 after thousands courted arrest. When it was made it was split even further.

2: Punjab's river waters are being stolen illegally by the center.

3: Punjab gets the least amount of aid from the central gov't.

4: Punjabi farmers get the lowest amount of money for their products.

5: The indian government does not recognize the Sikhi as a distinct religion. Anand Karaj act is not enacted.

6: The darbar Sahib and many other Gurdwaras have been attacked by the Indian military to combat 40 or so singhs with WWII guns.

7: Several thousands have disappeared from Punjab and killed in fake encounters.

8: Human rights groups are banned from Punjab.

9: Delhi pogrom victims are expected to forget 10,000 Sikhs murdered as the culprits are the members of parliament who drive around with gov't security.

10: If Sikhs raise a voice for Justice, they are terrorists and should be killed in the most inhumane of ways. Their whole families should be terminated as to teach the rest of the nation a lesson.

11..............................................................................

.......

>

Ok you decide which ramifiactions are worse. Any monkey with proper training could see the obvious choice.

FATEH.

[>Bikramjit Singh<]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

Excellent reply Nirgun Ji!

Just wanted to comment on one point by one sikhi. He asked what right have we Sikhs to claim Punjab as Khalistan. One simple thing, we are a majority in Punjab and the democratic norm is that the majority rules. The Muslims through their majority got West Punjab for themselves even though Sikhs owned the best lands and paid the most in taxes in these areas. As one Sikh leader said, the British have taken the Punjab from the owner and given it to the tenents! The Hindus through their majority took away Himachal and Haryana from Punjab. And now you ask what right have Sikhs got to the leftover area?

GurFateh

Bikramjit Singh

so veer.. back to my post.. what's stopping, even after a proposed Khalistan, hindus from moving into that space? making their own political parties.. populating enough to become a majority... electing in that new hindu party into power..

after all, if it's democracy that's going to be the form of government, then it's

not THAT big a psplit.. as it is, the majoirty is only roughly 55-45, in favour of sikhs, right? and i'm sure there's plenty of "Sikhs" who may not even vote for the Sikh party.. do you know what i mean?

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

VeerJi

Each and every sovereign state has the right to determine it's immigration policy. It is up the government of Khalistan to decide whether it allows any Hindus or others to migrate to Khalistan to settle. If anything the migrant issue can be used as an argument for Khalistan. At the moment because Sikhs have no control over who can come and settle in Punjab large number of Bhaiyas have come to Punjab and settled there. This settlement affects the Sikh majority and many Sikh political parties see this as a blatant attempt to reduce the Sikh majority.

GurFateh

Bikramjit Singh

[>Bikramjit Singh<]

Your simple remarks and mass support for each other only shows irrespective responses that are not well thought out. If you are so dedicated you will approach this argument with the utmost respect and aim to reason why a Church-State, Khalistan can exist. Your insecurity is what I see when you tell me to read signatures of quotes that are context sensitive, and you fail to ellaborate on your claims.

We do not deserve the Khalistan we dream about, if we cannot comprehend the ramifications that come with its birth.

I am willing to argue.

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

If anything it is your view that doesn't seem to be well thought out. Your argument is that a church-Khalistan cannot exist or will find it difficult to exist. You are looking at this issue from a western perspective. The West has a long history of problems created by the catholic church interfaring with the governance of different states. For a Khalistan we need to look at it from a Sikhi perspective. Would you agree with me that in a theocratic state such as Khalistan the Guru Granth Sahib would form the basis of the constitution. Just as in spiritual sphere then similarly in the temporal sphere the Guru G

ranth Sahib would be supreme. In a semitic ( Christian, Jewish and Muslim ) form of a state based on religion having the Bible, Torah or the Koran as the highest authority is problematic. In these scriptures there are many things which are directly opposed to the accepted norms of modern politics such as human rights and equality of all. This is especially the case with a state founded on the basis of the Koran. This is why Islamic states have an undercurrent of oppression against both women and minorities. No such issue exists with the Guru Granth Sahib. There is nothing in the Guru Granth Sahib which runs counter to the most enlightened and progressive ideals of governence.

Gurfateh

Bikramjit Singh

[The Voice of the Voiceless]

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

How would the Guru Granth Sahib treat a murderer in Khalistan? How would the state of Punjab?

The difference as I see it is that, criminals in the State of Punjab can commit a crime but still have faith that they have not offended their respective God or religion. In the country of Khalistan, the criminal must bear the burden that the act is directly an act against a religious institution. What happens when the criminal act was in the name of God? Does Khalistan have the right to convict a criminal without offending the freedom of religion? Or is this a freedom we will not provide? You see, this is but one paradox.

How can you build a Khalistan governed by a political party and then still refer to the nation as a religious ideal void of any political influence ?

How can you vote against the Khalistan Right or Khalistan Left? It's just another split among Sikhs. No one has gone as far as to develop some infrastructure regarding the composition of a constitution. Will it be tenets extracted from the Guru Granth Sahib? If so will it be ammendable as times change? The Guru Granth Sahib has not changed because it is the words of our Gurus. So it just means how we appropriate the Gurus wisdom to our times will change? Who decides when times have changed? Are there positions of power in Khalistan? Who decides?

No Gurudwara will sacrifice its laws for the state of Punjab. Thus, Punjab must adopt the laws of the Gurudwara. Punjab must evolve into the Gurudwara state. Or do you think that the Gurudwara must evolve into the state? Either way, the Gurudwara must excomm

unicate from itself all things that it considers against the steadfast morals that this religion is built on. In doing this Khalistan stumbles into many dilemnas concerning litigation, freedoms of speech, the justice process, non-sikhs, relations etc. Its not a solvable problem. Its something that must be dealt with.

"If anything it is your view that doesn't seem to be well thought out. Your argument is that a church-Khalistan cannot exist or will find it difficult to exist. You are looking at this issue from a western perspective. The West has a long history of problems created by the catholic church interfaring with the governance of different states. For a Khalistan we need to look at it from a Sikhi perspective. Would you agree with me that in a theocratic state such as Khalistan the Guru Granth Sahib would form the basis of the constitution. Just as in spiritual sphere then similarly in the temporal sphere the Guru Granth Sahib would be supreme. In a semitic ( Christian, Jewish and Muslim ) form of a state based on religion having the Bible, Torah or the Koran as the highest authority is problematic. In these scriptures there are many things which are directly opposed to the accepted norms of modern politics such as human rights and equality of all. This is especially the case with a state founded on the basis of the Koran. This is why Islamic states have an undercurrent of oppression against both women and minorities. No such issue exists with the Guru Granth Sahib. There is nothing in the Guru Granth Sahib which runs counter to the most enlightened and progressive ideals of governence."

In the Guru Granth Sahib Ji there is an active voice against caste. In Punjabi culture which includes those of Sikhs, caste has prevailed as a strong presence. If you decide that the authority posed by other religious texts are problematic because of the times they were written in, how does the Guru Granth Sahib Ji fair better with s.e.x.u.a.l preference, abortion, varied sects of Sikhism, secular governm

ent, sustainable economies, currency, freedoms of speech? You are wrong to assume that the Word of our Gurus is taken the same way among all Sikhs. Its true, there was no St. Luther to tell us that our interpretation of Waheguru is our own. But it is in the Guru Granth Sahib Ji. Naam Jaap is personal connection to Waheguru. So how does Khalistan govern varying ideals when Khalistan is derived from those ideals?

You've made too many assumptions. And our religion isn't so straightforward. The Guru Granth Sahib Ji is written in some cases in script that many cannot fully comprehend, lest I remind you. The power of the Word is beyond us Sikhs. Because the power of the Word is the immortalized Guru. We can't attempt to fully comprehend it, yet we are prepared to make it the affidavit of our constitution?

You've heard the statement, "A picture is a thousand words"? I believe a word is a thousand pictures. And that is the fallacy of humanity. We lack the capacity to define ourselves. We are victims of our own self-awareness. Look at our history. I mean the worlds history. Its conflict. Its vague. You can believe one thing as much as another. We will never define ourselves. What have we got to show for what we are? Identity? Image? When we perish, we leave our words. Describing a desert with a handful of sand.

You write and you are written.

Every word you write, unwrites what you've written.

Choose your words cautiously.

Waheguroo Jee Ka Khalsa!

Waheguroo Jee Kee Fateh!!

[10th regiment]

basically hes talking about seperation of powers between state and gurdwara which he deems impossible in sikhi ( miri piri) and so how would any justice system survive as it would be dependant on the laws of god so to speak

well i think thats what hes on about

there are answers to these qns, just read any jurisprudence book

[Bhullar]

1: well, Punjab state was not made until 1966 after thousands courted arrest. When it was made it was split even further.

2: Punjab's river waters are being stolen illegally by the center.

3: Punjab gets the least amount of aid from the central gov't.

4: Punjabi farmers get the lowest amount of money for their products.

5: The indian government does not recognize the Sikhi as a distinct religion. Anand Karaj act is not enacted.

6: The darbar Sahib and many other Gurdwaras have been attacked by the Indian military to combat 40 or so singhs with WWII guns.

7: Several thousands have disappeared from Punjab and killed in fake encounters.

8: Human rights groups are banned from Punjab.

9: Delhi pogrom victims are expected to forget 10,000 Sikhs murdered as the culprits are the members of parliament who drive around with gov't security.

10: If Sikhs raise a voice for Justice, they are terrorists and should be killed in the most inhumane of ways. Their whole families should be terminated as to teach the rest of the nation a lesson.

11..............................................................................

.......

Sometimes I wonder how human rights groups don't bring this to red cross attention, so they can aid??!!