More than half of Sikh issues can be resolved if we did this one thing..

[Guest]

What if I told you that the slavery on sikh people is because of something we did not do , and that in the long run there's one quick fix to more than half of the issues sikhs face today.

And that quick fix is this : 1) Higher rate of reproduction, 2)  Proselytization , 3) Preaching to orphans .'

1) Higher rate of reproduction 

In the latest indian census, Sikhs as a group were the ones who had the lowest fertility rate. It means Sikhs are having lesser children than hindus or muslims. Not surprisingly , muslims had the highest fertility rate . Whenever I encouraged Sikhs to have more kids per couple, the usual nonsensical , condescending reply I got was one of the following : 

1) Muslims are R-type species, while Sikhs are K-type . In plain words, it means we prefer quality over quantity . However the argument is rather ludicrous . Sikhs of today can't claim the good, old , oft-boasted "1 sikh = 125000 enemies" . Its a no-brainer our people have anything but quality. Would the people who make such ludicrous argument would rather be happy if Sikhs became an exotic, rare-to-be-found community like the zoroastrians . Money of all the world , but no future to look to . 

2) Muslims have multiple wives , so it makes it easier for them. Ok, fine , but what about the christians rapid growth-rate in india ? They manage to get a heavy majority in many north eastern states without having multiple wives. Their sword is capturing the orphans and the needy.

I have always asked Sikhs what stops us from having more than 1,2 kids per couple ? I never got a satisfactory answer. 

Its a fact that in a democracy your numbers dictate your political power. In every country , there're the sell-outs , the leftist who will pander to you and your needs , only if you have the votes. As the saying goes, "either be a note bank or a vote bank" . Else politicans couldn't care less about you . We see it in europe, we see it in india and elsewhere. Its a fact, when will out simple sikhs realize this ?

The reason politicians don't pander to sikhs is because we hardly make a mark in their political votebank. The votebank of pandering goes like this :

 

One would think its a common sense that the number of kids once have will have a domino effect once you go down generations , something like this : 

 

In the first case, the so called nuclear family , look at the degrading domino effect which is suicidal for a sikh population .

In the second case, its merely maintaining the population. 

The 300% growth rate actually happens in third case 

If you think I am being ridiculous , lets not forget our gurus too had atleast 3 kids . Guru Gobind Singh ji had 4 children. And the sikhs after that had even higher number of children , some as high as 12 or 15. 

The reason muslim population is so successful and causes terror in hearts of those who wish them ill is because of their humongous birth rate. Just look at how many kids the famous saudis had , you will be shocked ! 

2) Proselytization

This is another place where we're totally nullied ourselves. We like to preach that we don't preach ! I guess this is another fukra symptom in our community that we just wanna sound good to outsiders, esp amongst the elite , and give ourselves an exotic feel in front of people . However the Sikh gurus themselves had manji system in punjab which were nothing but centers of preaching. 

3) Preaching to Orphans

Why should we not preach to orphans ? Forcible conversion is against sikhi, however if christians can raise kids under them as christian , why we despite so much money can't pull sikh orphanages to sikhi-ize kids out there. Infact we're doing their halat-palat good , meaning now and the hereafter good by raising them and preaching them sikhi. 

Having said this , I think there's a great probability most of those young sikh men would just cut off their hairs and turbans off once they grow up . I think sikhi by its nature is not meant to be followed by the masses, esp vast majority of  men who find the uncut hair , uncut facial hair and turbans uncomfortable. 

[Ranjeet01]

15 minutes ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

What if I told you that the slavery on sikh people is because of something we did not do , and that in the long run there's one quick fix to more than half of the issues sikhs face today.

And that quick fix is this : 1) Higher rate of reproduction, 2)  Proselytization , 3) Preaching to orphans .'

1) Higher rate of reproduction 

In the latest indian census, Sikhs as a group were the ones who had the lowest fertility rate. It means Sikhs are having lesser children than hindus or muslims. Not surprisingly , muslims had the highest fertility rate . Whenever I encouraged Sikhs to have more kids per couple, the usual nonsensical , condescending reply I got was one of the following : 

1) Muslims are R-type species, while Sikhs are K-type . In plain words, it means we prefer quality over quantity . However the argument is rather ludicrous . Sikhs of today can't claim the good, old , oft-boasted "1 sikh = 125000 enemies" . Its a no-brainer our people have anything but quality. Would the people who make such ludicrous argument would rather be happy if Sikhs became an exotic, rare-to-be-found community like the zoroastrians . Money of all the world , but no future to look to . 

2) Muslims have multiple wives , so it makes it easier for them. Ok, fine , but what about the christians rapid growth-rate in india ? They manage to get a heavy majority in many north eastern states without having multiple wives. Their sword is capturing the orphans and the needy.

I have always asked Sikhs what stops us from having more than 1,2 kids per couple ? I never got a satisfactory answer. 

Its a fact that in a democracy your numbers dictate your political power. In every country , there're the sell-outs , the leftist who will pander to you and your needs , only if you have the votes. As the saying goes, "either be a note bank or a vote bank" . Else politicans couldn't care less about you . We see it in europe, we see it in india and elsewhere. Its a fact, when will out simple sikhs realize this ?

The reason politicians don't pander to sikhs is because we hardly make a mark in their political votebank. The votebank of pandering goes like this :

 

One would think its a common sense that the number of kids once have will have a domino effect once you go down generations , something like this : 

 

In the first case, the so called nuclear family , look at the degrading domino effect which is suicidal for a sikh population .

In the second case, its merely maintaining the population. 

The 300% growth rate actually happens in third case 

If you think I am being ridiculous , lets not forget our gurus too had atleast 3 kids . Guru Gobind Singh ji had 4 children. And the sikhs after that had even higher number of children , some as high as 12 or 15. 

The reason muslim population is so successful and causes terror in hearts of those who wish them ill is because of their humongous birth rate. Just look at how many kids the famous saudis had , you will be shocked ! 

2) Proselytization

This is another place where we're totally nullied ourselves. We like to preach that we don't preach ! I guess this is another fukra symptom in our community that we just wanna sound good to outsiders, esp amongst the elite , and give ourselves an exotic feel in front of people . However the Sikh gurus themselves had manji system in punjab which were nothing but centers of preaching. 

3) Preaching to Orphans

Why should we not preach to orphans ? Forcible conversion is against sikhi, however if christians can raise kids under them as christian , why we despite so much money can't pull sikh orphanages to sikhi-ize kids out there. Infact we're doing their halat-palat good , meaning now and the hereafter good by raising them and preaching them sikhi. 

Having said this , I think there's a great probability most of those young sikh men would just cut off their hairs and turbans off once they grow up . I think sikhi by its nature is not meant to be followed by the masses, esp vast majority of  men who find the uncut hair , uncut facial hair and turbans uncomfortable. 

Good points there. 

There is more chance to get Pandas to breed than our people to have more kids.

I did hear a theory as to why the birth rates have gone down and it was to do with the introduction of pensions. 

Traditionally having more children was seen as securing security for your old age.

With the advent of pensions,  having more children was no longer necessary. 

But with a rapidly ageing population and less young people, there is a demographic crisis with less younger taxpayers to help provide the pension provisions for the older folk.

What would be interesting to see is if when universal pensions were implemented in Punjab and whether birth rates got lower. I know correlation does not always mean causation but it would be interesting to find out.

[Guest]

5 hours ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

What if I told you that the slavery on sikh people is because of something we did not do , and that in the long run there's one quick fix to more than half of the issues sikhs face today.

And that quick fix is this : 1) Higher rate of reproduction, 2)  Proselytization , 3) Preaching to orphans .'

1) Higher rate of reproduction 

In the latest indian census, Sikhs as a group were the ones who had the lowest fertility rate. It means Sikhs are having lesser children than hindus or muslims. Not surprisingly , muslims had the highest fertility rate . Whenever I encouraged Sikhs to have more kids per couple, the usual nonsensical , condescending reply I got was one of the following : 

1) Muslims are R-type species, while Sikhs are K-type . In plain words, it means we prefer quality over quantity . However the argument is rather ludicrous . Sikhs of today can't claim the good, old , oft-boasted "1 sikh = 125000 enemies" . Its a no-brainer our people have anything but quality. Would the people who make such ludicrous argument would rather be happy if Sikhs became an exotic, rare-to-be-found community like the zoroastrians . Money of all the world , but no future to look to . 

2) Muslims have multiple wives , so it makes it easier for them. Ok, fine , but what about the christians rapid growth-rate in india ? They manage to get a heavy majority in many north eastern states without having multiple wives. Their sword is capturing the orphans and the needy.

I have always asked Sikhs what stops us from having more than 1,2 kids per couple ? I never got a satisfactory answer. 

Its a fact that in a democracy your numbers dictate your political power. In every country , there're the sell-outs , the leftist who will pander to you and your needs , only if you have the votes. As the saying goes, "either be a note bank or a vote bank" . Else politicans couldn't care less about you . We see it in europe, we see it in india and elsewhere. Its a fact, when will out simple sikhs realize this ?

The reason politicians don't pander to sikhs is because we hardly make a mark in their political votebank. The votebank of pandering goes like this :

 

One would think its a common sense that the number of kids once have will have a domino effect once you go down generations , something like this : 

 

In the first case, the so called nuclear family , look at the degrading domino effect which is suicidal for a sikh population .

In the second case, its merely maintaining the population. 

The 300% growth rate actually happens in third case 

If you think I am being ridiculous , lets not forget our gurus too had atleast 3 kids . Guru Gobind Singh ji had 4 children. And the sikhs after that had even higher number of children , some as high as 12 or 15. 

The reason muslim population is so successful and causes terror in hearts of those who wish them ill is because of their humongous birth rate. Just look at how many kids the famous saudis had , you will be shocked ! 

2) Proselytization

This is another place where we're totally nullied ourselves. We like to preach that we don't preach ! I guess this is another fukra symptom in our community that we just wanna sound good to outsiders, esp amongst the elite , and give ourselves an exotic feel in front of people . However the Sikh gurus themselves had manji system in punjab which were nothing but centers of preaching. 

3) Preaching to Orphans

Why should we not preach to orphans ? Forcible conversion is against sikhi, however if christians can raise kids under them as christian , why we despite so much money can't pull sikh orphanages to sikhi-ize kids out there. Infact we're doing their halat-palat good , meaning now and the hereafter good by raising them and preaching them sikhi. 

Having said this , I think there's a great probability most of those young sikh men would just cut off their hairs and turbans off once they grow up . I think sikhi by its nature is not meant to be followed by the masses, esp vast majority of  men who find the uncut hair , uncut facial hair and turbans uncomfortable. 

Dont worry, I'll give u 50 kids  

Then each one of my kids will make 50 kids too. Then that means i will have like 100's of grandchildren! 

=more sikhs

And There'll be a maryada in the family that says u have to have!at least 50 or more kids . We'll grow in numbers faster than ever!

[MisterrSingh]

I've noticed some of my generation (30s and younger Sikh) are shutting up shop with just one child. There's ZERO knowledge, interest, and affinity for any of the points raised in this thread. 

[Guest AjeetSinghPunjabi]

7 hours ago, MisterrSingh said:

I've noticed some of my generation (30s and younger Sikh) are shutting up shop with just one child. There's ZERO knowledge, interest, and affinity for any of the points raised in this thread. 

I think it has also to do with financial ability to raise many children. In olden times , our ancestors had many kids and raised them even though they had not the provisions to do so . Often the kids were raised substandard , but roti-paani was always there. What else do we need , be honest ! Rest everything will come later, esp in the times of crisis we find ourselves currently in . 

Nowadays many of us , esp outside india are financially well off to raise many kids but we still stop at 1 or max 2 kids, because we feel we want to give our one kid the best, the best to eat, the best to wear , the best education (foreign education) and that costs a lot even for just one kid. Hence the limitation is one kid. 

We require atleast 3 as the above pic shows how 2 only maintains numbers but atleast 3 will be required for growth. 

Unless we change our mentality, the fate of our kaum can't change. Atleast those who can afford to raise more kids should 

[Guest AjeetSinghPunjabi]

8 hours ago, NonExistant said:

Dont worry, I'll give u 50 kids  

Then each one of my kids will make 50 kids too. Then that means i will have like 100's of grandchildren! 

=more sikhs

And There'll be a maryada in the family that says u have to have!at least 50 or more kids . We'll grow in numbers faster than ever!

you're being sarcastic , right ? you think the points i raised is something to joke about ? 

[TejS]

1 hour ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

I think it has also to do with financial ability to raise many children. In olden times , our ancestors had many kids and raised them even though they had not the provisions to do so . Often the kids were raised substandard , but roti-paani was always there. What else do we need , be honest ! Rest everything will come later, esp in the times of crisis we find ourselves currently in . 

Nowadays many of us , esp outside india are financially well off to raise many kids but we still stop at 1 or max 2 kids, because we feel we want to give our one kid the best, the best to eat, the best to wear , the best education (foreign education) and that costs a lot even for just one kid. Hence the limitation is one kid. 

We require atleast 3 as the above pic shows how 2 only maintains numbers but atleast 3 will be required for growth. 

Unless we change our mentality, the fate of our kaum can't change. Atleast those who can afford to raise more kids should 

I don't think it has much to do with the financial costs of children to be honest. Most Sikhs are financially secure in the West. I think it has to do more with family structures. In the past, extended families was the norm and people would have multiple children and did not have to worry about their upbringing. Grandparents, uncles, aunties, older cousins, siblings would just raise all the family's children collectively while the parents would be doing their work. Raising a child was a shared thing and not limited exclusively to parents. This also meant more trust and love among the family as well as raising confident children with good social skills. It's hard to raise kids this way in the West for obvious reasons. Unless you have lots of unemployed family members living off of welfare like the Muslims usually do, hence their large number of children. In India, I guess in the urban areas the case is similar to the West. I have however still seen it in the rural areas of Punjab where people had like 5 kids and I was happy to see that. 

[Guest AjeetSinghPunjabi]

3 minutes ago, TejS said:

I don't think it has much to do with the financial costs of children to be honest. Most Sikhs are financially secure in the West. I think it has to do more with family structures. In the past, extended families was the norm and people would have multiple children and did not have to worry about their upbringing. Grandparents, uncles, aunties, older cousins, siblings would just raise all the family's children collectively while the parents would be doing their work. Raising a child was a shared thing and not limited exclusively to parents. This also meant more trust and love among the family as well as raising confident children with good social skills. It's hard to raise kids this way in the West for obvious reasons. Unless you have lots of unemployed family members living off of welfare like the Muslims usually do, hence their large number of children. In India, I guess in the urban areas the case is similar to the West. I have however still seen it in the rural areas of Punjab where people had like 5 kids and I was happy to see that. 

All these are excuses IMHO. Even in most traditional families, atleast one son is living with his old parents and in that case granny and grandpa are there to look after kids even if parents go to job. Je karna hoe te saare kuchh ho sakda hai . 

[Singh1989]

Friend. There is ONE condition where fertility rate increases in our community. 2 couples, 4 daugters, 1 son. 2 couples, 5 daughters, 1 son or, 5-6 daughters 0 son. Son is always the youngest. Or... 2 couples, 1 son, 1 daughter. Finally, 2-3 sons, 0 daughters. YOU DO THE MATHS!!!

AND... Sajno! Pehla biah biuh ta karlo! Our community focused on educated boys n girls for marriage. On top ehni saari nakhri! Goras may have 101 problems but settling in with someone is certainly not one of them. What do we focus on? Our own doubts, which leads to marriage delays.