In ‘Ruttie Jinnah’, Saad S. Khan explores the reasons behind the obliteration of Rattanbai Maryam Jinnah’s name from the world’s collective memory & the conscious distortion of her personality.
Reports on Allahabad High Court’s judgment in Salamat Ansari-Priyanka Kharwar case wrongly suggests a constitutional death-knell against UP’s 'love jihad' ordinance.
There is apparently a new conquest taking place in Modi’s India — the Muslim man over the Hindu woman. And the man who can’t stop noticing it is Yogi Adityanath.
Discriminatory laws limit firms from hiring willing women, and removing such barriers can help narrow the economic gap between developing and developed countries.
While bond yields tend to fall amid low inflation & interest rate cuts, market experts say they’ve been rising due to concerns over tax collections, fiscal deficit & potential impact of US tariffs.
A panel of experts moderated by ThePrint’s Editor-in-Chief Shekhar Gupta drew connections between insights of 1965 Indo-Pak War and strategic takeaways highlighted by Op Sindoor.
In its toughest time in decades because of floods, Punjab would’ve expected PM Modi to visit. If he has the time for a Bihar tour, why not a short visit to next-door Punjab?
No matter what laws you bring, unless the regressive mindset is changed (exemplified by none less than Justice Bobde), India will remain stuck in its past.
The cases highlighted by press all involves 18-21 olds, who are not financially independent, running away and getting converted to islam, they are not fully matured adults, more over they don’t get adequate protection under medeival muslim personal laws ,
Fully matured adults should not mind 1 month notice, Traditional marriage happen more than a month after betrothal
There is no provision for conversion in this act. But sometimes women are forced to convert after marriage. This law should be only for people who won’t convert. Those who want to convert can first get converted and then marry according to the Hindu or Muslim law.
The author seems to be either ill informed or carrying an agenda. She fails to recognise that religious marriage ceremonies don’t follow even personal laws and blatantly extends an argument that all religions restrict marriages between same faith couples only. Would like to get enlightened which Hindu scripture demand such requirement.
The author also fails to appreciate that although minisicule but some interfaith marriage have been found based on conceleled identities. In order to save the marriage one of the partner mostly women is left with no other choice than converting involuntarily. In this pretext what is the problem if all interfaith marriages are pre-verified.
On account of personal Liberty also author skips that even personal laws such as Hindu marriage act prohibits certain relationships. Is not that too an assault on personal liberty of consenting adults.
The crux of the matter is that in the name of personal Liberty few individuals wants to disregard all the social rules and create anarchy.
I understand the arguments and agree with most of them. Won’t a uniform civil code make it right? You have highlighted the difference between special marriages act and personal laws very well. However, if we have common civil laws only then we will have true equality due to differing rights in personal laws. Shouldn’t the argument be made that a marriage certification should not see religion at all? What is your stand on this?
No matter what laws you bring, unless the regressive mindset is changed (exemplified by none less than Justice Bobde), India will remain stuck in its past.
The cases highlighted by press all involves 18-21 olds, who are not financially independent, running away and getting converted to islam, they are not fully matured adults, more over they don’t get adequate protection under medeival muslim personal laws ,
Fully matured adults should not mind 1 month notice, Traditional marriage happen more than a month after betrothal
There is no provision for conversion in this act. But sometimes women are forced to convert after marriage. This law should be only for people who won’t convert. Those who want to convert can first get converted and then marry according to the Hindu or Muslim law.
The author seems to be either ill informed or carrying an agenda. She fails to recognise that religious marriage ceremonies don’t follow even personal laws and blatantly extends an argument that all religions restrict marriages between same faith couples only. Would like to get enlightened which Hindu scripture demand such requirement.
The author also fails to appreciate that although minisicule but some interfaith marriage have been found based on conceleled identities. In order to save the marriage one of the partner mostly women is left with no other choice than converting involuntarily. In this pretext what is the problem if all interfaith marriages are pre-verified.
On account of personal Liberty also author skips that even personal laws such as Hindu marriage act prohibits certain relationships. Is not that too an assault on personal liberty of consenting adults.
The crux of the matter is that in the name of personal Liberty few individuals wants to disregard all the social rules and create anarchy.
I understand the arguments and agree with most of them. Won’t a uniform civil code make it right? You have highlighted the difference between special marriages act and personal laws very well. However, if we have common civil laws only then we will have true equality due to differing rights in personal laws. Shouldn’t the argument be made that a marriage certification should not see religion at all? What is your stand on this?