Knowingly or unknowingly


Sanal Edamaruku posted a photo of a chilling ad from an Indian newspaper on his Facebook page, with a comment.

Freedom of thought and expression are guaranteed as fundamental rights in Indian Constitution. Promotion of critical inquiry, scientific temper and spirit of reform are fundamental duties.

Resist all attempts to take India back to medieval times. The picture given is an advertisement by Karnataka state government in a prominent Indian newspaper.

Photo: Is India going the Iran way? Criticism of religion or faith can be taken as an offence now. 

Freedom of thought and expression are guaranteed as fundamental rights in Indian Constitution. Promotion of critical inquiry, scientific temper and spirit of reform are fundamental duties. 

Resist all attempts to take India back to medieval times. The picture given is an advertisement by Karnataka state government in a prominent Indian newspaper.

That’s a hell of a sweeping prohibition – note the “with a view to hurt religious sentiments knowingly or unknowingly.” Emphasis mine. Don’t do it on purpose and don’t do it by accident either! So the only way to be sure not to do it is just to…do nothing.

And if you do do it, on purpose or accidentally, the citizens are encouraged to call the cops on you.

And that’s why Sanal no longer lives in India.

Comments

  1. Morgan says

    More than sweeping, it’s nonsensical – how can you act with a view to doing something unknowingly? There’s such a thing as recklessness or depraved indifference, but I’ve never heard of meaning to accidentally do something being a crime.

  2. Brony says

    This is what results when authorities just want everyone to get along, but can’t or won’t spare the energy to figure out precisely why people are not getting along and create functional solutions. If people are not getting along there is a conflict and creating a permanent solution will involve government regulating the public discussion to prevent violence and suffering, but otherwise not taking a side in the larger debate itself (channeling means of social “persuasion” is not taking a side).

    Since humans are able to find just about anything offensive in a religious context all this does is turn society into a simmering pressure cooker of unresolved disputes. Doubly so because the religious themselves are going to be offended by one another’s basic beliefs. This is functionally trying to take the side of the religious, but I believe will fail in the long run.

  3. timberwoof says

    Inspector General!
    Your direction to report religious wrong-thinking hurts my religious sentiments. It goes against my deeply-held beliefs that we are all protected in our religious and philosophical thoughts, words, and deeds and gives me fear that I may be arrested for expressing such beliefs. You have failed in protecting my constitutionally guaranteed rights. Please report at once to the authorities and submit yourself to the proper punishment.

  4. Pierce R. Butler says

    So now one can longer even like, say, the writings of Hitchens or Dawkins in Karnataka State?

  5. Brony says

    @ Lassi Hippeläinen
    That’s a little too close to harassing behavior for my taste. Sure they are the more powerful authority in this case but I think it’s still a bad tactic at any social level. The email should be used for complaints and other justified outrage, but not spam.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *