Radical Hindus Angry Over Valentine's Day

3113

Hello Summer!
Joined
Nov 1, 2005
Posts
13,823
Those radical Hindus are mad at us westerners and our "vulgar" practices again...
Activists of Shri Ram Sena, a radical Hindu outfit, on Saturday protested against the upcoming Valentine's Day in Jammu and Kashmir. The activists shouted anti-Valentine's Day slogans, and burnt greeting cards during the protest.

Rajeev Gupta, a local functionary of the organisation, told mediapersons that they would observe February 14 as a black day across the country...."I am making an appeal to all the parents to keep their children at home; we will not tolerate any kind of vulgarity in Jammu...."

He warned that "vulgarity" would not be tolerated, and called for couples to refrain from any kind of celebration on Valentine's Day.

"Shri Ram Sena will oppose this and all the activists will be present in all parks, hotels and restaurants. If we find any sort of vulgarity anywhere, we will not tolerate it," said Gupta.
You heard him! Keep your children at home and don't tolerate any vulgarity!

(Personally I don't think these radicals can win. They're up against chocolate after all...)
 
I can understand their views.

Valentine's Day, like Halloween and Christmas, has become too commercialised. There is plenty of vulgarity in the commercial celebration of Valentine's Day with increased sales of rosé wine; masses of special packs of chocolates that cost more and deliver less than the standard packs; overpriced meals in crowded restaurants; and flowers that are nearly as expensive as those for Mothers' Day.

St Valentine is supposed to be a Christian celebration. What meaning has it for Hindus, Sikhs, Buddhists, Muslims? What most people do on Valentine's Day has nothing at all to do with the saint's day.

Og
 
Last edited:
A radical Hindu? I think when he says "vulgarity" he means kissing in public. You can get put in jail in India for kissing on film, as I recall. Such a come-down from the days of the Kama Sutra.
 
St Valentine is supposed to be a Christian celebration.
Um, likely not, Og dearest. Arguably (but, granted, not provably) appropriated from the Roman-pagan festival of Lupercalia. Rather like Christmas and Halloween, pagan holidays appropriated by Christians. Again, there's no absolute proof of this, but there is a chance that it was by no means Christian until the church decided there was no stamping out the festival celebrating this pagan day, and so made it Christian so those celebrating would be celebrating a Christian holiday instead.

I've no problems with it being secularized and/or made multi-cultural-spiritual myself. If the Christians could appropriate pagan holidays for their purposes, I see no reason why other religions shouldn't do the same with Christian holidays. That, after all, is what we humans do. We steal, transform, and re-create. We stole plenty from the Hindus, including Cupid (the god Kama). So, we're just giving him back with Valentine's day.

If there is, as Christians believe, only one god and that god made all, then aren't all forms of worship towards that divinity, including a celebration of love, one as well?

It's said that god is the top of the mountain. When you're at the base of that mountain, it seems that your religion and others are far apart. As you go up the mountain, however, they get more and more alike, and closer and closer together till, at the top, they're all one. :cattail:
 
Last edited:
And here I thought Valentine's Day was another mandatory day for getting laid. Damn, losing all those important days of the year. :(

Maybe we need a PC correction for the day and make it that all couples must go in private and do it in the name of Allah, them slap a sticky heart on each other's forehead. :D
 
Um, likely not, Og dearest. Arguably (but, granted, not provably) appropriated from the Roman-pagan festival of Lupercalia. Rather like Christmas and Halloween, pagan holidays appropriated by Christians. Again, there's no absolute proof of this, but there is a chance that it was by no means Christian until the church decided there was no stamping out the festival celebrating this pagan day, and so made it Christian so those celebrating would be celebrating a Christian holiday instead.

I've no problems with it being secularized and/or made multi-cultural-spiritual myself. If the Christians could appropriate pagan holidays for their purposes, I see no reason why other religions shouldn't do the same with Christian holidays. That, after all, is what we humans do. We steal, transform, and re-create. We stole plenty from the Hindus, including Cupid (the god Kama). So, we're just giving him back with Valentine's day.

If there is, as Christians believe, only one god and that god made all, then aren't all forms of worship towards that divinity, including a celebration of love, one as well?

It's said that god is the top of the mountain. When you're at the base of that mountain, it seems that your religion and others are far apart. As you go up the mountain, however, they get more and more alike, and closer and closer together till, at the top, they're all one. :cattail:




A point made in the second or third century Syriac account of the travels of the Magi. It's just recently been translated into English and a tough read it is. However, it was known in the Middle Ages as several very early Renaissance paintings show. All you have to do is see the Holy Babe superimposed on the star of Bethlehem and you know the artist knew the story. Needless to say, when the Reformation came along, the curia was less than pleased with the idea that an important Early Church document ratified the idea that worship could be done in a myriad of ways. Why, that would include Luther! So it disappeared into the Vatican library for the next five hundred years. Funny thing about that . . .
 
And here I thought Valentine's Day was another mandatory day for getting laid. Damn, losing all those important days of the year. :(

Maybe we need a PC correction for the day and make it that all couples must go in private and do it in the name of Allah, them slap a sticky heart on each other's forehead. :D

Vishnu, Royce, Vishnu! Not Allah. Sheesh, get South Asia straight. :D
 
Maybe it's just me, but it seems that there's always some 'radical' ethnic and/or religious group bitching about most holidays...now it's Valentine's Day? Sheesh!

Fuck this 'It offends my (insert name of god here)' and all this PC crap! Let's have fun on holidays, not whine and complain about them. Hell, it's a day off, why ruin it. ;)
 
Maybe it's just me, but it seems that there's always some 'radical' ethnic and/or religious group bitching about most holidays...now it's Valentine's Day? Sheesh!

Fuck this 'It offends my (insert name of god here)' and all this PC crap! Let's have fun on holidays, not whine and complain about them. Hell, it's a day off, why ruin it. ;)

You get Valentine's Day off? I'm coming to your country. :D Wow, talk about liberal, lmao.

Although I do like the idea of slapping a little heart on my forehead to say I got laid.
 
You get Valentine's Day off? I'm coming to your country. :D Wow, talk about liberal, lmao.

Although I do like the idea of slapping a little heart on my forehead to say I got laid.

Nah, we don't get St.V's Day off...darn it...we used to get Columbus Day off...the feds still do, but most folks don't...when I lived in Georgia (USA) we had Confederate Memorial Day off...I think that's still on, I'm not sure...you guys have any holiday's we don't and vice versa?
 
Nah, we don't get St.V's Day off...darn it...we used to get Columbus Day off...the feds still do, but most folks don't...when I lived in Georgia (USA) we had Confederate Memorial Day off...I think that's still on, I'm not sure...you guys have any holiday's we don't and vice versa?

They made up this new one for Feb. called Family Day. Sort of a love your family day, cuz you hate them the other 364 days of the year, lmao. For the life of me, I can't understand why they haven't come up with one for June. Why can't the first day of Summer be a good reason to have a National holiday? Maybe a, National Naked Day;)
 
They made up this new one for Feb. called Family Day. Sort of a love your family day, cuz you hate them the other 364 days of the year, lmao. For the life of me, I can't understand why they haven't come up with one for June. Why can't the first day of Summer be a good reason to have a National holiday? Maybe a, National Naked Day;)

Well, if you lived in Germany, every sunny day would be National Naked Day. I never saw such a collection of sun worshipers in my life. Even the French don't strip off as often as the Germans, and they don't go find some place private, either. Beach, park, river bank, front yard---they don't care. Very healthy folks, the Germans.
 
Well, if you lived in Germany, every sunny day would be National Naked Day. I never saw such a collection of sun worshipers in my life. Even the French don't strip off as often as the Germans, and they don't go find some place private, either. Beach, park, river bank, front yard---they don't care. Very healthy folks, the Germans.

See, there ya go. If Hitler would have won, we'd all be healthy naked Germans. :D JK
 
Ah, no, the Nazis tried to suppress the Kunzkultur and its happy naturism. They thought it led to homosexuality and good German girls wanting to be something other than baby machines. It's mostly a pre-war and post-war phenomenon.
 
Ah, no, the Nazis tried to suppress the Kunzkultur and its happy naturism. They thought it led to homosexuality and good German girls wanting to be something other than baby machines. It's mostly a pre-war and post-war phenomenon.

Ach, it's all because of Himmler and his little dick!!! If Goering hadn't of pointed at him and laughed out loud, things would have been so much better. :D
 
Um, likely not, Og dearest. Arguably (but, granted, not provably) appropriated from the Roman-pagan festival of Lupercalia. Rather like Christmas and Halloween, pagan holidays appropriated by Christians. Again, there's no absolute proof of this, but there is a chance that it was by no means Christian until the church decided there was no stamping out the festival celebrating this pagan day, and so made it Christian so those celebrating would be celebrating a Christian holiday instead.

I've no problems with it being secularized and/or made multi-cultural-spiritual myself. If the Christians could appropriate pagan holidays for their purposes, I see no reason why other religions shouldn't do the same with Christian holidays. That, after all, is what we humans do. We steal, transform, and re-create. We stole plenty from the Hindus, including Cupid (the god Kama). So, we're just giving him back with Valentine's day.

If there is, as Christians believe, only one god and that god made all, then aren't all forms of worship towards that divinity, including a celebration of love, one as well?

It's said that god is the top of the mountain. When you're at the base of that mountain, it seems that your religion and others are far apart. As you go up the mountain, however, they get more and more alike, and closer and closer together till, at the top, they're all one. :cattail:

This is not necessarily about The Power of Love vs. The Clerics Who Never Want Anyone To Have Any Fun, though.

It’s quite possible to call Valentine’s vulgar from a position unrelated to backwardness or sexual repression. Consumerism, kitsch, fakelore, and some more consumerism—that’s plenty ‘vulgar’, if you ask me. The power in question seems rather to be the power of cash, and the power of social conformity.

Where the practice is a foreign import, as it is in India, there’s also the power of cultural imperialism. To want to resist that—to want to resist being groomed into a consumer of someone else’s worthless trinkets and cultural neuroses—one doesn’t have to be any more backward than the Parisians were backward when they wanted McD’s off the main street.
 
I believe the Western cultural holidays and symbolisms are under attack, because we dedicate more of our lives to the pursuit of happiness, whereas Mid-Eastern culture is strictly regimented by religion.

The issue in all of this PC compromising, is the loss of traditions and that Westerners have had, that other cultures find offensive. In as much as we are to accomodate others and allow them their freedom of speech and religion, their attacks on our holidays and customs have now become an offence to us.

Coming to another country and demanding they stop their practices, because they are offensive to them, leaves us with only one solution. Stay where you are. My rights are just as valid to protect as theirs.

Jews don't believe in Jesus, but they don't bitch about Christmas, so why should any other culture. Let us do our thing and they can do their thing and no one has to get their knickers in a knot over differences.
 
Could you expect anything less from radical Hindus? When hate and intolerance become religious tradition, people will scour the globe to find reasons to be angry about anything that is not their own, regardless of how petty the manufactured object of their contempt may be.
 
It’s quite possible to call Valentine’s vulgar from a position unrelated to backwardness or sexual repression. Consumerism, kitsch, fakelore, and some more consumerism—that’s plenty ‘vulgar’, if you ask me. The power in question seems rather to be the power of cash, and the power of social conformity.
Granted, but one can hardly look at an Indian wedding where the father of the bride has (traditionally and for a very long time) had a procession displaying in public each dowry item he is giving to the groom, the richer and more impressive the display the better, and say that consumerism, kitsch and fakelore is somehow a western and imported tradition. Such processions now include refrigerators and televisions, but westerners didn't create that tradition.

The Hindu religion may be steeped in renouncing the world, but so is Christianity. Neither has been corrupted to the dark side of consumerism or rejecting aestheticism by the other. People just like things. The power of cash existed in India long before there even was a Western civilization. All the west is doing is giving them a different "holiday" to spend it on for the usual ones.

Where the practice is a foreign import, as it is in India, there’s also the power of cultural imperialism.
No, it's not. Not if the candies in the heart-shaped boxes are made in India by Indians. And most especially not if certain western imports are giving Indian's jobs at the expense of the west. India's has a whole rising middle class, educated, trained, and employed thanks to outsourcing--and the west is sinking. And the result may be that they survive and we do not.

At which point, all that they've "imported" they can make into their own image. Which is my point, This is what humans do. We do it with everything. We export it in trade, and import and put our stamp on what we import, and then export it back out again. There is no stopping it. Certainly not in a global economy.

one doesn’t have to be any more backward than the Parisians were backward when they wanted McD’s off the main street.
No one say you had to be backwards. I certainly didn't. I would say that you have to be a little blind and stupid. And the two aren't quite the same. There is a local town near me that doesn't want chain restaurants on it like McD's and has an ordnance that, in fact, keeps such restaurants off it's main street. But that doesn't mean it's residents are threatening to attack, yell it, shame or abuse anyone visiting a chain restaurant. The Parisians can make what laws they like about where a McD's can be but it still exists in Paris.

And McD's is a chain, it is run by a corporation. Not quite the same as a "holiday" where one buys trinkets for one's sweetheart and those could be made by anyone--the old lady on the street as much as a greeting card company.

Something about Valentines has gotten the attention of enough normal Indian couples to get this radical--and leave us remember he is a "radical"--riled up. Given that such radicals get riled up by men and women kissing, it could as easily be about simple romance as about gaudy hearts, flowers and chocolates. I'm dubious that Valentines is going to have any more damaging effect on India than McD's did on fine French food. What scares the radicals is that it indicates a shift in perspective. And neither you nor I can say if this is, in the long run, going to be positive or negative on the average Indian, in good taste or vulgar.

It might be that after India makes Valentine's it's own, it will be quite tasteful--then they'll import that new Valentine's to us, and like Bollywood musicals, we might finally have some good taste in our holidays.
 
The issue in all of this PC compromising, is the loss of traditions and that Westerners have had, that other cultures find offensive. In as much as we are to accomodate others and allow them their freedom of speech and religion, their attacks on our holidays and customs have now become an offence to us. .
Dude. You've got the argument backward. These Hindu radicals in India (they're not in "tolerant" U.S.) are acting EXACTLY like Christains who want Christmas To be Christmas not "happy holidays,".

They Don't want Hindus in a Hindu country (Sub Christaians in a Christian country for their US counterparts) to be diluted by other, Non-Hindu traditions.

This isn't About Hindus tolerating Christians or Westeners celebrating their own holidays. It's about not tolerating Hindus participating in such holidays. Hindus not being Hindu--and a Hindu country not celebrating anything not Hindu. Just as certain Christains here insist on Merry Xmas because, they argue, we are a Christain country.
 
Dude. You've got the argument backward. These Hindu radicals in India (they're not in "tolerant" U.S.) are acting EXACTLY like Christains who want Christmas To be Christmas not "happy holidays,".

They Don't want Hindus in a Hindu country (Sub Christaians in a Christian country for their US counterparts) to be diluted by other, Non-Hindu traditions.

This isn't About Hindus tolerating Christians or Westeners celebrating their own holidays. It's about not tolerating Hindus participating in such holidays. Hindus not being Hindu--and a Hindu country not celebrating anything not Hindu. Just as certain Christains here insist on Merry Xmas because, they argue, we are a Christain country.

Doesn't that fall under the, "When in Rome..." ruling? If they can't tolerate seeing Hindus participate in non-Hindu traditions, why not look at the purpose of the day, which is basically sharing and showing love to one another and allow them a way to participate under their guidelines.

I totally agree commercialism has distorted the original meaning and values it was created for, but it's not so far gone that every culture can't adopt and adapt to it and enjoy the true purpose of the day. We might eventually find others have come up with ideas that everyone can agree with.

Loving is universal, but then again, so is money and commercialism. If there's a buck to be made....;)

P.S. most Christians would cringe at seeing Christmas spelled with a X. It signifies the deletion of Christ. It is His day after all, not Santa's.
 
Doesn't that fall under the, "When in Rome..." ruling? If they can't tolerate seeing Hindus participate in non-Hindu traditions, why not look at the purpose of the day, which is basically sharing and showing love to one another and allow them a way to participate under their guidelines.

That doesn't fall under the "When in Rome..." ruling. Under this concept, you'd have to think like a Hindu in a Hindu area, not like a Westerner, which is how you are responding.
 
That doesn't fall under the "When in Rome..." ruling. Under this concept, you'd have to think like a Hindu in a Hindu area, not like a Westerner, which is how you are responding.

I don't want to think like a Hindu, it's a Western tradition and there's only one way to thnk of it. Seems the radicals don't like the idea of their Hindu bretheren enjoying a western tradition, because it is offensive to them. Change is inevtable and the purists can't stand the idea.

Like any species of life, if it wants to survive, it must adapt to the present conditions, or die.
 
Back
Top