History And Debates About ‘Socialist’ And ‘Secular’ In The Preamble Of The Constitution | News18

[@subashpadhee7096]

We citizens should totally discard the word “secularism and socialist” as there have been lopsided practices of secularism in last 50 years and the onus is always one the people following the Indic faith.

[@akashrajv7528]

Vishnu shankar jain saviour of Bharat

[@ranjitjaiswal9342]

See

[@eruditionenglishclass_99]

Secular and socialist words must be removed from our constitution as they were not the part of cour constitution

[@tejovatimyfav5371]

Bilkul.they need to be scrapped.

[@capjack213]

​@@tejovatimyfav5371they need to be in dustbin as dirty as gatar...gatar mei dalo sikularism ko

[@amitsarkar3019]

Words were introduced by Parliament in 1976 and now should be taken out by Parliament.

[@syamalakona2591]

Yes. An un wanted patch to be removed.

[@niveditadas6506]

Since it was pushed in during Emergency, it was arm twisting of the Indian citizen.

[@peachNpink]

It was passed without obtaining majority votes. Its invalid anyhow.

[@nagukrithi5990]

Secure and Socialism included illegally ... Should be removed. I have confidence in Judicial system.

[@nitichatterji5223]

Sanjay Hegde if the state is supposed to be secular why does the state control Hindu temples while there is no control over other places of worship?? Why don't lawyers like you who have a VOICE and a MIND challenge this in the courts?

[@TheKrish1972]

He will not get paid to fight for Hindus. He has sold his soul

[@rajagopalkn.673]

Sanjay Hegdae is crossbreed

[@rajasekhark8333]

Because he has Khangressi mindset. He is "Secular" which means bashing Hinduism and acting against Hindu interests are completely acceptable

[@saenchai5071]

The Congress has been in power since the independence of India on the basis of religious division, if the principle of religious separatism is removed, there will be no Congress, DMK and their alliance parties!!! At the same time, when the *secular* principle was brought by force in the Indian political system' it is the Congress now using the ideas to incite religious division, if the election comes, it is the Congress that is talking & the election manifesto and spreading only ideas that are against religious harmony in any election campaign. Preaching only to the nation ' but they are not following secularism !

[@rajjena9053]

Well defined

[@alphaconsulting9715]

Sanjay Hedge is a snob and condescending. He said he is not a judge to say if courts will decide or not but he is a judge to say Courts don't interfere in political issues. He is lecturing Vishnu Shanker. This amendment was passed during Emergency it should be stuck down. The parliament had no authority to pass any laws and every law passed during emergency should be stuck down. These should be brought to the parliament to vote for against any amendments to the constitution

[@balasubramaniansanjeevi3046]

Hats off to Vishnu. Every Hindu owes him respect and adoration for his efforts. While on the subject of Secularism and religion, my take is the following definitions in the Constitution: 1. Religion; A compendium of tools involving practices, teachings and ways of life for the Spiritual upliftment of man as an individual even as he is bound by laws of the secular world. Commentary: The primary Dharmic Indian postulate is that Man is the most evolved species within the restricted domain where individual or “unit being” is manifest. However, viewed from the platform of Universal truth, Man is in the penultimate state of evolution. His next level of evolution is a state of discarding identity as an individual through the dissolution of the ego and transcending it to attain an identity with the infinite. This transcendence is achieved by attaining spiritual growth to a point where the speed of spiritual growth reaches a kind of escape velocity whereby he totally identifies with the Infinite even as he exists physically as an individual. The tool to attain that spiritual speed can be the only definition of religion in the Indian paradigm. If I were to give an analogy in physics, man is the ultimately evolved dimension akin to mass in physics. As he attains (spiritual) speed approaching the speed of light, his identity as mass disappears, and he becomes pure energy. A secular society (a society of mass) should not restrict the natural evolutionary pressure in the Universe, including the inherent evolutionary progression of man transcending to become one with the Infinite. This calls for secular society to deem the practice of religion a fundamental right. But that practice is ONLY and ONLY for spiritual growth, even as one lives within the laws of secular society. All religious practices must conform to this definition. 2. Secular: Refers to the societal domain where the constitutional laws apply. Commentary: Secular is in contra-distinction to Spiritual. (Not the separation of religion from government, like in the West) A man has a secular dimension of life where he is governed by secular laws. At the same time, he has a spiritual dimension where he works for his individual spiritual growth following the religious practice of his choosing. Remember, religion has only a spiritual aspect and nothing to do with his secular life. No prescription of spiritual practice should interfere with secular societal laws. If there are any (like untouchability), they must be deemed violative of secular laws and hence illegal.

[@prashantmarkandeya2265]

Why do you invite Sanjay Hegde who feels everything is going wrong in India since Modi has become PM. He would like Congress to come to power.

[@AdarshBalak69]

Vishnu Shankar Ji 🔥

[@Deshabakht]

Secular word inserted by Indira Gandhi during emergency. The word secular is not there in original constitution. It must be removed. We need UCC, CAA, NRC and uniform education policy through out India. Education must come under Centre list. Invaders of India , atrocities , persecution of Hindus during Mughal period, etc all must come in text books.

[@syamalakona2591]

In fact sree Ambedkar rejected the idea of including these terms at the time of drafting the constitution.

[@Deshabakht]

@@syamalakona2591 Congress spoiled the country. Infact did not like Ambedkar as per history

[@sundaramsadagopan7795]

Every one knows how the Farm act 2020 was enacted and how it was rolled back. In the same way to pass this amendnent in parliament the opposition parties will use all their mights- first to thwart any discussion and if then passed by majority, these parties will arrange the same type of agitation held for farm act. Foreign powers will be roped in, press will be bought, public will be subjected to inconveniances etc etc. In one way it is better that the matter takes the judicial route to set right the 42nd amendment. It may be noted that even if parliament passes any amendment with majority, what is the guarantee that the matter will not be taken to court where there are some senior lawyers who take up only this kind of cases to fight ?

[@tejovatimyfav5371]

There you are! the opposition by default is afterall posing as spoilt sport.They simply walk out or dance on the desks of of our temple of democracy.i fully endorse sundaramsadagopan.7795.more over the majority number has to be respected in a democracy.and oppodition inspite of low numbers take the parliament in their petty pockets and peoples mandate gets a scant respect.Pathetic.

[@Drsatish09]

There is a substance in Vishnuji's line of thinking..

[@shekarb958]

India is with Vishnu shanker jain.

[@Imjm001]

I agree with vs jain points of view

[@rajsinghji-84]

His name is VS Jain, I know it was a typo but BS has certain connotations so I will request you to edit your comment.

[@patrioticindiansgj6704]

I find this individual Sanjay Hegde a arrogant person,having seen him in a number of debates.Vishnu Shankar you have already done a lot of work on the temples, where you have fought this bigots who have robbed and looted hindus of india,I thank you for your work and perseverance.India is natural secular because of its majority race and do not need a constitution to remind of it .

[@rajjena9053]

He is a congress supporter , while jain is neutral.

[@jdasubramanya933]

Such Debates should continue, may be in parts and installments. They should include SC Lawers like Sri Sai Deepak. Also thinkers like Dr Anand Ranganathan, Athikur Rehman.

[@niranjanajena4611]

In India secular means anti Hindu

[@amitsarkar3019]

Removal of Article 370 was challenged in court. So, why can't Amendment 42 be challenged in court?

[@rakeshkumarsinha3623]

If a bill is passed in Lok sabha - Hegde will go running to court

[@shrikantsharma5558]

Why not now? Mr Hegde. Is it against the law or against the constitution. Why bring this Hindu hater for such debates. You dilute the seriousness of the debate by having him.

[@gaurimathur55]

Excellent debate. Very informative

[@rameshchandrapanda5488]

Why and how the constitution was amended without being discussed.in the parliament.

[@tvsramanarao6818]

Mr Hegde has a mind but it is polluted

[@shivnegi6614]

Proud of VISHNU SHANKAR JAIN 🙏🙏🙏🙏

[@MS-ov9sv]

Jain ji ......Indians are super grateful to you and your great father ❤❤❤❤❤

[@unkalpaddy16121]

'Secularism' does not mean all religions are equal, they can never be. Secularism means that religion will not decide laws and policy i.e. separation of church & state. Secularism is required in a Christian or Muslim nation, to protect religious minorities (because these 2 abrahamic religions are exclusionary in nature, i.e. they both prescribe disfavour for non-believers), but not in a Hindu majority state, because Hinduism says that all paths lead to God, and there is no disfavour towards non-Hindus. We don't need foreign imports like 'secularism', because we have historically protected minorities... parsis, jews etc. Secularism is therefore a total misfit in Bharat, and must be done away with.

[@MS-ov9sv]

Would liked to hear more of Jain ji❤

[@CHANAKYA-TheManWhoUnitedBHARAT]

our baba saheb didn't gave this shitty word secular neither in the preamble nor in constitution now like electoral bonds would supreme kotha call this forceful addition of sickular word UNCONDITIONAL HUH

[@dharmicobserver7962]

Constitutions are meant to be discarded when it does not serve the purpose of the nations' civilizational values. Constitutions are not written in a void. This Constitution needs to changed in order scale back the scope and depth of State power. We need sensible laws enforced strictly, not hundreds of laws which conflict with each other and cause chaos.

[@Seekay-oe3qz]

India was divided on the basis of religion - 2 parts where taken away to be Islamic states & what was left was ? A mix bag that under terms that sound ideal in reality have made the Hindu a slave , a pariah in our own motherland. If today a state like gujerat or u.p declares itself to be a Hindu Rashtra will the constitution deny the will of that majority ? Given that the will of the majority is enshrined ? So long as the state does not seek to break away from the union it's majority will must be accepted under democracy.

[@MS-ov9sv]

Must be removed.....

[@par5308]

Hedge is not logical at all especially principles of fairness he's either my way or no way. Vishnu Jain has done so much already hes loved by millions of hindus for bringing up issues of the right thing to do is to challenge the status quo which only benefits some communities at the expense of causing detriment to mollions millions of hinfus.JUSTICE IS TO ALL REGARDLESS OF NUMBERS.....

[@allembrace]

what kind of advocate is this guy - sanjay hegde ? The words , secular, and sociaism were inserted without debate, parliament debate, without defining the meaning, scope , context , social rules etc . Now this guy says , parliament must debate !!!!!!!! Courts exist to bring justice as one pillar of constitution , as checks and balance. when the basic structure was violated by introducing the words. secular, and socialism, then it behooves on saner people to take cognizance and seek justice through available courts and means.

[@DM-ie9pm]

Words 'Secular' and 'Social' are nautiating ones.

[@atmakrishna85]

Two horrible words that pulled Bharat behind. Remove it.

[@s036525]

Hegde is a congressman

[@capjack213]

Finally after so many years u finally understood

[@suvamview]

People have to decide if they want Ambedkar Preamble or Maimuna begum Indira preamble..Let the campaign begin..

[@ramamurthyir8710]

I.Ramamurthy Secullar and secular word has to be removed from the constitution which was inserted by Indira Gandhi during emerhgency in 1976 without debate in parliament since many opposition members were imprisoned by Indira Gandhi which is illegal. Why should majority hindus should accept this secularism and socialism which was enforced on hindus just for vote bank politics. Can Sanjaj Hedge support Congress party justify why the state govt controlling the hindu temples in particular without touching the Wakf boards muslim mosques and christianity churches which is blatantly in violation of so called secularism? Moreover, most of the psedo sicklurasim parties are misusing this clause to harass the majority hindus to appease the socalled minority muslim communities. To amend this central govt must review and thro ordinance. India should be made Hindu Shastra instead of Secular country. Secular word is EVIL. Jai Hind Bharat Mata ki jai Vande Matharam

[@kamalsrawat]

Nice Debate Rahul. For Socialism : The Courts should First ask all Politicians and their Family Members / Proxies to give up all their Wealth . And For Secualrism as Somebody said in Comment The State Covt and Central Govts should give up all Funds that it controls of Hindu Religion. Yes India should be Secualar and Socialist ..let's start with the Vadra / Gandhi / Nehru Families giving up all the Welath they have Accumulated to the Govt .

[@rakeshkumarsinha3623]

Hegde did you oppose Article 370 in court or no?

[@sumansengupta9280]

Commonsense says that it's never too late to rectify an error that was done in past..

[@vijaygoyal5337]

I suggest there should also be discussion on two about the definition of " Minority " and "Majority" words as these have been misused in regard to secularism.

[@DipakBose-bq1vv]

Ambedkar was a British agent all his life. He was appointed by the British to be the chairman of the Drafting Committee of the Constitution written by 350 British officers and politicians.

[@pathfinder1540]

A meaningful debate on an important subject of the current situation 👍👍🙏🙏

[@pratibhaagrawal3006]

If we are secular why minority rights

[@sivakumaran7248]

Hegde starts as expected with a weak political arguement.His peeve is evident when he talks about 400 par! With religion specific provisions some to favour a particular section and many to have control over another on religious grounds is there is any meaning to claim secularism as the state policy is ridiculous.

[@rishisingh2989]

Hegde’s argument is weak that why correct it after 50 years. Mistakes and corrections can happen any time …. Also today the court interferes in every aspect of the executive inc the abolition of 370 which it weighed on. If the parliament amends it , Hegede will be the first one to go to SC.

[@venkateswarannarayanan2252]

Mr Sanjay Hegde appears not convincing and looks politically biased. Hope he doesn't become a judge. Another thing, Secularism and Socialism are ideologies. So they can't be forced on people in general. If they still want to have an equivalent ONE word that covers Socialism and Secularism, they can use the one Indian root word HINDUTVA in preamble.

[@kumarkrishnan2327]

Secular is ok but why only applies to Hindus?

[@nalindesai09]

These two nasty words were inserted on Gun point by the then Dictator India Gandhi the daughter of Ayyash Dictator Nehru without any discussions in the parliament during emergency!

[@Mgk830]

When these two words are inserted in the meantime into the preamble...it can also be deleted henceforth, this shud be done soon after the next parliament is convened... instead of these two words the word TOLERANT may be added..if it is accepted by all parties...

[@jayramgowda1197]

Enlightened

[@munirathnam96]

It’s illegal let’s remove the word

[@venkataramanasrivatsasa6470]

For being socialist, private ownership is no no. For secular, religion, religiously venerables can be abused and criticized just like in Netherlands. No. No.. Better include Hindu, which is all encompassing, inclusive, accepting every religion and venerables and abuse of other religions and religious practices are not allowed. Better Hindu included in the preamble.

[@durgaprasadsrivastava3307]

It's immaterial whether the words secular and socialist are removed or retained. What matters is that these words should be defined.

[@MS-ov9sv]

Hedge is speaking so rudely to Jain ji.....Hedge should learn some.manners and professionalism.himslef first

[@pinakidash2730]

We need to ask if BJP were to amend the preamble tomorrow following the same process/way as IG did, is it legal and acceptable?

[@ramakumarnambiar7010]

If it passed by two-thirds in the lock sabha

[@SanjaySingh-ws2jh]

Preamble doesn’t say citizen has to be secular. It says “ India is constituted to be secular …..

[@amitsarkar3019]

Socialism was not there in the original constitution.

[@peachNpink]

After partition the question of secular did not arise and was not even valid.

[@vh6172]

Truly so he has the right to challenge

[@vh6172]

The point is why the said words had to be inserted in the preamble when the fundamentals were suspended and it was unilaterally inserted without discussing itt in parliament what was the intention

[@amitsarkar3019]

50-year too late is an useless argument.

[@DipakBose-bq1vv]

Socialism is in the directive principle of the state policy.

[@abhijit2406]

Even Hegde doesn’t have proper arguments

[@rajjena9053]

Well defined topic atleast jain is fighting this case ,most people are always said that our country is secular by constitution, we are, but not by constitution politicians have exploited to large extant

[@vinitphadke2706]

Section 120B of the IPC defines criminal conspiracy as an agreement between two or more persons to commit an illegal act or a legal act by illegal means. The essence of this offense lies in the agreement and the intention to commit the act.

[@SaraswatiMSarasa-pn7ci]

This history IWill learning school on that time sir today my teachers all' of you one place on that time sir all' of you tacking on that time sir ❤

[@ramanin.v.s5044]

Whether Article 29 of the constitution which allows Govt under HRCE is not violative of the Preamble SECULAR Interference in hindu temples but not in other minority religions places of Worship is it secular.

[@VitaminPutin]

It was just a political statement made my Indira Gandhi. Secular was already in the preamble ever since its inception in 1950. (Liberty of belief, faith and worship) Dr Ambedkar didn't want to add Secular and socialist during the post world War because of different meanings it might propagate .. .

[@dcamper11]

Indira Khan was a dictator, black spot on Bharat’s democratic values. These 2 words should be removed that were illegally added. Communities who don’t agree, can get lost.

[@MyLovingSwami]

Sanjay hedge feel sorry u will not be becoming Rajya Sabha anytime sooner. Ur frustrated sulk is visible

[@amitsarkar3019]

Article 370 was temporary, but was there for 75 years. 50 years is less than 75 years, so long/short time doesn't mean anything.

[@vh6172]

This man called Sanjay hegede is politicising a debate which is legal in nature

[@vh6172]

He is right

[@SaraswatiMSarasa-pn7ci]

Your says on that time to IWill one year child on that time sir that is true sir 🙏🌹👍

[@vh6172]

How it is political it is legal

[@rajsinghji-84]

Not only that these two words need to be removed, we need them replaced with Dharmic and free market economy.

[@sridharancr1542]

Why do you call this person Hegde? What is his competence?

[@subramanianramajayam2467]

Secularism is an unwanted concept used by Congress for votebank politics

[@amitsarkar3019]

The issue here is to challenge Amendment 42, as unconstitutional.

[@rakeshkumarsinha3623]

The places of worship - do Hegde n others withdraw from opposite sides

[@vinay679-m1e]

PLEASE BRING THE TWO POLITICAL PARTY SYSTEM AS IN LIKE UNITED STATES TOO MUCH OF POLITICAL PARTIES IS OF NO USE

[@kisansirur1164]

Here is the problem: Secular means this;things are not religious. Anything not affiliated with a church or faith can be called secular. Non-religious people can be called atheists or agnostics, but to describe things, activities, or In other words YOU all MUSt accept every religion as given and not discredit like aKAFIR or devil 😈 the other!!

[@SaraswatiMSarasa-pn7ci]

Excuse me sir IWill born on that years on that 1975 on that time sir 😂

[@mintusaren895]

Both the words same meaning, enlarge it

[@deepakseth6256]

This gentleman in his earlier job spealiesed in strring Hindu Muslim pot day in and day out

[@nishantc9100]

Sanjay to Vishnu - raise the level of argument and not your voice to be heard in the courts

[@Anil-g2d1i]

Why is Vishnu shouting?

[@ashok-p3h]

hahaha.....whats surprise in it, its another game by bjp .....is ideology can be forced by bjp on all the people ????

[@divyadivya3457]

First remove this they people like me will accept this as hindu country. Because since school, we are being taught india is secular country. so as long as it is in constitution, i will go with that.

[@Pritam414]

First gain some basic knowledge. Secular word was later introduced by Indira Gandhi in 1976 of 42 amendment. Br. Ambedkar never included secular word in the constitution and one more thing India a secular country because it has Hindu majority

[@peachNpink]

divyadivya, first read some history as well. India was partitioned on the basis of religion. So the original constitution did not have secular term and it was not supposed to be secular after partition.

[@vinay679-m1e]

You don't know nothing on history and blabbering here 😂😂

[@ManiramDeonanan]

Modi BJP should used majority Hindu vote to reform and make necessary changes to constitution.

[@amitsarkar3019]

The word "secular" doesn't exist in the USA constitution.

[@Truthseeker2609]

We will . No undo

[@ManiramDeonanan]

BJP Modi must peacefully and temporary break up India. Change the constitution. No more Muslim voting rights. They who break up India. Stop appeasement forever.