Swami saranam!!!

[uttermost]

evadanna chadivaada judgement ee thread lo?

hehe..

[soodhilodaaram]

22 hours ago, Spartan said:

some dogs missing in the thread..

kukka ippude vachindi

[chittimallu2]

7 hours ago, uttermost said:

I keep hearing this 'real believer of Swamy Ayyappa' bullshit. is a lot similar to what some radical muslims claimed about Haji Ali when the issue of allowing women into Haji came up couple yrs back.

 Finally women were allowed into the Haji Ali, and muslims apart from making a few noises, didn't engage in the kind of rowdyism that certain Ayyappa bhakts have indulged in.

 So are we now accepting that Hindus are far more violent than muslims in India, finally? because it is true. and this is proof.

rest of what you wrote is immaterial. people can go to a temple for whatever they wish to. Its like kids going to a public library. some go to study, some go because they like a chick/stud in the library, some go because they want to cool off in the AC.

 All this problem is because the govt has allowed some boards (in this case Travancore Devasvom board) to keep some power. And this what happens when temples are quasi private. A section of population is restricted. that's why govt should take over all temples, and maintain it like TN govt does. 

how is that bullshit? This is indeed a matter of faith and belief more than anything spin it however you want. 

Im not even going to respond to your mad and stupid claims that hindus are more violent than muslims and that example of haji ali lol... thats not even relevant to me. 

People dont go to sabarimala by trekking about 2500mts for AC or for a chick/stud ... you are being stupid here and are "trying" to win an argument rather than discussing on point.

Its only some dumbfcuk liberals who never stepped their foots on any temples premises want to visit sabarimala just because it will hurt the devotees sentiments and they believe thats a victory for them by doing so.

You lost it man, you are bringing up all irrelevant BS to stay relevant in this topic... take a break

[chittimallu2]

7 hours ago, uttermost said:

how about a referendum among hindu women and men in kerala on whether women should be allowed inside the temple? lol.

the devaswom board is so losing that referendm, if it happens. normal people don't give a fcuk.

its just political goons who are making the noise now, making some people who are neutral to take a stand in their support as if their stance is the popular one.

Totally wrong, its the devotees that are blocking women and some organisations are standing beside them. The devotees are pleading women to go back and are also ofcourse harassing and sending them back when they dont listen to them.

[uttermost]

8 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

how is that bullshit? This is indeed a matter of faith and belief more than anything spin it however you want. 

 Im not even going to respond to your mad and stupid claims that hindus are more violent than muslims and that example of haji ali lol... thats not even relevant to me. 

People dont go to sabarimala by trekking about 2500mts for AC or for a chick/stud ... you are being stupid here and are "trying" to win an argument rather than discussing on point.

Its only some dumbfcuk liberals who never stepped their foots on any temples premises want to visit sabarimala just because it will hurt the devotees sentiments and they believe thats a victory for them by doing so.

You lost it man, you are bringing up all irrelevant BS to stay relevant in this topic... take a break

There's no point there. the best way to settle this is to put this to vote. let all stakeholders vote on this. Currently the stakeholders are all men. How do we include women into this exercise?

are you going to claim that every woman who wants to go to sabarimala is a liberal mischief monger? I'm sure plenty of men bhakts too don't mind women accompanying them in the trip.

Like i asked earlier. have you read the judgement. I haven't. pls do. I'm sure there are legal reasons for this judgement too, not just moral or religious reasons.

[uttermost]

4 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

Totally wrong, its the devotees that are blocking women and some organisations are standing beside them. The devotees are pleading women to go back and are also ofcourse harassing and sending them back when they dont listen to them.

what if number of people who want to allow women, are more than number of people who want to block them?

has devaswom board ever thought of conducting such a referendum? Is religion beyond democracy? why? because a bunch of people got together and designed specific rituals, and decided to stick to it for eternity? how's that fair?

The matter wouldn't have gone to supreme court, if devaswom board was flexible in solving this

[chittimallu2]

10 minutes ago, uttermost said:

There's no point there. the best way to settle this is to put this to vote. let all stakeholders vote on this. Currently the stakeholders are all men. How do we include women into this exercise?

 are you going to claim that every woman who wants to go to sabarimala is a liberal mischief monger? I'm sure plenty of men bhakts too don't mind women accompanying them in the trip.

 Like i asked earlier. have you read the judgement. I haven't. pls do. I'm sure there are legal reasons for this judgement too, not moral or religious reasons.

You dont have to vote.. its okay it can stay like that. Not any woman is losing their sleep or being deprived of food or is dying because she was unable to visit that temple between the ages of 13-50 or so. Its not a matter of life and death for any woman and there is nothing to do with equality either. Everything doesnt have to be like that, there can be exceptions especially when nothing bad is happening out of that inequality.

Yes, I can claim that because like I said, if they are true devotees they will respect the rules of the temple and want to keep it that way. No, your surity is wrong and you have no clue about Ayyappa Swamy mala eskunna bhakthulu... like I said give it a rest.

I didnt read the judgement and I dont have to, SC means nothing to me in this issue, there is no reason for SC to poke its nose here.... Im all up for woman rights and quality when it comes to anything but like I said women are not losing their sleep, food or the right to live or work they want just because they are not let into this temple at certain ages.... They wont be treated as second class citizens since they never visited sabarimala, its not a matter of survival of woman in this topic... 

END OF. IM OUT OF THIS TOPIC

[Roll_Tide]

1 minute ago, chittimallu2 said:

You dont have to vote.. its okay it can stay like that. Not any woman is losing their sleep or being deprived of food or is dying because she was unable to visit that temple between the ages of 13-50 or so. Its not a matter of life and death for any woman and there is nothing to do with equality either. Everything doesnt have to be like that, there can be exceptions especially when nothing bad is happening out of that equality.

Yes, I can claim that because like I said, if they are true devotees they will respect the rules of the temple and want to keep it that way. No, your surity is wrong and you have no clue about Ayyappa Swamy mala eskunna bhakthulu... like I said give it a rest.

I didnt read the judgement and I dont have to, SC means nothing to me in this issue, there is no reason for SC to poke its nose here.... Im all up for woman rights and quality when it comes to anything but like I said women are not losing their sleep, food or the right to live or work they want just because they are not let into this temple at certain ages.... They wont be treated as second class citizens since they never visited sabarimala, its not a matter of survival of woman in this topic... 

END OF. IM OUT OF THIS TOPIC

say one more line pls

[chittimallu2]

4 minutes ago, uttermost said:

what if number of people who want to allow women, are more than number of people who want to block them?

 has devaswom board ever thought of conducting such a referendum? Is religion beyond democracy? why? because a bunch of people got together and designed specific rituals, and decided to stick to it for eternity? how's that fair?

 The matter wouldn't have gone to supreme court, if devaswom board was flexible in solving this

I know I said END OF above but will respond to this since you posted before I said that.

There is zero proof for that in bold and the chances are higher , much much higher, that its not the case. Im not talking about people, since people as a group as a whole are stupid, but im talking about devotees who actually dedicate few months of their time every year and do the pilgrimage. They dont want women there, not just majority but by a thumping majority which would be closer to 100%

rest of the post is irrelevant after my above reply above.

 

[uttermost]

1 minute ago, chittimallu2 said:

You dont have to vote.. its okay it can stay like that. Not any woman is losing their sleep or being deprived of food or is dying because she was unable to visit that temple between the ages of 13-50 or so. Its not a matter of life and death for any woman and there is nothing to do with equality either. Everything doesnt have to be like that, there can be exceptions especially when nothing bad is happening out of that equality.

Yes, I can claim that because like I said, if they are true devotees they will respect the rules of the temple and want to keep it that way. No, your surity is wrong and you have no clue about Ayyappa Swamy mala eskunna bhakthulu... like I said give it a rest.

I didnt read the judgement and I dont have to, SC means nothing to me in this issue, there is no reason for SC to poke its nose here.... Im all up for woman rights and quality when it comes to anything but like I said women are not losing their sleep, food or the right to live or work they want just because they are not let into this temple at certain ages.... They wont be treated as second class citizens since they never visited sabarimala, its not a matter of survival of woman in this topic... 

END OF. IM OUT OF THIS TOPIC

choice. every person has a choice. they chose to go to sabarimala. They don't have to lose sleep. they just can want to go.

does devaswom board own sabarimala or what? why no vote? let an overwhelming majority say they don't want women there, it won't happen, but the fight to change people's minds will happen until they are allowed in. If not today, then some other day. It was always bound to happen. can't be stopped.

the temple doesn't exist in a vaccuum. It is protected by the laws of the state (Indian constitution), and has to respect that. temple is not bigger than the Indian state. is it? I'm sure the case for allowing women was strong. Otherwise SC in India is very conservative, and won't give this sort of judgement.

[uttermost]

2 minutes ago, chittimallu2 said:

I know I said END OF above but will respond to this since you posted before I said that.

There is zero proof for that in bold and the chances are higher , much much higher, that its not the case. Im not talking about people, since people as a group as a whole are stupid, but im talking about devotees who actually dedicate few months of their time every year and do the pilgrimage. They dont want women there, not just majority but by a thumping majority which would be closer to 100%

rest of the post is irrelevant after my above reply above.

I don't know man. you seem enthusiastic about restricting a section in the name of tradition. 

Its fine to have rules of behaviour when inside the premises or even enroute.. but to completely deny a section seems unfair.

also there's no proof that people want to restrict women going to the temple. Devotees may be the stake holders for this temple, but I asked how do you include women and get their views too? may be a lot of women want to go too, and will vote YES anonymously, if given a chance.

what you are saying is like vote for separate TG in united AP assembly. There's no way it'd pass if every mla was allowed to vote in the assembly. That's why center stepped in. Same devaswom didnt recognize this long standing demand for even a little bit, which is what got them the mess that is today.

[uttermost]

Am I missing something?

Is there something in that 45?? or 60?? days of penance that devotees do, that can't be done by women?

 

[uttermost]

@chittimallu2.. things change. if not today, some day women will have to be allowed.

newer traditions can be built around this new development. Its not the end of the world for sabarimala.

[kingcasanova]

2 hours ago, uttermost said:

sollu gaallaki sollu chaalu.

ante inkemi cheppaleraaa mee batch?

[uttermost]

5 minutes ago, kingcasanova said:

ante inkemi cheppaleraaa mee batch?

nuvvu naaku ichey comment la ki, ninnu manishi kindha treat cheyyatam maanesina.

nuvvemo expect chesthunnav. but nuvvu daaniki aruhudu kaavu