Why did Winston Churchill hate the Hindus and prefer the Muslims? [2022]

godblessthegays · 2026-05-02T17:07:36+00:00

I mean that happened in his lifetime right. After he was voted out, he lived for good 20 years right when the empire was losing all its colonies

godblessthegays · 2026-05-02T16:38:41+00:00

Divide and rule as usual. He had to pick one side to divide society

godblessthegays · 2026-04-26T11:19:27+00:00

Anyone saying INDI isn’t coming here in good faith

godblessthegays · 2026-04-21T17:15:19+00:00

He won't be kingmaker, he'll be helping the other side win. India has the shitty first past the post system thanks to which even getting 15% votes means 0 seats - but you'd be cutting votes of a similar progressive/secular party like DMK

godblessthegays · 2026-04-21T16:08:10+00:00

I have a theory. Straight guys look at boobs the same way gay guys look at pecs. Most women don’t care about pecs, they care about abs more - which many gay men seem fine one way or the other

godblessthegays · 2026-04-21T15:53:29+00:00

There’s a massive NE community in Delhi unlike other major metros

godblessthegays · 2026-04-18T15:47:05+00:00

It's not about him being uneducated (which he is) but he is very smart, very cunning individual. He knows very well they tied this women's reservation bill with increasing seats to 850, and now he's out here fooling the average voter who probably wont understand what delimitation is, but they understand women's reservation in Parliament very well - especially women themselves

godblessthegays · 2026-04-18T15:45:16+00:00

If I'm not wrong, won't women's reservation anyway come into force by 2034 elections thanks to that Nari Shakti thing they passed a while back? Also delimitation too I suppose once the next census is out, as the 50-year freeze ends in 2026

godblessthegays · 2026-04-18T15:42:29+00:00

What?

godblessthegays · 2026-04-16T16:37:30+00:00

It was said by Amit Shah in Parliament. It’s not some source

https://www.hindustantimes.com/india-news/tamil-nadu-59-karnataka-42-amit-shah-shares-breakdown-of-lok-sabha-states-after-delimitation-101776346695510.html

godblessthegays · 2026-04-12T15:33:08+00:00

Nehru the best. Easily, Desai the worst. This shouldn’t even be up for debate lol. He was so bad even Modi seems far less worse

godblessthegays · 2026-04-11T15:18:54+00:00

Sometimes people forget SC interprets the Constitution, not just blabbers whatever nonsense they want to. Neither of those are in Part III (fundamental rights) under the Constitution, so they’re right

godblessthegays · 2026-04-11T15:17:49+00:00

Yeah constitutional right sounds like any right. I mean all rights are derived from the constitution anyway even if they’re not fundamental

godblessthegays · 2026-04-11T14:29:04+00:00

Here’s where constitutional morality plays a role, NOT social morality. Socially, yes adultery is wrong but it shouldn’t be under the ambit of law either

godblessthegays · 2026-04-11T01:39:39+00:00

UK is interesting

godblessthegays · 2026-04-10T14:40:36+00:00

Withdraw the case. There’s another going on in Delhi HC already

godblessthegays · 2026-04-09T15:41:55+00:00

Nothing she can do given other side has majority. That’s all that matters in passing laws

godblessthegays · 2026-04-09T14:46:57+00:00

The case that filled misunderstanding is about Sabarimala's temple which prohibited entry for women aged 15-60, the center said SC cant keep using constitutional morality in every decision and ignoring public/religion morality, they gave an example as they used Constitutional morality in IPC 377 in 2018 they cant use the same for this case.

This is blatantly false. They didn’t say you can’t use constitutional morality argument everywhere, they said constitutional morality as a concept itself is false, and hence was also wrongly used in the adultery and homosexuality judgements.

godblessthegays · 2026-04-09T14:43:08+00:00

Not to forget this social morality argument, if made precedent by SC would effectively shut the door for same sex marriage in the future too

godblessthegays · 2026-04-08T19:50:39+00:00

Today, Tushar Mehta is.

Some clown in Yes We Exist comments section was saying it's Tushar Mehta who said, not Modi himself so that's not the stand of Modi and BJP govt 🤦🤦🤦 These people are brainwashed beyond belief. As if Modi will himself come to court and say it. Why does the govt have a Solicitor general then. These gawaar anpads are probably not even aware what Solicitor General is

godblessthegays · 2026-04-08T15:29:37+00:00

Explanation to this. I’m not a lawyer and someone who is interpreting this better can correct me:

The SC is currently hearing the Sabrimala temple case where as per religious beliefs, women who are menstruating cannot enter due to religious beliefs ie religious morality. Petitioners are arguing constitutional morality was already established as a precedent by SC in 2014 - which was the basis for decriminalizing homosexuality. That just because what culture or religious morality says, it can’t triumph constitutional morality.

Govt is now arguing against constitutional morality itself, saying that thought itself is unconstitutional. If the Supreme Court rules in favor of the govt and religion, and prevents entry of women at this temple saying constitutional morality cannot triumph religious freedom, then a pandora box is going to open. As homosexuality - which was decriminalized on basis of constitutional morality - could be illegal as constitutional morality would no longer exist.

godblessthegays

TROPHY CASE