Wait…really? You know, before clicking on the link, I thought you were joking. That is ridiculous.

Since living here in the states, I’ve forgotten that India’s majority is Hindu. So similar to hear, there’s probably quite a few laws that are pro majority’s religion in India too.

Folks,
While I agree 100% that this is preposterous,I do not think the law was different for non Hindus because of a grand plan to discriminate.It was based ,I believe on a misguided and thoroughly ill-conceived plan to “protect ” minority religions. I am not fully clear on the legalities but it had to do with the difference in Hindu inheritance rights vs other religions.

One more reason why a common civil code is so necessary!

I am not fully clear on the legalities but it had to do with the difference in Hindu inheritance rights vs other religions.

Runa, that’s interesting. I’d be curious to find out in detail what you mean. And what exactly is different now that the law had to be changed.

Shlok,
Unfortunately I don’t have details.Even the linked article says “Some clarifications may still be needed on whether the changes would apply to Muslims as the community has its personal laws.” An example of one such inheritance law is the “HUF”:Hindu Undivided family” which gets special tax laws applied to it.For Hindus the family includes children(male) by birth and adoption! Don’t even get me started on the gender inequalities!

Like I said , a uniform civil code is so necessary - I think everyone should follow one law the law of the land and having different laws for Hindus vs other communities is ridiculous!

Hey thanks Runa. That makes sense.

Don’t even get me started on the gender inequalities!

Please. I wouldn’t dare. Not when you say that in a “datne ka tone.”

Not when you say that in a “datne ka tone.”

Ha Ha
I can’t help it - its my favorite soap box