Two things.
1. Christian paper Deccan chronicle is wrong.
Pottu (Bindi) is Hindu. It is not merely 'Indian', but particularly Hindu. It has great significance in Dharmic tradition. Hindu women know well that it covers the third eye for a purpose.
But I don't know why christoterrorists like Ambika Soni are wearing it, other than sheer ignorance. Then again, who am I to stop them when they keep making fools of themselves in public.
And good grief, not another gratuitous mention of the oryans/japhetites again (which are brought up at the end of the christorag Deccan Chronicle's article in the above post).
Why do christo fictions (jeebusjehovallah and the japhetites) keep getting imposed on unbelievers across the globe?
<b>About christoislami Deccan Chronicle:</b>
http://hamsa.org/coelho.htm
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Like its sister publication the Asian Age, the Deccan Chronicle is a Christian-oriented masala newspaper edited by the militant secularists M.J. Akbar, Naazreen Bhura, and Seema Mustafa. They do not tolerate dissent or opinions critical of themselves or their contributors. Their newspapers are a business to make money, not a forum for debate. Facts and figures are extraneous irritants to be ignored, except where the facts and figures can be employed in Hindu-bashing exercises.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->And the page also contains:<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Deccan Chronicle is a popular anti-Brahmin2 <b>Catholic newspaper</b> and the newest proponent of the St. Thomas fable as Indian history (following The Hindu and The New Indian Express). It hides its pro-St. Thomas agenda behind a correspondent's byline and the provocative statement of the Santhome Cathedral parish priest: "The existence of the Santhome Church is a proof by itself that Christianity in India is more than 2000 years old" (DC, Chennai, 8 April 2007). For sucking up to the Catholic clergy, the Deccan Chronicle is the leader among Indian newspapers. Its editors, M.J. Akbar and Naazreen Bhura, both self-righteous secularists of the Nehruvian school, assiduously follow the Christian practice of treating Christian legend as history and Hindu history as mythology (or put another way, treating Christian superstition as tradition and Hindu tradition as superstition).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
2. On the matter of dowry again - the following's from http://satyameva-jayate.org:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/Pool/1644/precolonial.html
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Many Filipino customs are of Indian origin. Among them are the following: (1) placing a sampaguita flower garland around the neck of a visitor upon his arrival and departure as a symbol of hospitality and friendship; (2) before marriage, a groom gives a dowry to the brideâs parents and renders domestic services to his future in-laws; (3) when the guests throw rice on the bride and groom after the wedding; and (4) when a childless couple goes on a pilgrimage to a holy shrine, believing that the god of shrine will grant their prayer for fertility.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If one sees it, the dowry practice spread and got its influence to the SEA region from India in pre-Islamic and pre-colonial times. The form of dowry practice is entirely different from what we see today in India. The original dowry practice was âthe groom had to pay a dowry to the brideâ and not the other way round as we see today in India.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
1. Christian paper Deccan chronicle is wrong.
Pottu (Bindi) is Hindu. It is not merely 'Indian', but particularly Hindu. It has great significance in Dharmic tradition. Hindu women know well that it covers the third eye for a purpose.
But I don't know why christoterrorists like Ambika Soni are wearing it, other than sheer ignorance. Then again, who am I to stop them when they keep making fools of themselves in public.
And good grief, not another gratuitous mention of the oryans/japhetites again (which are brought up at the end of the christorag Deccan Chronicle's article in the above post).
Why do christo fictions (jeebusjehovallah and the japhetites) keep getting imposed on unbelievers across the globe?
<b>About christoislami Deccan Chronicle:</b>
http://hamsa.org/coelho.htm
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Like its sister publication the Asian Age, the Deccan Chronicle is a Christian-oriented masala newspaper edited by the militant secularists M.J. Akbar, Naazreen Bhura, and Seema Mustafa. They do not tolerate dissent or opinions critical of themselves or their contributors. Their newspapers are a business to make money, not a forum for debate. Facts and figures are extraneous irritants to be ignored, except where the facts and figures can be employed in Hindu-bashing exercises.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->And the page also contains:<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->The Deccan Chronicle is a popular anti-Brahmin2 <b>Catholic newspaper</b> and the newest proponent of the St. Thomas fable as Indian history (following The Hindu and The New Indian Express). It hides its pro-St. Thomas agenda behind a correspondent's byline and the provocative statement of the Santhome Cathedral parish priest: "The existence of the Santhome Church is a proof by itself that Christianity in India is more than 2000 years old" (DC, Chennai, 8 April 2007). For sucking up to the Catholic clergy, the Deccan Chronicle is the leader among Indian newspapers. Its editors, M.J. Akbar and Naazreen Bhura, both self-righteous secularists of the Nehruvian school, assiduously follow the Christian practice of treating Christian legend as history and Hindu history as mythology (or put another way, treating Christian superstition as tradition and Hindu tradition as superstition).<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
2. On the matter of dowry again - the following's from http://satyameva-jayate.org:
<!--QuoteBegin-->QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->http://www.geocities.com/CollegePark/Pool/1644/precolonial.html
<!--QuoteBegin--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE<!--QuoteEBegin-->Many Filipino customs are of Indian origin. Among them are the following: (1) placing a sampaguita flower garland around the neck of a visitor upon his arrival and departure as a symbol of hospitality and friendship; (2) before marriage, a groom gives a dowry to the brideâs parents and renders domestic services to his future in-laws; (3) when the guests throw rice on the bride and groom after the wedding; and (4) when a childless couple goes on a pilgrimage to a holy shrine, believing that the god of shrine will grant their prayer for fertility.<!--QuoteEnd--><!--QuoteEEnd-->
If one sees it, the dowry practice spread and got its influence to the SEA region from India in pre-Islamic and pre-colonial times. The form of dowry practice is entirely different from what we see today in India. The original dowry practice was âthe groom had to pay a dowry to the brideâ and not the other way round as we see today in India.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->