The anti-superstition ordinance is just a face-saving exercise
With reference the editorial The silencing of a voice of reason (Our Take, August 22), the murder of anti-superstition activist Narendra Dabholkar, who advocated progressive and critical thinking, is a blot on our democratic traditions. It is appalling that in India whistleblowers, environmentalists and activists are penalised for the good work they do for society. The Maharashtra government’s decision to pass the anti-superstition Bill through the ordinance route is a face-saving exercise. Had the government passed the ordinance earlier, Dabholkar would probably have been alive today.
Rajan Kalia, via email
A few ‘sacred’ facts we must note
With reference Farrukh Dhondy’s article A divine intervention (Moving Finger, August 22), it is commendable that the Archbishop of Canterbury is planning to float credit unions and use the Church’s money to give loans to the poor at cheaper rates. However, the author is wrong in stating that “there are no laid down criteria for the appointment of the Archbishop, just as there are none for the election of a Pope.” The responsibility for choosing the Archbishop of Canterbury rests with the Crown Nominations Commission and the election has 16 voting members. The Catholic Church too has clear guidelines regarding the eligibility and election of a Pope, as we saw in the election of Pope Francis.
Chhotebhai Noronha, Kanpur
Solve the border disputes
With reference to the editorial Head for the map room (August 23), it’s in India’s strategic interest that it solves the border disputes with its neighbouring countries. The fact that India has territorial issues with six of its 10 neighbours must force India to take this matter seriously.
Gaurav Gupta, Ongole
We at Hindustan Times would like to know more about what you want from your page. So write to us at Hindustan Times House, 18-20, KG Marg, New Delhi 110001 Phone: +91-11-66561234, firstname.lastname@example.org