Religion no bar

IN A country so obsessed with religious faiths, this move of the Bombay HC is sure to give non believers some breathing space. Next time the state compels you to declare your religion, you can now cite this unprecedented ruling and remind that your identity is not ascertained by the religion you practice or even if you don’t, you can’t be unnecessarily profiled. In fact had the state not made it mandatory with such dubiousness, a situation like this may have never come out to the fore, the manner in which it has.

But can anything in India progress without religion being an integral part of it? The answer to it is a vehement no. No, why? Why, because until and unless political issues of great significance and considerable mirth too, are not given a communal colour, there usually is that essential spice missing. The question that needs to be put across to political parties is that when Article 25 of the Indian Constitution espouses the freedom to any individual in relation to any religion he or she might want to practice, profess or propagate and also the choice to declare himself or herself an atheist or not, then why do these undemocratic congregations cannot understand that the provision is for an individual and not a group? Religion is a very personal choice and it is indeed worth mentioning that the formation of the Anglican Church in 16th century England, was largely an outcome of a severe papal retribution which objected in principle to Henry VIII, the Tudor King’s request to get his marriage annulled in 1527.

Many may say that it was more of a political decision and had no theological preponderance but the fact of matter also is that an individual even then revolted to accept the dictates of the Roman Catholic Church. In the same light, the PIL that effected this change of perception should not only be hailed but may be the harbinger of times to come when religious freedom wouldn’t just remain a dream.