Dedications

First it was raising the age bar, for drinking from 18 to 25 in Maharashtra. No logical conclusions and explanations, and is made a rule as some idiots of moral brigadiers in the government feels so. It can’t be moral because no one in the government has any moral values. It is just opening more avenues for corruption. To make it even easier for more corruption now even if you are above 25 you still need a license to drink. How would a license help you to drink responsibly?

A license to drive is required, as it needs specific skills. What skills do a license to drink offer? If it is to earn revenue then tax alcohol even more higher, which is anyways taxed beyond a common man’s reach, or make it like Gujarat a ‘dry state’. If morality is the concern then why only Gujarat; every Indian should be made morally a better citizen. Then are the alleged evils of drinking and driving, or crime associated with drinking. Godhra carnage in Gujarat had nothing to do with drinking, but one Narendra Modi who was drunk and intoxicated in power had thousands killed in the riots. Maybe he had a license to kill.

The weirdest is issuing ‘one day drinking permits’. So how does one day qualify a person to drink on ‘one day’ and other days he cannot. Why create a maze for breeding corruption. If 25 years of age is decided as an eligible age to drink, why add a license over it. Maximum should be proof of age which can be asked for. Then if responsibility to drink can be achieved only at the age of 25, then so should be age for marriage and voting. If a person can vote at the age of 18 and can decide responsibly on who should run the country, then the person is more than capable to know how to drink responsibility.

If morality is again an issue, then contraceptives should be dispensed to only people who have a license or who are married, and should be aged 25 and above. So Chemist shops should be told to issue ‘one day license’. So this could be additional revenue issuing a license to have sex. Then the same should apply for smoking, dancing, singing, seeing movies, etc. If a movie is rated A, then adults who go to watch should have a license.

The craziest and most draconian of the law is the bar premises you're drinking must have all its licenses in place, for you could be jailed even if the bar has lapsed in the observance of rules. How much more weird could it get? For transporting alcohol you should have a license. Then make it mandatory for all the commuters in any form of transport including public transport to have a license, as if a bar runs illegally the people patronizing it are held it guilty. So if a person is transporting alcohol does not have a license then all who are travelling with the person are also guilty. Then it should be mandatory when you get a license to drive, you should also get a license to drink, so if a commuter is transporting alcohol the driver is also licensed to transport the commuter………or better still license to drink and drive.

Maharashtra is the only state where a person can buy only two bottles of 750 ml liquor every week. What is the logic? If you want to make revenue then let a person buy any amount they want. Maybe the aim of the government could be to save on water resources which is a scarcity, then the rule should apply for soft drinks, and that too should be licensed. Make the age limit to drink soft drinks, also 25 years. Since aerated drinks contain harmful chemicals the person should reach a mature age to know about it, and the government feels a person is mature at the age of 25.

Bar dancers are resorting to prostitution as ‘dance bars’ have been made illegal. So if dancing to entertain is illegal, then any form of entertainment should be illegal. The government instead of killing gangsters, and terrorism, is killing the right of a citizen to be happy with a license to chill.

No other country in the world can match Indians in their fervor of prayers and traditions. Then within the myriad of religions and traditions is the interaction of faith, with people of one faith visiting shrines of other faith which transcends above religions and rituals. This strength of social harmony defies the logic of spiritual leaders and politicians who fear it. The divisions of religions and fabricating flaws in other’s religions are what survival for them is.

Then there are the weak in their faith who want to try another God because their God is not answering their prayers, or people going to a shrine of their faith in faraway places as if God who resides in the shrine in their neighborhood or the altars in their home cease to exist. The basic teaching that God resides in every human being, is losing its value and virtue and getting shrouded with rituals and traditions.

So when you have a Anna Hazare that mobilizes a nation to fight corruption it connects deeper and stronger than a call for religion and its rituals. It connects with neighboring Pakistan who we love to consider as our enemy, and we have people there visiting Anna Hazare to understand and emulate his fight in Pakistan. The same goes with Mother Theresa who works of charity and humanity were not restricted to a ‘gated community’ of religion. Her inspiration could be religion but her work was above its rituals, and reached out to humanity. The list of examples can be endless, but what is limiting us to do the same is the corruption of our souls and conscience.

Articles such a death of a new born child and the parents donating the eyes of the child, acts of bravery to save lives; acts of honesty where a poor driver returns a bag of a passenger who forgot it in his taxi and it contained diamonds and jewels; touch our hearts with joy of the existence of human values and again list of humanity can be endless. What is limiting is the narrowness of our minds with ambition and success. The desire to win and succeed at any cost is what creates the ugly world we are now living and experiencing. A simple act of donating eyes after death is not done due to our selfishness. If we cannot be generous even after death, what generosity can we practice when alive? Which God are we trying to please when we cannot stir the God is us?

We then blame the politicians for the mess. What they are doing is exactly what we are doing. They too want to succeed, they too want to acquire wealth, they just want about anything and everything we want. So why complain? Where does this logic or doctrine come about that politicians are there to do good for their people; religious heads are there to lead people of their faith towards good; municipal officials are there to serve us. When the fact is we don’t want to good or desire good of our neighbor or society. We do wrong in our moral lives and want religious head to lead us to good, we litter the streets and throw garbage around and think it is the job of the Municipality to keep the streets clean.

We all like to believe that we are so spotlessly clean, that we don’t cheat, we don’t harm, and we don’t do evil. All of this could be true, but the problem is that we turn a blind eye towards people who cheat and people who get cheated, we thank God that we are not victims of harm and don’t do a thing to report the one who has harmed or help the one subjected to harm, we don’t do evil but fear the ones who do it.

The worst form of corruption is not being involved in it, but knowing about it and not doing anything about it. Still shamelessly we pray to God and appease him with rituals and offerings, and tell Him that he almighty and all powerful and fear human beings that do wrong, and stay contended that we don’t do the bad. Religion is standing up against the bad and evil and not just standing before God.

In an unusual case in France, a husband was fined 10000 Euros for failing to have sex with his wife. Usually it is a court proving, an act is non consensual sex as in cases of rape, or even rape in marriages. If a man does get into a non consensual act of sex, he could be proven guilty through forensic tests or like the way Bill Clinton got screwed when he screwed. In this case the man had to prove he is screwing. Wonder how they proved this one out?

Another one was proving ‘Marriages killing the joy of kissing’. How did they prove this? Though many may agree to this one but disagree that it kills only the joy of kissing; it kills every joy and sometimes even kills. So like cigarette pack warnings, soon Marriage Certificates should carry warnings that ‘Marriages kill’.

It is estimated that 38.2 per cent - 165 million people - of people in Europe suffers from a mental disorder and that anxiety is the commonest. To reduce the problem a study has suggested that treating children early for anxiety would reduce their risk of developing severe mental problems in later life by 60 per cent. That could be a reason Europeans plan to have no kids, so the problem could be solved 100 per cent. Then they have a problem with immigrants as they don’t make babies. Then blame a certain immigrant religious community for having many kids, and the fear their religion could colonize Europe. Either way Europeans are going to be mentally disordered.

Latest fashion trend is to have panties that would show butt cleavage. That reminds of an old joke where in the early days, you needed to part the panty to see the butt, now you need to part the butt to see the panty. Why show the butt cleavage when the butt is anyway visible? This could be another reason why many parts of Europe are banning the Burkha and hijab for Muslim women, to enforce latest trend in fashion.

It’s weird that in many parts of Middle East, people uprising is ousting Tyrant and Dictator rulers, when in America democracy is ousting people from their homes due to the financial crisis. In Russia people are evicted from their homes for making way for the Olympics in 2014. In China anything goes for gaining supremacy, it could be killing their own or bullying neighboring countries. Though China is not a democracy, whatever the hell it is, it is creating a hell. In India people movement for corruption is attempted to be thwarted, as they feel the Parliament is the supreme authority. Authority for what, is the confusion, an authority for breeding corruption or an authority to kill people’s movement who raise their voice against corruption.

Corruption in India and idiosyncrasies of people intoxicated in power is nothing new. Mayawati dispatches a plane to get for her a pair of footwear from Bombay. I don’t understand what the big deal as Nehru used to send his laundry to Paris to be laundered. Janardhana Reddy has a gold throne in his home worth crores and eats from silver and gold utensils. We should fully agree with poor Mayawati that WikiLeaks owner Julian Assange who exposed her, needs to be sent a mental asylum. In fact we all Indians need to be put in a mental asylum as we vote such idiots to power.

Julian Assange response to Mayawati lashing out on him and claiming he needs mental treatment replied, Mayawati is welcome to send a private jet to England to collect him, and he will bring Mayawati a range of the finest British footwear. Julian thinks Indian politicians are so cheap, as if Mayawati wants him to get something from UK, she would ask for the ‘Kohinoor Diamond’, anyway it belongs to India.