There were in fact many such incidents of persecution and even outright massacres, including in post-revolutionary France, early-20th-century Mexico, and still later in North Korea, Albania and Khmer-Rouge Cambodia. Contrary to common misconceptions, atheism is not inherently more rational or freedom-oriented than any other religious stances.

From his comment history, search for Pakistan. It's a flagged post. He is openly racist and hates Muslims. "Muslims have always been the perpetrators of unwarranted violence," This is why he votes for modi.

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=naruvimama

Development of gujarat under modi is a fig leaf for the underlying reason for voting for modi. The motivations are right wing religious ethno fascism. The others in this case are muslims, with Christians and Sikhs being discriminated on a more opportunistic basis. Their vote for modi is in the hopes of building a hindu religious ethno state along Nazi principles with the muslims playing the role of German Jews. This idea is being heavily propagandize through social media, primarily WhatsApps encrypted channels.

The religious frenzy being built up in the country is absolutely unreal. Well educated software engineers have also been completely absorbed into this fold, as you can observe from the comments.

I like how you have stated your beliefs simply and clearly. Let's not pretend that your vote for modi is based on some car factory.

Also, for your future reference.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_and_secularism#Secular...

I don't agree with any of the posters in this thread advocating that India become a Hindu state.

But your viewpoint is also troubling for me. Do you not think there is an undercurrent of theocracy in Islam? Do you think that there is nothing wrong with the countries in that list? India is still far more diverse, liberal, accepting than any of those countries. You can't simultaneously think that India is horrible for minorities but these muslim majority countries are not.

Of course Islamic countries can be fairly theocratic. India was liberal pre-2014. Now all parties feel compelled to sport some form of Hindutva-lite.

But you are fooling yourself if you think India is liberal or secular today. How many Muslim majority countries will you find where lynching is commonplace and a terror accused is specially picked as a candidate, because the act of terror was a blast in a mosque. Outside Israel, Saudi Arabia, Russia this will be a hard sell.

The concerns around Modi or Erdogan is the change from a secular state to a. theocratic state.

Stoning to death is pretty common in Islamic countries.

You actually believe life in Afghanistan, Pakistan, Syria or Iraq is safer?

India is always meant to be a Hindu state. The word secular was introduced by Indira Gandhi in her brief dictatorship.

Only 3 European countries do not have a state religion. All 56 or so Muslim majority countries clearly back a specific denomination.

Recently you have had a rally of 5 million Sunnis calling for the death Shias in Pakistan.

Stop making the false claim that India is dangerous for Muslims, it is the Muslims who are dangerous for India as you would never know when they are going to stab you in the back.

We have seen this many times over since independence, 2.4 million Hindus killed in Bangladesh in 1971.

Half a million Kashmiri Hindus ethnically cleansed from their ancestorsal homeland.

You have been spouting easily refuted fake news all over this thread. I am not going to fall into the trap of refuting false statement you make.

Only 3 European countries lack a state religion! Great going! The number of muslim kashmiris killed by state forces is several orders of magnitude higher than the Hindus killed - a couple of hundred in 1989-90. I will stop here, because you will simply respond with a barrage of lies.

You are just a brainwashed islamist cherry picking facts.

Pakistan exports terrorism to Afghanistan, Iran and India. Security forces kill terrorists.

Ethnic cleansing is about driving out people.

Bangladesh claims the 2.4 million Hindus killed.

You do not need a research report to prove the ethnic cleansing I Islamic dominated regiins, Pakistan as well as Kashmir has 99% muslim population. Please explain.

Funny you say that, most of them are namesake secular.

Filter out countries that have had large scale ethnic cleansing or genocide in the last 70 years.

Filter out those countries which have 99% muslims.

Filter out those which do not have some form of sharia imposed.

Even though both muslims and Hindus in India want a better future for themselves and their children.

Muslims have shown their willingness to engage in arson, destruction of public property and stopping economic activity or progress to push their own Islamic politics at every opportunity.

You must be really blind to not have observed this.

BJP is pushing for a Hindu ethno-fascist state. Are you citing Islamic states as a form of what-aboutism or as a template for inspiration?

Also, for your laundry list of objections that you created with zero research - here is Albania https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Secularism_in_Albania#Debates_...

There are more, but I will let you do the research. Maybe you will find an example in a secular muslim majority state where the prime minister hand picks a terrorist under trial (whose phone and vehicle were used to bomb a church/temple) as a candidate for election.

> BJP is pushing for a Hindu ethno-fascist state

The relevant word there is obviously "Hindu", but the Permit Raj system in India is more than 70 years old. Is there really a national alternative to the BJP that's less authoritarian/corporatist/fascist and more freedom oriented, in a way that would meaningfully benefit the average Indian?

Virtually any party would be less authoritarian and fascist. Manmohan Singh was the last prime minister. The average Indian would benefit from a better economy, employment opportunities, fearlessness from cow and other vigilantes, sedition charges for expressing political opinions. Muslims in kashmir, lakshwadeep and Sikhs would feel safer.

BJP losing would boost national pride. Right now Indians are considered a joke. I have been personally asked to go drink cow piss on various forums. Plastering cow dung all over the body and ridiculous statements about gold in cow milk will be stripped from text books. Money invested in ayush ministry and central vista will be used in health spending.

https://www.reddit.com/r/shitbjpsays/

> fearlessness from cow and other vigilantes ... Muslims in kashmir, lakshwadeep and Sikhs would feel safer.

This is perhaps your most compelling point. It's also cherrypicked however since radicalism and violence are coming from both the Hindu and Muslim sides. Picking one side over the other is just not what good government is about, this goes for Hindus obviously but also Muslims.

Every muslim majority state is a facist state.

India's diversity is safe as long as it is a Hindu state. I would like India to become a Hindu Rashta.

With the creation of Pakistan, it is only fair for India to become a Hindu state.

The history of Islam & Christianity clearly show the genocide that they have carried out across the world. We would like to preserve what we are.

You are just being an Islamic apologist.

I like your confidence.

Are you citing Islamic states as a form of what-aboutism or as a template for inspiration?

If India is not declared a Hindu state, there is a good chance that it becomes an Islamic state.

Like Pakistan, one denomination will start killing another, it will become a hellhole, like much of west Asia.

India has been a secular state for 70 years, and it is not becoming Islamic. We can stay secular or become a Hindu theocratic state. Becoming an Islamic theocratic state is not at all a possibility.

If you really think there's a chance, i am willing to bet on it. Free money for me.

That must be exactly what the people of Sindh and Kashmir must have thought when they first gave refugee to Muslims.

Did not turn out very well for them.

The root issue is that there are entities that profit (mostly in retaining their relevance/power) when two group of people are pitched against one another. Because such entities can proclaim themselves to be the protectors of the group that is the majority from the other group that could be a minority group.

So you have to understand that once all Muslims are driven out, such entities will pitch two classes within Hindus itself. And in all probability, this could be what happening in places with Muslim majority.

So the real solution is not to drive a group of people away, or declare a "Hindu Rashtra" but to recognise such entities that are profiting from these conflicts, and render that tactic toothless. You will magically see the killings stop.

We do not have conflicts with other groups.

I am not so convinced that there is no fault with Islam considering history as well as the neighborhood.

It takes a lot of self loath and stupidity to buy into this argument mostly made by young or ignorant leftists.

> We do not have conflicts with other groups.

Well, there's that whole bovine liberation moo'vement, that has sometimes turned violent.

In India where a cow is not safe a Hindu is not safe.

Wonder how that came about.

Attack does not mean physically.

The only identity of a western atheist is that they are against believers.