Comments on: Stop lavish Sikh weddings

By: bananabrain

bananabrain — Fri, 10 Aug 2007 12:01:25 +0000

i love weddings but mine was just ridiculously expensive. once you factor everything in we wouldn’t have got a lot of change out of Â£40K and that was with just over 200 guests. sikhs aren’t the only ones who need to address this stupid stupid stupid issue. i’d far rather have spent 25% as much and used the money to do up the house.

b’shalom

bananabrain

By: nobody hero

nobody hero — Mon, 06 Aug 2007 21:03:01 +0000

Who are you tell people how to spend thier money, Live your own life’ The SGPC – theyâ€™re about as progressive as George Bush. I Dont rememeber SGPC Starting any wars in iraq or afghanistan.Nor allow condom use in aid ridden Africa . Sunny , you have such an anti sikh agenda . Even a postive sikh story you try to turn it in a negative
Ps George Bush like you self(sunny)is anti abortion

By: El Cid

El Cid — Sun, 05 Aug 2007 08:56:02 +0000

I love weddings

By: Don

Don — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 20:44:30 +0000

Reliable abortion rates are hard to pin down, but UK rates at around 17 per thousand are high compared to the rest of western Europe (Holland and Belgium at around 10 and 11 per thousand.) They aren’t that high by world standards at 26 per thousand, and scarcely record breaking with Russia at around 62, and Vietnam at around 44.

But I agree that declining birth rates do mean that we need a steady supply of new people.

By: nobodys hero

nobodys hero — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 19:51:31 +0000

The Record number of abortions has made the uk a world leader in foetus termination.Resulting in a crisis with the birth rate. The need for mass immigration.

By: nobody hero

nobody hero — Sat, 04 Aug 2007 04:20:18 +0000

So only european women have a right to abortion.If a women choses to terminate her pregnancy for what ever reason, what concern is it of yours sunny mr liberal .

By: Bleh

Bleh — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 14:11:27 +0000

I hate weddings. Mine was horrific! We spent money like it was going out of fashion before the Big Day and was piss poor the day after. You can keep your Big Bling weddings.

I know how you feel. The better half and I have decided that if we take the plunge, we’re doing it in Venice.

By: Jai

Jai — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 12:46:08 +0000

Also, in terms of religion %, its not actually the Sikhs who are the worst offenders.

Ind, could you please supply the relevant statistics if available.

By: Ind

Ind — Thu, 02 Aug 2007 09:59:22 +0000

I know someone who works for a Human Rights organisation actively trying to address the issue of female foeticide in India and particularly Punjab, and have been told this practise is far worse in the Citys as opposed to the villages. Also, in terms of religion %, its not actually the Sikhs who are the worst offenders.

By: justagal

justagal — Wed, 01 Aug 2007 15:40:22 +0000

I agree with Sunny’s point about misogyny being the real underlying reason for female foeticide. After all, even in affluent socities where families can and do pay expensive dowries, the birth of a boy child is still more of a cause for celebration that of a girl,
one can but wonder what the response might be in if they were poor.

By: The Dude

The Dude — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 21:01:05 +0000

I hate weddings. Mine was horrific! We spent money like it was going out of fashion before the Big Day and was piss poor the day after. You can keep your Big Bling weddings.

By: Jai

Jai — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 18:20:12 +0000

I knew that it was nothing to do with Sikhism

The notion of this happening amongst Sikhs at all is even more horrific considering the fact that the practice was explicitely outlawed and condemned by the Sikh Gurus, to the extent that they stated people should actually refuse to associate with those who engaged in female foeticide (one of the few occasions when, to all intents and purposes, the Gurus declared anyone should be treated as pariahs). It was something they were vehemently, unequivocally opposed to.

How effective the “edict” turns out to be remains to be seen, but the logic behind it is actually sound. An admirable and inspirational decision on the part of the Sikh committee concerned.

By: KSingh

KSingh — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 17:40:47 +0000

‘I knew that it was nothing to do with Sikhism, but nobody has come up with an explaination of why the Punjab ratio is far worse than other states. Any suggestions?’

Seems to be a North Indian issue , the neighbouring state of Haryana has similar ratio and that is 90%Hindu. Delhi and Uttar Pradesh also have poor ratios. The ratio is worst amongst wealthy and often educated people who can afford the ultrasounds and abortions.

By: Bleh

Bleh — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 15:17:18 +0000

Surely we’re missing the bigger point here – a ratio of 793 females per 1000 males, or even 893 per 1000 is, in the medium term at least, totally unsustainable, no matter the percentage of local affordable GDP spent on weddings?

By: Rumbold

Rumbold — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 15:07:14 +0000

Okay Sahil; unless someone comes up with a better reason, I will accept the margin of error theory.

Ind:

Surely farming is widespread in most Indian states?

By: sahil

sahil — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:43:38 +0000

Rumbold #20 yes it can. If you go to the Indian federal bank of India:

http://www.federalbank.co.in/

You can try and find statistics about population and they themselves stress the problems with data collection. It is really a massive problem in LDCs. My friend is right now working in Haiti with the worldbank and data collection is the bane of his life.

By: Ind

Ind — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:39:47 +0000

The desire for a son and heir coupled with the notion that a male can help farm the land and continue to do so longterm are just some of the reasons.

Farming being the number one earner in Punjab, farmers have a misconception that girls will be a drain on wealth, and as the point of this thread states, lavish weddings (and the appalling dowry system that comes with them) doesnt help the situation for the poor.

By: Rumbold

Rumbold — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:39:16 +0000

I fail to see why pointing out the difference is silly.

793 per 1000 as opposed to 933 is a big difference. Though measurement might account for part of it, I cannot believe that the margin of error would be this high.

By: sahil

sahil — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:34:17 +0000

Rumbold don’t be so silly there is not much of a difference, if anything measurement error can account for a lot of regional variations. Unfortunately this phenomena seems to be a national or even Asian (All of Asia) problem. Highly patriarchal societies simply at the moment do not value women, multiplied by the amplitude of bride wealth and we have a disaster in the making. Read the link I added to my previous post for more detail.

By: Rumbold

Rumbold — Tue, 31 Jul 2007 14:16:32 +0000

Ind:

I knew that it was nothing to do with Sikhism, but nobody has come up with an explaination of why the Punjab ratio is far worse than other states. Any suggestions?