CreateDebate


Debate Info

9
6
Yes No
Debate Score:15
Arguments:12
Total Votes:16
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (7)
 
 No (4)

Debate Creator

nidhib(18) pic



Beef Ban

Maharashtra has banned beef consumption.

Yes

Side Score: 9
VS.

No

Side Score: 6

Those blasted Hindu nationalists... How dare they have their own culture. *

Side: Yes
1 point

As India has a high Hindu population their sentiments should be respected and beef should be banned in India

Anyone who wants to consume beef can do so overseas.

Side: Yes
atharva(9) Disputed
1 point

But if a community follows the belief and is forming the majority of the population of your country, you can't keep on obstructing them. It will only lead to unnecessary conflicts within the country.

Side: Yes
1 point

I feel the banning of beef is a good alternative as it will not defy the morals of any specific religion, which considers cow as a holy animal. We can't keep defying against the people's religious beliefs which forms the majority population of our country, right?

Side: Yes
1 point

In some ways I feel like a country shouldn't ban something on religious grounds. Allowing one religion to have monopoly over the laws of a country can lead to escalating situations where the country becomes a totalitarian theocracy. For example, women in Saudi Arabia not being allowed to do anything without a male relative's permission.

However, consumption of beef is not a right, and if the majority of the population supports the ban then it should stay.

I would have said a fairer course of action to non-Hindus would have been to allow the consumption of beef in private property, but ban it from being sold by street vendors and in restaurants.

Side: Yes
WinstonC(1226) Disputed
1 point

"However, consumption of beef is not a right, and if the majority of the population supports the ban then it should stay."

I strongly disagree with this. There isn't any codified right to have homosexual sex either. I apply the same logic to beef consumption as I do to homosexual sex. One must respect the rights of others to do as they please as long as they don't harm others or infringe upon the rights of others.

Side: No
outlaw60(15499) Clarified
1 point

When does banning come to beef consumption on private property ?

Side: Yes
1 point

I don't really care. Each culture makes their own choice.

And basically then that's more beef for the rest of us.

Side: Yes
1 point

I can understand the side of those who may live in that culture but not necessarily practice its beliefs on food consumption. But I can also not say that they don't have the right as a culture to pass such a law if the majority approves.

Side: Yes
2 points

It can be eaten by those who wish to, there shouldn't be unnecessary banning of beef

Side: No
2 points

India is a secular country which does not have a state religion which is favored by the government. But the present scenario is not that. The beef ban is a way of telling that Hinduism is superior to other religions. This goes against the beliefs of secularism included in The Constitution. If beef is banned, then why not ban pork also. By banning beef, the government tries to favor a more dominant religious group. This also goes against other visions set forth by the Constitution as minority religious groups are not given a thought and are denied their rights. In the section of fundamental rights in the Indian Constitution, it is clearly stated that every person has the right to follow and practice any religion of their choice. It is very wrong of the government to issue a legal notification to ban beef and that this law should be thought and debated on once again and appropriate changes need to be made that act in the favor of everybody.

Supporting Evidence: Fundamental Rights (www.constitution.org)
Side: No
1 point

Banning beef is not a good alternative as India is a democratic and secular country and peoples fundamental right to consume food of their choice should be respected and allowed irrespective of religion . Those who want to consume can do so while does who dont want to shouldnt . This way it wont hamper anyones fundamental rights as well as freedom.

Side: No