Sympathizing with the sentiments of people is one thing but is it viable from an economical point of view?
This is the question raised by those who support the slaughtering of cows.
Those who want cows to be protected say it does not matter whether it is economically viable or not it is a matter of our tradition,our emotion and our devotion to cows.
They say "an economic calculation is brutal and quote the eg of old mothers, fathers, blind or handicapped and mentally-ill people saying even they are a burden so why not kill them ? "
The realists say "we already have burden why add one more because of religious sentiments ? Why not be practical? Affection towards parents, caring of sick and old is secular it has no religious connotation, but protection of cow is a Hindu sentiment and for others who are non Hindu it is a delicacy, nutritious and a habit since ages, why should they be forced to not eat beef? It's unreasonable and communal."
To this the cow lovers who are generally the follower of Sanatana dharma, Jains, Buddhists or Sikhs say, "this is the land of cow lovers and why should we compromise to the cause of the minority at the cost of majority?
When the Islamic invaders came even though they never had cow killing practices in the Arab countries they killed cows to hurt Hindu sentiments When they were uncompromising and hurtful why should we submit to them?
why not support non violence and ban cow killing for ever? They need to submit to the law of the land and respect the sentiments of the majority .They also say that the Hindu minority in other parts of the world never creates or agitates
the law of their land."
Cow supporters also challenge saying
" the question of economics is easily solved if we make the cow and land interdependent."
Unfortunately the western educated mind set does not want to understand the whole story of cows and its effect on economics. It's an open secret and implementable. To make land prosperous by cowdung and urine.
Few points to reflect.
The amount of subsidy given for pesticide and chemical fertilisers is colossal.
We are importing fertilisers which are banned in America and Europe.
Why not study why they are banned in Europe and America and why we are still using them?
Land is becoming poisonous and useless because of the poisonous fertilisers and in turn the immune system of humans and animals is getting destroyed.
Ordinary farmers who were promised huge profits are crying for losing their land and health.
Cow and cow products have a solutions to this .
One can see how the British destroyed the prosperity of the Indians by killing cows everyday. They killed a minimum of thirty thousand cows so that the land would become barren and they could advertise their chemical pesticides and control the economics of India by forcing the Indian farmers to depend on their products.
Why not both parties go beyond sentiments and debate on the history of India for the last three hundred years? One will notice that cows grazing on land was synonymous to GDP being very high.
The Mahabharata says;
"The great Laxmi symbolically was given a place to reside in urine and dung of the cow."
Does this ring a bell or are we so stubborn that we cannot hear it?
Mahabharata says that profits need to be dharma centric and dharma needs to be practicable.
The cause of cow protection is challenging our sentiments.
The issue is not that it is good to protect cows rather the fact that only cows can protect us from perishing due to lack of food and health,.
Why not give mother cow a chance to make India prosperous again?
Are we hearing?
The issue is beyond sentimental but certainly full of sentiments.