No, I mean a state that does not establish any religion, does not hinder the peaceful expression of religion, and does not favor citizens of one religion over another.
I am worried at the assumed logic here; the more secular a state is the better for all. America isn't exactly secular.
It is secular in the sense the I put forth. It is rightly not secular in the sense that all religion is banished from government.
Here, even Atheists enjoy the rights afforded to them by principles extracted from Jewish/Christian philosophy. As much as we try to separate Church and State here we still fundamentally owe our current governmental philosophy to religion, which is, where the concept of justice is fundamentally defined.
Hinduism does not contain the same principles of justice as Christianity. Consider that before you start advocating a Hindu-dominated government.
Well, India fits the bill here except for the last part...since it has favored Muslims since partition. What we are seeing in India today is part of "Nehru's legacy."
This is the second article to be posted in the last 24 hours bashing India's supposed extremism and mistreatment of minorities. Well, it's a steaming load of dung.
If the press wants true mistreatment of minorities or a threat of extremism to write about, they have no further to look than "Azad" Kashmir, or Pakistan itself. Why will the media not look at the truth?
Where is the threat? The problem is with those who believe it's their God given duty to make you Muslim or die. In that case there is no common ground and no negotiating, only war. If it lies with any side, that has been the Ottoman (and now the neo-Ottoman) M.O., at least, for the last 600 years and I doubt they are going to rest any time soon. (In the Balkans during the 15th Century, the Ottoman Sultan took the youngest child of non-muslim families and raised them as Muslims) I would reexamine where that threat lies, all you have to do is look at Chechnya, Kosovo, Saudi Arabia, Iraq, Philippines, Congo... Look at the History!