Jump to content
dalsingh101

Wedding between Sikh bride and non-Sikh groom stopped by 'thugs' at London temple

Recommended Posts

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/wedding-between-sikh-bride-and-nonsikh-groom-stopped-by-thugs-at-london-temple-10450476.html

 

So much for the Singh Sabha being the vanguards of Sikhi...

I'm uncomfortable with the idea of white people dictating what goes on in Gurdwaray. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The bride and groom need to be educated before the actual wedding day .

Tell them about the Anand Kharaj , and ask them questions about whether they agree with the Gurus teachings , if not then tell them to partake in a registry wedding only. I think its all about awareness and i am pretty confident if they are told in advance about the Anand Kharaj in a polite, loving manner they will think twice or even change their mindset, but with brute force its not good. Its funny how this type of news hits the papers and I feel is damaging Sikhi , why not discuss beforehand and iron out any differences amicably

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to remember the vast majority are 'culturally Sikh', especially those who would marry into another community. 

I think to them, the 'ceremonies' they witness growing up are just that - ceremonies. I don't think they see any deeper significance than that. I don't think they link them to any spiritual notions. 

On the other hand, Singh Sabha Southall are a disgrace for allowing it to happen in the first place. What's the deal? 

If the bloke was a sullah would they have allowed it? Did those hogis go into bumlick mode because the groom was a gora or something?

I thought the Singh Sabha brigade prided themselves on following Akal Takhat edicts? 

It's comical: the same people who go mental and start fighting over having tables and chairs in a langar hall allow this to happen.

Edited by dalsingh101

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its a sad state theres no sharda left anymore . Rather than discussing, explaining etc... they are so rude , want to fight you rather than talk to you.

I think they all need to have a Piare Pill  and they need Singhs/Singhni's who have this gian to explain to the bride and groom , like Basics of Sikhi who are doing a fantastic job and can have a proper dialogue with the bride,groom and families regarding the Anand Kharj ceremony.

All gurudawaras need to follow one Rehat Maryada, it seems we are picking and choosing what suits our needs. It will take a lot of time,effort and determination to make a change but an immediate change that can be in place at every Gurudawarais a dialogue with the bride/groom and family who wish to partake in an Anand Kharaj at a Gurudwara.The dialogue should be 100% as to what our Gurus have shown us to do and perform.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

It is all to do with love for the Guru and the Guru Ji's wonderful TEACHINGS.  Either you have it or don't and no one can force these janwars to feel love or sharda towards something so sacrosanct as sikhi. One can only feel sharda (love) if Vaheyguru ji hukams it.  Everything is happening under His Hukam. The so called vanguards of sikhi are too busy looking after material gains.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have to remember the vast majority are 'culturally Sikh', especially those who would marry into another community. 

I think to them, the 'ceremonies' they witness growing up are just that - ceremonies. I don't think they see any deeper significance than that. I don't think they link them to any spiritual notions. 

On the other hand, Singh Sabha Southall are a disgrace for allowing it to happen in the first place. What's the deal? 

If the bloke was a sullah would they have allowed it? Did those hogis go into bumlick mode because the groom was a gora or something?

I thought the Singh Sabha brigade prided themselves on following Akal Takhat edicts? 

It's comical: the same people who go mental and start fighting over having tables and chairs in a langar hall allow this to happen.

Interesting points.

In the article they say "Sikhism is liberal". If so it would seem they are willing to allow interfaith marriage BUT would they allow a Muslim groom? 

It's an interesting question.

Ps where do you stand on tables and chairs?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think there are two choices in how to deal with it:

Either disallow interfaith marriages alltogether... (and btw some even say that only Amritdhari can be married by anand karaj) and act like th Taliban... this will drive not only the nonSikh away from ever considering following Sikhi, but also likely their Sikh spouse.

OR

Use it as a chance to educate the couple PRIOR to the wedding.  Explain the deeper meaning in the lavaans and who knows maybe the non Sikh will become interested to follow Sikhi.  Not only will it reinforce the Sikh's faith (if they have been not taking their religion seriously) but also possibly spread the faith to someone new in a welcoming and inclusive way.

---

If after counselling by a Granthi or the management committee etc... and the non Sikh has no interest in following Sikhi, then maybe there should be some kirtan, some blessings from the Granthi, so they can still have marriage in the Gurdwara but not using the lavaans.

I think that would not only satisfy the edict from Akal Takht but also make the couples happy too.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

 

If after counselling by a Granthi or the management committee etc... and the non Sikh has no interest in following Sikhi, then maybe there should be some kirtan, some blessings from the Granthi, so they can still have marriage in the Gurdwara but not using the lavaans.

I think that would not only satisfy the edict from Akal Takht but also make the couples happy too.

 

..............................Complete and utter poppycock....................

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

est I am not sure which side of he coin to agree on here...

Are you saying everyone should be able to be married by anand karaj regardless of whether they consider themselves to be Sikh or not?
Or are you saying that helping non Sikhs by educating them on the meaning of the lavaans is wrong?

I'm not sure what you are suggesting...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

The bride and groom need to be educated before the actual wedding day .

Tell them about the Anand Kharaj , and ask them questions about whether they agree with the Gurus teachings , if not then tell them to partake in a registry wedding only. I think its all about awareness and i am pretty confident if they are told in advance about the Anand Kharaj in a polite, loving manner they will think twice or even change their mindset, but with brute force its not good. Its funny how this type of news hits the papers and I feel is damaging Sikhi , why not discuss beforehand and iron out any differences amicably

We do not educate our children about the Guru's teachings five minutes before they are about  to get married, we teach them when they are tiny little infants in nappies and being breast fed.  If we can't educate them then we engage someone who can.  The teachings of the Guru do not start or end by just visiting our local gurdwaras and doing the matha tekya and langar shakiy and the rest, we have to read the Guru Granth Sahib ji and learn the Guru's teaching.  If we can't interpret the teachings of the Guru then we engage someone who can.  It should be the parents of those couples that should be teaching their children why they cannot use the Guru Sahibaan for their Anand Karaj and not the granthies.  Our parents are our first gurus. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I think there are two choices in how to deal with it:

Either disallow interfaith marriages alltogether... (and btw some even say that only Amritdhari can be married by anand karaj) and act like th Taliban... this will drive not only the nonSikh away from ever considering following Sikhi, but also likely their Sikh spouse.

OR

Use it as a chance to educate the couple PRIOR to the wedding.  Explain the deeper meaning in the lavaans and who knows maybe the non Sikh will become interested to follow Sikhi.  Not only will it reinforce the Sikh's faith (if they have been not taking their religion seriously) but also possibly spread the faith to someone new in a welcoming and inclusive way.

---

If after counselling by a Granthi or the management committee etc... and the non Sikh has no interest in following Sikhi, then maybe there should be some kirtan, some blessings from the Granthi, so they can still have marriage in the Gurdwara but not using the lavaans.

I think that would not only satisfy the edict from Akal Takht but also make the couples happy too.

 

1. Disallow all interfaith marriages all together.  Everyone else whether amritdhari or not should be allowed to marry only if they are sikhs.

2. Use this ban as a chance to teach children when they are young what to expect if they decide to marry someone out of the sikh faith.  Catch them when they are young to educate them about the Guru's teachings and not wait when they are adults. Deeper meanings of lavaans can be transmitted to people when they children and not when they have grown into adulthood.  Stop pandering to non sikhs by reciting the bani in the kirtan form.  They should not be there in the gurdwara if they have no wish to learn and follow the teachings of the Guru.  They should not be allowed to make a mockery of the Guru.  Sikh religion is not same as christian religion where one hopes that a non christian person will see the light and embrace jesus some day. 

3. It is not incumbent on the granthi to bless the couples, it is the Guru that blesses them.  The granthi is not similar to the christian pope, who goes around blessing people.

4.  The Guru is not there to satisfy the couples it is the other way round. The role of the Akaal Takhat is to issue edicts and the role of the sikh gurdwaras is to reinforce them sensibly and efficiently. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest, forgive me but I always thought Darbar Sahib had four doors to show that anyone is welcome at any time??  That nobody will be turned away from entering a Gurdwara as long as they have no intoxicants and cover their head out of respect??

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great article by Kamalroop Singh on this issue- 

source: http://akalinihang.blogspot.co.uk/2015/08/some-ad-hoc-comments-about-recent.html

Some ad hoc comments about the recent events surrounding Sikh Marriages

The message of Guru Nanak is to accept all religions and that the Divine is one and the same for all. The Gurdwara is open for all to come and visit, and partake in the Guru's free kitchen and meditation/prayer. The Sikh scripture is not prescriptive, and to find information about marriage rites you have to look at the Rahit-name, i.e. codes of conduct. The primary scripture of the Sikh canon is the Guru Granth Sahib which is devotional, it does not describe in detail how a Sikh should conduct oneself in social life. Therefore, secondary scripture, the Rahit-name were composed in the times of Guru Gobind Singh to fulfil the needs for the emerging community, some three hundred years after Guru Nanak. We need to consider why these injunctions were not bound with the Guru Granth Sahib? I would argue that any code of conduct, like any law, is open to interpretation based on the circumstances. Therefore, these laws related to the Sikhs temporal life, were not fit to be bound with the spiritual content found in the Guru Granth Sahib. The Rahit-name are mostly referred to by Khalsa Sikhs, most Sehajdhari Sikhs will know very little about them, and generally will only accept what is written in Guru Granth Sahib.

The practices of prima noctas by the Moghuls and foeticide by some sections of Indian Society, as well as no widow remarriage, and Sati, led to the chivalrous codes, one of which was to protect women. The community was small and thus had to ensure its survival. The Rahit-name clearly state a Sikh should marry a Sikh, and if someone wishes to marry a Sikh they should embrace Sikhism. A Sikh is defined as someone who believes and practices the teachings of all Ten Gurus, and the Guru Granth Sahib. Some would argue that as Sikhism is against empty ritualism, for a non-Sikh to be married before Guru Granth Sahib when she/he has no intent to follow it, is an empty ritual. The Prem Sumarag Granth circa 1700 clearly states a Sikh should marry his son or daughter within the Sikh community, after taking amrit. So, in actual fact the Sikh marriage rite of Anand Karaj was only prescribed for Khalsa Sikhs (which is still the practice at Takht Hazur Sahib, Nanded), while Sehajdhari Sikhs would have had some sort of marriage blessing in the Gurdwara. We must also bare in mind that to mingle with killers of daughters (female infanticide) and of wives is a serious kurehat, or major break from the Khalsa code, but those who marry their daughters to a non Sikh is a minor transgression or tankha.
Nowadays, we can see young Sikh males dressing up as a Singh and keeping their beard for the day and carrying a sword, and then later on shave their beard. It was probably for this reason that this injunction of being amritdhari for marriage was made. Some Khalsa Sikhs argue that Sehajdhari Sikhs should not be allowed to have an Anand Karaj. This change in tradition occurred the time of British with the introduction of the Anand Marriage Act in 1909, which was adopted by the Singh Sabha. It states:

‘3. Exemption of certain marriages from Act: Nothing in this Act shall apply to -- (a) any marriage between persons not professing the Sikh religion, or’

Since then the position of women has changed worldwide and in the West women are economically independent and have much more freedom. In our secular societies, religion plays a very little role in most peoples lives, and in the West there have been increasing numbers of mixed marriages. Which led to the Akal Takht Sahib issuing a ‘Sandesh’ or advice, which some may argue is different from a ‘Hukam’ or encyclic edict. This ‘Sandesh’ states that to be a Sikh the person must have Singh or Kaur in their name. Sikhs do this at birth, but in reality this title is only officially given to Amritdhari Sikhs. The Sikh Rahit Maryada (1955) states:
Article XVIII - Anand Sanskar (Lit. Joyful Ceremony)
a. A Sikh man and woman should enter wedlock without giving thought to the prospective spouse’s caste and descent.
b. A Sikh’s daughter must be married to a Sikh.
c. A Sikh’s marriage should be solemnized by Anand marriage rites.
k. Persons professing faiths other than the Sikh faith cannot be joined in wedlock by the Anand Karaj ceremony.

Point A is not adhered to as many Sikhs marry within their caste. Point B is interesting to note that it is about a daughter rather than a son. Point C is also interesting as this deviates away from traditional Rahitname.
The issue behind the protests is that those individuals, who are predominantly male, see these marriages as the loss of a member of the Sikh community, to another. It would be interesting to find out if they have protested at the weddings of Sikh males, with non-Sikh females. This group has employed the Rahitname to support their protests, and seem to have coaching on tactics to employ against the police also. One of the Committee members discussed the issues with the group who said ‘ We are only following the maryada (injunctions) of Guru Gobind Singh, to which the committee member replied you know your Pita ji, but not your Baba, Guru Nanak then.’.

An interesting debate was between the Hundal brothers, Jagraj Hundal and Sunny Hundal. Jagraj Singh is a Khalsa Sikh and runs ‘Basics Of Sikhi,’ and Sunny is a Sehajdhari Sikh and is a journalist. Sunny labelled this emerging group protesting at mixed marriages as the Khaliban, or the Sikh Taliban, which Jagraj Singh considers unfair, as they haven’t committed any act on level with the Taliban to date. However, Sunny’s argument is that if left unchecked, this type of ideology could one day lead to more dangerous forms of extremism.
Perhaps, a good way of reaching common ground is perhaps to introduce a Sikh Marriage Blessing or prayer for any couple.

Kamalroop Singh

 

Sikh Marriage Act 1909

 

Prem Sumarag Granth (Circa 1700), see JPS 15 for the dating of this manuscript. Sikh Rehit Marayada SGPC.

 

 

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/wedding-between-sikh-bride-and-nonsikh-groom-stopped-by-thugs-at-london-temple-10450476.html

 

 

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest, forgive me but I always thought Darbar Sahib had four doors to show that anyone is welcome at any time??  That nobody will be turned away from entering a Gurdwara as long as they have no intoxicants and cover their head out of respect??

I am a sikh so if someone gave me a bible and asked me to make a solemn promise that I will  sell my car to them it will amount to an invalid promise, because I have no faith in the bible. I can change my mind anytime and sell it to someone else.  I don't have to keep my promise because the authority upon which my promise was made was meaningless to me. On the other hand if someone asked me to make a promise on the Gutka Sahib to sell my car to them then, I will have to keep my promise because the authority in this situation is so meaningful that I'd rather die than break my promise. It is meaningful because I believe in this authority and have complete and total faith in it.

When we enter the Gurdwara Sahib for the Anand karaj ceremony do you not think that we are there to make a solemn promise/vow that we will live our married lives according to the Guru's teachings as stated in Soohi Mahalla 4 and the rest of the Guru Granth Sahib ji?  How can anyone make that promise/vow/oath if they don't have any faith in the Guru? The walking around the Guru Sahib ji four times amounts to a solemn promise/vow/oath to listen and follow the Guru's Teachings, doesn't it?  If we don't have any faith in the Guru, if don't even bother to understand what the Guru is trying to tell us, tell me please, in what sense is our solemn promise/vow/oath valid? 

I have no qualms about what you have said above because you are totally correct but please remember that when we enter the Gurudwara Sahib ji for Anand karaj we are entering it for a very special and sacred reason and that is to make a special and a very sacred promise with our very special and sacred Beloved. 

I hope I have not offended you in any way.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am in agreement with you about anand karaj.... 100%

What I was saying was that when an interfaith couple approaches the gurdwara for anand karaj, we have a choice.  We can use the opportunity to educate the NON SIKH because who knows, they may really be interested in Sikhi and by doing this they may follow this beautiful and deeply spiritual faith.  Or we can flat out refuse at the gurdwara management level BEFORE THE WEDDING DAY.  Nothing is accomplished by ruining someone's day on the day of.  

And how many anand karaj's of two Sikhs were taken truly seriously?  How many Singhs grow a beard just for that day and then shave it off right after?  Many go through it just for the cultural thing, because they grew up in a Sikh household.  These should be addressed too! 

I am actually being married, by anand karaj in only 3 weeks (in India).  I am a gori.... who found Sikhi on my own a long time ago now.  But I followed the edict from Akal Takht just to be safe so my name is already changed.  I am also taking Amrit only a few days prior.  I would have waited to take a first name when I took Amrit, but to change all legal ID and documentation to a new name is seriously complicated.  I still have things that I am having trouble changing so I took a first name now (properly by the Hukam) with help of sangat here... and that way I could change both first and last name at one time.  So now my passport actually says my new name.  I think it also helps that I tie a dastar... but anyway I am hoping I don't have any issues.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

The non sikh needs to be told at the outset what this faith requires when it comes to marrying a sikh. There is a requirement in this faith that a sikh should marry a sikh. This is just the basic information regarding marrying a sikh. The person who is thinking of marrying a non sikh should inform them and not the granthi.  This is what our parents taught us.  I think it would be very unfair to tell a non sikh about this requirement just few months or weeks before the actual ceremony is to take place.  Surely, the non sikh needs time to think about this, they need to know about this requirement beforehand and not later on because it is totally unfair and cruel to tell them when they have decided to marry someone they love. This responsibility lies with the sikh person intending to marry a non sikh and not anyone else.

Yes, we have a choice to educate a non sikh when this happens but don't you think our student needs time to take everything in in order to absorb it?  One cannot just expect anyone to follow something without understanding it first and this requires time.  A person has to be given time to appreciate what is being given to them before they can accept it and reach conclusions, don't you think? No one can just walk someone into something whilst blindfolded, I think this is so very wrong.  We need time to grasp it before we can follow it.  How can anyone become interested in anything unless they know what it is or what is its significance?  Don't refuse sikhi to anyone.  Sikhi is a huge, limitless and endless Treasure which really really needs to be shared.  Vand ke Shakko.  No one's day can be ruined if the information regarding this requirement is communicated right from the start by those involved and intending to marry a non sikh. 

This is precisely what the edict is trying to address. The sikhs are not taking their Anand karajs seriously because they are making fake promises by walking around something four times in which they have no faith whatsoever! if they did they will not be making invalid promises.  How can they have any faith in it when they don't even know or understand what it contains?  One does not become a sikh just because one is born in a sikh household and even I know this.  This is what the edict is trying to address.  It is telling us people to stop sham, fake, empty or bogus marriages when we don't even follow Shri Guru Granth Sahib ji.

Do you know, just by reading your comments you come across as such a nice sikh who has taken sikhi to her heart.  I am so very happy for you.  May Vaheyguru ji truly bless you and your future husband with more and more sikhi and may your future children enjoy the Ras the bliss sikhi provides. 

 

Good Luck.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

https://www.facebook.com/gurnam.s.khela?fref=ts

Dr Gurnam Singh write small article on this:

My sense is that the Anand karaj was introduced to displace the Brahmanical rules and ritual and the power of the Pandits or priesthood. It was an attempt to create an inclusive Guru centred ceremony based on genuine spiritual union of souls.

The soul, according to Sikhi has no colour, nationality, race, religion or caste. Hence, if one follows this logic, then there is no such thing as an 'interfaith' anand karaj, but a union of two blistful souls (atmas) through union with the celestial soul (paramatma).

So, according to Sikh theological teaching anyone at all who comes with humility, love and spirituality before the Guru is entitled to anand karaj. Devotion and commitment to the teachings of the Guru is the ultimate test. Changing ones name, dressing in a certain way or growing a beard for the ceremony... etc are all irrelevant in comparison to ones inner commitment. The same applies to married life and indeed, all of life.

If Guru Nanak is 'Jahar Pir Jagat Guru Baba' and Guru granth sahib ji is the embodiment of social equality and secular spirituality, then on what basis can anybody be turned away. And who am I or anybody other than the Guru to make a judgement about how pious or devoted somebody is to the ideals of Sikhi, which are first and foremost, 'kirat karni (honest labour), wand shakna (sharing wealth) and naam japna (living a perpetual reflective spiritual existence)

So, we should not be turming people away but embracing them with unconditional love and using the process of anand karaj to induct the couple into the wonderful humanitarian and egalitarian ideals of Sikhi. Indeed, given the shrinking birth rate of Sikhs, the future of Sikhi lies in non Panjabis and so called interfaith marriage is one way to spread Sikhi from and ultimately secure its survival. As I said at the outset, if Guru Nanak is the Guru of all humanity, then let humanity claim the Guru.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like the incident may facilitate positive change:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

According to Maryada (code of conduct):

Quote

According to Gurmat both the bride and bridegroom should be Amritdharee.

Unquote [1]

[1] - http://www.damdamitaksaal.org/code-of-conduct#h9-wedding-ceremony-anand-sanskar-fourth-ceremony

Other method used (in the past), in case the bride and bridegroom were non-Amritdharis, was that they were asked to take a oath before Satguru jee, that they will become Amritdharis in the future.

Therefore, if a Gurudwara actively participates in a marriage ceremony of non-Amritdharis (the ones who have not taken an oath), it goes against the code of conduct.

Hypocrisy (Paakhand) - Allow marriage of non-Amrtidhari so-called Sikhs, while disallowing marriage of non-Sikhs (who might have love for Sikh masters).

Alternate option - A Gurudwara should not actively participate in the marriage ceremony of non-Amritdharis/Non-Sikhs, but they should also not ban their marriages.

For example: Non-Amritdharis/Non-Sikhs should be allowed to book a hall and then perform the marriage ceremony on their own.

Bhul chuk maaf

Edited by paapiman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree with their decision of banning anand karaj of interfaith couple marriage at all as they haven't even take the first step which is parchar, if they can spend all the energy to do parchar, 1 hr seminar of anand karaj one month before wedding of couple and one hour introduction to anand karaj in the day of marriage that would itself go long way itself, at this point their decision is very short sighted, knee jerk reaction of banning individuals, having singh and kaur name with their name superficially, if they would have spent that energy towards explaining sikh theology on atma-paratma unity within in anand karaj (Which is essence of anand karaj itself) they would drawn lot more people in sikhi because remember anand karaj ceremony its  more of a spiritual discourse and life long contemplation on spiritual discourse in anand karaj than affirmation - convert or else- no wedding its not over night transformation...for vahiguru sake- we are unique dharam than abhramic dharam/sharia dharam like islam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Paapiman, the Maryada you psted is Damdami Taksal one... the Gurdwara in question (I don't think) is Damdami Taksal run.  So the issue of Amritdhari is not in question.  It's the issue of whether they both profess the Sikh faith or not.  Only a small amount of Sikhs follow Gurmat Rehet Maryada of Damdami Taksal, so it would be wrong to push it on everyone else who are not DDT followers.  Most follow and agree with (like it or not) Sikh Rehet Maryada. Only a very small portion of Sikhs are Damdami Taksal.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paapiman, the Maryada you psted is Damdami Taksal one... the Gurdwara in question (I don't think) is Damdami Taksal run.  So the issue of Amritdhari is not in question.  It's the issue of whether they both profess the Sikh faith or not.  Only a small amount of Sikhs follow Gurmat Rehet Maryada of Damdami Taksal, so it would be wrong to push it on everyone else who are not DDT followers.  Most follow and agree with (like it or not) Sikh Rehet Maryada. Only a very small portion of Sikhs are Damdami Taksal.

 

The so-called SRM has not been accepted by the Panth and has other problems too.

By definition, a person cannot call himself a Sikh, until he/she gets Baptized. This is according to Gurbani and Gurbani is above, this so-called SRM document.

If a Gurudwara allows marriage of Niguray/Patits (Non-Baptized/Outcasts), then the Gurudwara should have no problems in allowing an inter-faith marriage. Hypocrisy is a big sin in Sikhism.

Bhul chuk maaf

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

If a Gurudwara allows marriage of Niguray/Patits (Non-Baptized/Outcasts), then the Gurudwara should have no problems in allowing an inter-faith marriage. Hypocrisy is a big sin in Sikhism.

 

I actually agree with this, looks like this decision is based on pure hypocrisy/two tier system and lot of cultural-religious fear as their sensors seem to go off only when girl from sikh background marries non sikh not the other way around.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×