Religious leaders condemn gay sex ruling
July 09, 2009 19:49 IST
Last Updated: July 09, 2009 19:55 IST
A group of religious leaders today alleged that the campaign to legalise homosexuality in the country was part of a "well-planned conspiracy" to finish India's moral and social values, and sought government intervention against it.
Terming the Delhi [Images] High Court's recent judgment which decriminalised homosexuality "shocking, deplorable and unfortunate", they said "unnatural sex is totally unacceptable in India which has rich cultural and ethical traditions.
"It is a conspiracy to finish our moral values and those who are involved in such activities have no place in our society," Maulana Syed Jalaluddin Umari, president of Jamaat- e-Islami Hind, told reporters.
Maulana Umari also criticised those who cite fundamental rights for legalising gay activities saying such rights are not absolute.
"The individual rights are not absolute but are subject to public order, morality and health," he said.
Father Dominic Emmanuel, Director of Delhi Catholic Archdiocese, claimed gay activities would increase the risk of HIV infection. He, however, made it clear that they were not in favour of treating homosexuals as criminals despite their activities are "unnatural".
"We are always with them (gays) and ready to offer them counselling as it is possible to bring homosexuals in the mainstream of life," Immanuel said.
Acharya Lokesh Muniji, a Jain religious leader, also maintained that the campaign to legalise homosexuality was "conspiracy to finish our social fabrics".
"Indian civilisation survived centuries after centuries because of its moral and spiritual values. Westernisation is not acceptable in the country," Muniji said. While Sardar Tarsem Singh of Delhi Sikh Guruduwara Prabandhak Committee said gay activities should not be encouraged as it is against the law of nature.
However, he maintained that Sikhism does not treat homosexuals as criminal
I concur with the above views.
I understand Swami Ramdeo is challenging the high court judgement legalising gay sex.
I support him.
Our Indian civilsation has survived more than 5000 years based on certain principles which treats sex as a very private affair between man and woman.
If God had wanted gayocracy, he would have made two Adams in the Garden of Eden instead of Adam and Eve.
We can do without importing these western diseases and these rights to deviation.
Radheshyam
Thursday, July 9, 2009
Monday, July 6, 2009
Changed India
An article worth reading for those of us from India – even though some of us are a lot older than the author and we might be “anglo-indians” not “Indians” –yet India was our home for many years.
Sent by Fay Kelly
July 5, 2009
The World
Farewell to an India I Hardly Knew
By ANAND GIRIDHARADAS
MUMBAI, India — The first thing I ever learned about India was that my parents had chosen to leave it.
The country was lost to us in America, where I was born. It had to be assembled in my mind, from the fragments of anecdotes and regular journeys east.
Now, six years after returning to the country my parents left, as I prepare to depart it myself, the mind goes back to the beginning, to my earliest pictures of it.
India, reflected from afar, was late-night phone calls with the news of death. It was calling back relatives who could not afford to call you. It was Hindu ceremonies with saffron and Kit Kat bars on a silver platter.
India, consumed on our visits back, was being fetched from the airport and cooked a meal even in the dead of night. It was sideways hugs that strove to avoid breast contact. It was the chauvinism of uncles who asked about my dreams and ignored my sister’s.
It was wrong, yet easy, to feel that we did India a favor by coming home. We packed our suitcases with things they couldn’t get for themselves: Jif peanut butter, Hellmann’s mayonnaise, Gap khakis. These imports sketched a subtle hierarchy in which they were the wanting relatives and we their benefactors.
My cousins in India would sometimes ask if I was Indian or American. I saw that their self-esteem depended on my answer. “American,” I would say, because it was the truth, and because I felt that to say otherwise would be to accept a lower berth in the world.
What it meant to be American was to be free to invent yourself, to belong to a family and a society in which destiny was believed to be human-made.
I looked around in India and saw everyone in their boxes, not coming fully into their own, replicating lives lived before. If only they came to America, I told myself, so-and-so would be a millionaire entrepreneur; so-and-so would be as confident in her opinions as her husband; so-and-sos’ marriage would be more like my parents’, with verve and swing-dancing lessons and bedtime crossword puzzles; so-and-so would study history and literature, not just bankable practicalities.
I moved to India six years ago in an effort to understand it on my own terms, to render mine what had until then only belonged to my parents.
India was changing when I arrived and has changed dramatically, viscerally, improbably in these 2,000 days: farms giving way to factories; ultra-cheap cars being built; companies buying out rivals abroad. But the greatest change I have witnessed is elsewhere. It is in the mind: Indians now know that they don’t have to leave, as my parents left, to have their personal revolutions.
It took me time to see. At first, my old lenses were still in place — India the frustrating, difficult country — and so I saw only the things I had ever seen.
But as I traveled the land, the data did not fit the framework. The children of the lower castes were hoisting themselves up one diploma and training program at a time. The women were becoming breadwinners through microcredit and decentralized manufacturing. The young people were finding in their cellphones a first zone of individual identity. The couples were ending marriages no matter what “society” thinks, then finding love again. The vegetarians were embracing meat and meat-eaters were turning vegetarian, defining themselves by taste and faith, not caste.
Indians from languorous villages to pulsating cities were making difficult new choices to die other than where they were born, to pursue vocations not their father’s, to live lives imagined within their own skulls. And it was addictive, this improbable rush of hope.
The shift is only just beginning. Most Indians still live impossibly grim lives. Trickle down, here more than most places, is slow. But it is a shift in psychologies, and you rarely meet an Indian untouched by it.
Grabbing hold of their destinies, these Indians became the unlikely cousins of my own immigrant parents in America: restless, ambitious, with dreams vivid only to themselves. But my parents had sought to beat the odds in a bad system, to be statistical flukes that got away.
What has changed since they left is a systemic lifting of the odds for those who stay. It is a milestone in any nation’s life when leaving becomes a choice, not a necessity.
My parents watch me from their perch outside Washington, D.C., and marvel at history’s sense of irony: a son who ended up inventing himself in the country they left, who has written of the self-inventing swagger of a rising generation of Indians, in a country where “self” was once a vulgar word.
At times, my mother wonders if they should have remained, should have waited for their own country’s revolution instead of crashing another’s. And as I leave India now I can only wonder how history would have turned out if the ocean of change had come a generation earlier.
Because it came between their generation and mine, the premise of our family story has been pulled out from beneath us. We are American citizens now, my family, and proudly so. But we must face that we are Americans because of a choice prompted by truths that history has undone. They were true at the choice’s making; in India, I saw their truth boil slowly away.
They don’t crave our mayonnaise and khakis anymore. They no longer angrily berate America, because they are too busy building their own country. Indian accents are now cooler than British ones. No one asks if I feel Indian or American. How delicious to see that unconcern. How fortunate to live in a land you needn’t leave to become your fullest possible self.
And how wondrous, in this time of revolutions, to have had my own here.
I grew up in America defining myself by the soil under my feet, not by the blood in my veins. The soil I shared with everyone else; the blood made me unbearably different. Before I loved India, I loathed it. But that feeling seems now like a relic from a buried past.
I leave now on the journey’s next stretch, with sadness and with joy, humbled by India, grateful to have been at the revolution and to have known the revolutions within.
Sent by Fay Kelly
July 5, 2009
The World
Farewell to an India I Hardly Knew
By ANAND GIRIDHARADAS
MUMBAI, India — The first thing I ever learned about India was that my parents had chosen to leave it.
The country was lost to us in America, where I was born. It had to be assembled in my mind, from the fragments of anecdotes and regular journeys east.
Now, six years after returning to the country my parents left, as I prepare to depart it myself, the mind goes back to the beginning, to my earliest pictures of it.
India, reflected from afar, was late-night phone calls with the news of death. It was calling back relatives who could not afford to call you. It was Hindu ceremonies with saffron and Kit Kat bars on a silver platter.
India, consumed on our visits back, was being fetched from the airport and cooked a meal even in the dead of night. It was sideways hugs that strove to avoid breast contact. It was the chauvinism of uncles who asked about my dreams and ignored my sister’s.
It was wrong, yet easy, to feel that we did India a favor by coming home. We packed our suitcases with things they couldn’t get for themselves: Jif peanut butter, Hellmann’s mayonnaise, Gap khakis. These imports sketched a subtle hierarchy in which they were the wanting relatives and we their benefactors.
My cousins in India would sometimes ask if I was Indian or American. I saw that their self-esteem depended on my answer. “American,” I would say, because it was the truth, and because I felt that to say otherwise would be to accept a lower berth in the world.
What it meant to be American was to be free to invent yourself, to belong to a family and a society in which destiny was believed to be human-made.
I looked around in India and saw everyone in their boxes, not coming fully into their own, replicating lives lived before. If only they came to America, I told myself, so-and-so would be a millionaire entrepreneur; so-and-so would be as confident in her opinions as her husband; so-and-sos’ marriage would be more like my parents’, with verve and swing-dancing lessons and bedtime crossword puzzles; so-and-so would study history and literature, not just bankable practicalities.
I moved to India six years ago in an effort to understand it on my own terms, to render mine what had until then only belonged to my parents.
India was changing when I arrived and has changed dramatically, viscerally, improbably in these 2,000 days: farms giving way to factories; ultra-cheap cars being built; companies buying out rivals abroad. But the greatest change I have witnessed is elsewhere. It is in the mind: Indians now know that they don’t have to leave, as my parents left, to have their personal revolutions.
It took me time to see. At first, my old lenses were still in place — India the frustrating, difficult country — and so I saw only the things I had ever seen.
But as I traveled the land, the data did not fit the framework. The children of the lower castes were hoisting themselves up one diploma and training program at a time. The women were becoming breadwinners through microcredit and decentralized manufacturing. The young people were finding in their cellphones a first zone of individual identity. The couples were ending marriages no matter what “society” thinks, then finding love again. The vegetarians were embracing meat and meat-eaters were turning vegetarian, defining themselves by taste and faith, not caste.
Indians from languorous villages to pulsating cities were making difficult new choices to die other than where they were born, to pursue vocations not their father’s, to live lives imagined within their own skulls. And it was addictive, this improbable rush of hope.
The shift is only just beginning. Most Indians still live impossibly grim lives. Trickle down, here more than most places, is slow. But it is a shift in psychologies, and you rarely meet an Indian untouched by it.
Grabbing hold of their destinies, these Indians became the unlikely cousins of my own immigrant parents in America: restless, ambitious, with dreams vivid only to themselves. But my parents had sought to beat the odds in a bad system, to be statistical flukes that got away.
What has changed since they left is a systemic lifting of the odds for those who stay. It is a milestone in any nation’s life when leaving becomes a choice, not a necessity.
My parents watch me from their perch outside Washington, D.C., and marvel at history’s sense of irony: a son who ended up inventing himself in the country they left, who has written of the self-inventing swagger of a rising generation of Indians, in a country where “self” was once a vulgar word.
At times, my mother wonders if they should have remained, should have waited for their own country’s revolution instead of crashing another’s. And as I leave India now I can only wonder how history would have turned out if the ocean of change had come a generation earlier.
Because it came between their generation and mine, the premise of our family story has been pulled out from beneath us. We are American citizens now, my family, and proudly so. But we must face that we are Americans because of a choice prompted by truths that history has undone. They were true at the choice’s making; in India, I saw their truth boil slowly away.
They don’t crave our mayonnaise and khakis anymore. They no longer angrily berate America, because they are too busy building their own country. Indian accents are now cooler than British ones. No one asks if I feel Indian or American. How delicious to see that unconcern. How fortunate to live in a land you needn’t leave to become your fullest possible self.
And how wondrous, in this time of revolutions, to have had my own here.
I grew up in America defining myself by the soil under my feet, not by the blood in my veins. The soil I shared with everyone else; the blood made me unbearably different. Before I loved India, I loathed it. But that feeling seems now like a relic from a buried past.
I leave now on the journey’s next stretch, with sadness and with joy, humbled by India, grateful to have been at the revolution and to have known the revolutions within.
Tuesday, June 30, 2009
Legalising Gayocracy
Govt soft-pedals on gay law change
OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
New Delhi, June 29: Vocal opposition from religious minority groups and consequent fears of a political backlash have forced the government into cautious — and hasty — retreat on removing the “illegal” tag from homosexuality.
Within 48 hours of indicating a bold move to amend section 377 and give gay people the right to profess their brand of sexuality, the Centre sent out clear signals it was backtracking.
While Union law minister Veerappa Moily claimed he had been “misquoted” as saying the government was planning to legalise homosexuality, health minister Ghulam Nabi Azad spoke of the need for “debate and consensus” on the issue before any move. This is a sure way of putting amendments to section 377 in the cold storage as consensus appears unlikely.
On the heels of objections from the Catholic Church yesterday, an influential Islamic seminary spoke out strongly against lifting the ban on homosexuality, saying “unnatural sex” was against the tenets of Islam.
“Homosexuality is an offence under Shariat law and haram (prohibited) in Islam,” Maulana Abdul Khalik Madrasi, deputy vice-chancellor of the Darul Uloom of Deoband said. Madrasi also asked the government not to repeal IPC Section 377 which criminalises homosexuality.
Terming gay activities as crime, Maulana Salim Kasmi, vice-president of the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board, said homosexuality was punishable under Islamic law and Section 377 should not be tampered with. Other prominent spokespersons for Islamic organisations too have strongly opposed any changes.
The law, home and health ministries are expected to meet soon to discuss the issue.
“We need more debate on the positives and the negatives... and there can’t be a better forum than Parliament,” Azad said. “We need a broad consensus within the government and [other] political parties. I don’t think my personal or anyone else’s personal thinking on this should prevail.”
Asked about his personal views on the issue, Azad said: “I don’t come in that category.”
The debate on Section 377 has simmered in India since the early-1990s but has intensified in recent years with health experts arguing it obstructs action to prevent the spread of HIV infection among men who have sex with men. Non-government agencies have also been calling for a change in the law saying it is used by police to harass individuals for their sexual orientation.
Azad said the debate on the proposal to repeal the law would be multifaceted. Some might link the issue with culture, while others may point out its implications for infections or the potential of the existing law to induce harassment. “We need a debate... and then a broad consensus.”
But lawyers who have campaigned for the repeal of Section 377 said history suggests that a majority view or consensus may not be easy to obtain on progressive laws.
“When Raja Rammohun Roy opposed sati and advocated widow remarriage in the early 19th century, there was massive opposition to it — specially from upper-caste Hindus,” said Leena Menghaney, a civil rights lawyer in New Delhi. “In every era, there are unpopular reforms to be made.”
The Government surely should be having more important topics for legislation than legalising gayocracy, if I may coin the word.
This diversion is practised by about 0.01% of our population.
However, this percent is very vocal, made up of artist and media personalities and public school educated children who did not have the benefit of co-ed school but who control the media.
We already have sufficient divisions in society without adding this one.
OUR SPECIAL CORRESPONDENT
New Delhi, June 29: Vocal opposition from religious minority groups and consequent fears of a political backlash have forced the government into cautious — and hasty — retreat on removing the “illegal” tag from homosexuality.
Within 48 hours of indicating a bold move to amend section 377 and give gay people the right to profess their brand of sexuality, the Centre sent out clear signals it was backtracking.
While Union law minister Veerappa Moily claimed he had been “misquoted” as saying the government was planning to legalise homosexuality, health minister Ghulam Nabi Azad spoke of the need for “debate and consensus” on the issue before any move. This is a sure way of putting amendments to section 377 in the cold storage as consensus appears unlikely.
On the heels of objections from the Catholic Church yesterday, an influential Islamic seminary spoke out strongly against lifting the ban on homosexuality, saying “unnatural sex” was against the tenets of Islam.
“Homosexuality is an offence under Shariat law and haram (prohibited) in Islam,” Maulana Abdul Khalik Madrasi, deputy vice-chancellor of the Darul Uloom of Deoband said. Madrasi also asked the government not to repeal IPC Section 377 which criminalises homosexuality.
Terming gay activities as crime, Maulana Salim Kasmi, vice-president of the All-India Muslim Personal Law Board, said homosexuality was punishable under Islamic law and Section 377 should not be tampered with. Other prominent spokespersons for Islamic organisations too have strongly opposed any changes.
The law, home and health ministries are expected to meet soon to discuss the issue.
“We need more debate on the positives and the negatives... and there can’t be a better forum than Parliament,” Azad said. “We need a broad consensus within the government and [other] political parties. I don’t think my personal or anyone else’s personal thinking on this should prevail.”
Asked about his personal views on the issue, Azad said: “I don’t come in that category.”
The debate on Section 377 has simmered in India since the early-1990s but has intensified in recent years with health experts arguing it obstructs action to prevent the spread of HIV infection among men who have sex with men. Non-government agencies have also been calling for a change in the law saying it is used by police to harass individuals for their sexual orientation.
Azad said the debate on the proposal to repeal the law would be multifaceted. Some might link the issue with culture, while others may point out its implications for infections or the potential of the existing law to induce harassment. “We need a debate... and then a broad consensus.”
But lawyers who have campaigned for the repeal of Section 377 said history suggests that a majority view or consensus may not be easy to obtain on progressive laws.
“When Raja Rammohun Roy opposed sati and advocated widow remarriage in the early 19th century, there was massive opposition to it — specially from upper-caste Hindus,” said Leena Menghaney, a civil rights lawyer in New Delhi. “In every era, there are unpopular reforms to be made.”
The Government surely should be having more important topics for legislation than legalising gayocracy, if I may coin the word.
This diversion is practised by about 0.01% of our population.
However, this percent is very vocal, made up of artist and media personalities and public school educated children who did not have the benefit of co-ed school but who control the media.
We already have sufficient divisions in society without adding this one.
Minister Exerts Pressure of judge
Union Minister tried to influence me, says HC Judge
PTI | Chennai
In a startling revelation, a Madras High Court Judge told an open court that a Union Minister sought to influence him to grant anticipatory bail to a doctor and his son in a forged mark sheets case filed by CBI.
An agitated Justice R Reghupathy last evening said "a Union Minister talked to me and sought to influence me to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners."
Justice Reghupathy made the remarks when the advocate, appearing for S Kirub Shridhar, a third year student in a private medical college in Puducherry, and his doctor father Krishnamoorthy, complained that the judge was not granting bail to his clients on the basis of prosecution submissions.
The advocate's remarks came when the judge said he was not inclined to grant any relief as their pleas had been rejected by him on June 15 itself.
Annoyed, the judge retorted saying a "Union Minister talked to me about the matter. You yourself know every thing. Unless an unconditional apology is tendered by you, I will incorporate every detail in my order," he said.
Justice R Reghupathy said he would also be writing to the Prime Minister on the "pressure exerted" on him.
The judge, however, did not name the Minister. The CBI had filed a case against the father-son duo for allegedly using the services of a Puducherry University official and a middle man to inflate the marks of Shridhar.
I suppose, we all know that these type of things occur but is never high-lighted.
I would like to thank Justice R Raghupathy for letting us know.
However, he could serve us better if he would name the minister.
Since this has ocurred in Tamil Nadu, it must be a Union Minister from Tamil Nadu.
Seeing the ruckus created by Karumanidhi during the ministry formation, it does not surprise us.
He tried to get corrupt ministers into the cabinet, so why should this surprise us?
PTI | Chennai
In a startling revelation, a Madras High Court Judge told an open court that a Union Minister sought to influence him to grant anticipatory bail to a doctor and his son in a forged mark sheets case filed by CBI.
An agitated Justice R Reghupathy last evening said "a Union Minister talked to me and sought to influence me to grant anticipatory bail to the petitioners."
Justice Reghupathy made the remarks when the advocate, appearing for S Kirub Shridhar, a third year student in a private medical college in Puducherry, and his doctor father Krishnamoorthy, complained that the judge was not granting bail to his clients on the basis of prosecution submissions.
The advocate's remarks came when the judge said he was not inclined to grant any relief as their pleas had been rejected by him on June 15 itself.
Annoyed, the judge retorted saying a "Union Minister talked to me about the matter. You yourself know every thing. Unless an unconditional apology is tendered by you, I will incorporate every detail in my order," he said.
Justice R Reghupathy said he would also be writing to the Prime Minister on the "pressure exerted" on him.
The judge, however, did not name the Minister. The CBI had filed a case against the father-son duo for allegedly using the services of a Puducherry University official and a middle man to inflate the marks of Shridhar.
I suppose, we all know that these type of things occur but is never high-lighted.
I would like to thank Justice R Raghupathy for letting us know.
However, he could serve us better if he would name the minister.
Since this has ocurred in Tamil Nadu, it must be a Union Minister from Tamil Nadu.
Seeing the ruckus created by Karumanidhi during the ministry formation, it does not surprise us.
He tried to get corrupt ministers into the cabinet, so why should this surprise us?
Sunday, June 28, 2009
Eating Fruits, how, when, why?
The correct way and time for eating fruits. Sent by Prakash Bhartia.
I may have posted this earlier, but it is sufficiently important for a repeat.
EATING FRUIT - Guide
We all think eating fruits means just buying fruits, cutting it and just popping it into our mouths. It's not as easy as you think It's important to know how and when to eat..
What is the correct way of eating fruits?
IT MEANS NOT EATING FRUITS AFTER YOUR MEALS! - FRUITS SHOULD BE EATEN ON AN EMPTY STOMACH.
If you eat fruit on an empty stomach, it will play a major role to detoxify your system, supplying you with a great deal of energy for weight loss and other life activities.
FRUIT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT FOOD - Let's say you eat two slices of bread and then a slice of fruit.. The slice of fruit is ready to go straight through the stomach into the intestines, but it is prevented from doing so.
In the meantime the whole meal rots and ferments and turns to acid.. The minute the fruit comes into contact with the food in the stomach and digestive juices, the entire mass of food begins to spoil.
So please eat your fruits on an empty stomach or before your meals! You have heard people complaining - every time I eat water-melon I burp, when I eat durian (fruit from Asia with a foul smell yet delicious flavor) my stomach bloats up, when I eat a banana I feel like running to the toilet etc. - actually all this will not arise if you eat the fruit on an empty stomach. The fruit mixes with the putrefying other food and produces gas and hence you will bloat!
Graying hair, balding, nervous outburst, and dark circles under the eyes - all these will not happen if you take fruits on an empty stomach.
There is no such thing as some fruits, like orange and lemon are acidic, because all fruits become alkaline in our body, according to Dr. Herbert Shelton who did research on this matter. If you have mastered the correct way of eating fruits, you have the Secret of beauty, longevity, health, energy, happiness and normal weight.
When you need to drink fruit juice - drink only fresh fruit juice, NOT from the cans.. Don't even drink juice that has been heated up. Don't eat cooked fruits because you don't get the nutrients at all. You only get to taste.
Cooking destroys all the vitamins.
But eating a whole fruit is better than drinking the juice. If you should drink the juice, drink it mouthful by mouthful slowly, because you must let it mix with your saliva before swallowing it.
You can go on a 3-day fruit fast to cleanse your body. Just eat fruits and drink fruit juice throughout the 3 days and you will be surprised when your friends tell you how radiant you look!
KIWI: Tiny but mighty. This is a good source of potassium, magnesium, vitamin E & fiber. Its vitamin C content is twice that of an orange.
APPLE: An apple a day keeps the doctor away? Although an apple has a low vitamin C content, it has antioxidants & flavonoid which enhances the activity of vitamin C thereby helping to lower the risks of colon cancer, heart attack & stroke.
STRAWBERRY: Protective Fruit. Strawberries have the highest total antioxidant power among major fruits & protect the body from cancer-causing, blood vessel-clogging free radicals.
ORANGE: Sweetest medicine, eating 2 to 4 oranges a day may help keep colds away, lower cholesterol, prevent & dissolve kidney stones as well as lessens the risk of colon cancer.
WATERMELON: Coolest thirst quencher. Composed of 92% water, it is also packed with a giant dose of glutathione, which helps boost our immune system. They are also a key source of lycopene - the cancer fighting oxidant. Other nutrients found in watermelon are vitamin C & Potassium
GUAVA & PAPAYA: Top awards for vitamin C. They are the clear winners for their high vitamin C content. Guava is also rich in fiber, which helps prevent constipation. Papaya is rich in carotene; this is good for your eyes.
Drinking Cold water after a meal = Cancer! Can you believe this??
For those who like to drink cold water, this article is applicable to you.
It is nice to have a cup of cold drink after a meal. However, the cold water will solidify the oily stuff that you have just consumed. It will slow down the digestion.. Once this 'sludge' reacts with the acid, it will break down and be absorbed by the intestine faster than the solid food. It will line the intestine. Very soon, this will turn into fats and lead to cancer. It is best to drink hot soup or warm water after a meal.
A cardiologist says if everyone who gets this mail sends it to 10 people, you can be sure that we'll save at least one life. Read this...It could save your life!
I may have posted this earlier, but it is sufficiently important for a repeat.
EATING FRUIT - Guide
We all think eating fruits means just buying fruits, cutting it and just popping it into our mouths. It's not as easy as you think It's important to know how and when to eat..
What is the correct way of eating fruits?
IT MEANS NOT EATING FRUITS AFTER YOUR MEALS! - FRUITS SHOULD BE EATEN ON AN EMPTY STOMACH.
If you eat fruit on an empty stomach, it will play a major role to detoxify your system, supplying you with a great deal of energy for weight loss and other life activities.
FRUIT IS THE MOST IMPORTANT FOOD - Let's say you eat two slices of bread and then a slice of fruit.. The slice of fruit is ready to go straight through the stomach into the intestines, but it is prevented from doing so.
In the meantime the whole meal rots and ferments and turns to acid.. The minute the fruit comes into contact with the food in the stomach and digestive juices, the entire mass of food begins to spoil.
So please eat your fruits on an empty stomach or before your meals! You have heard people complaining - every time I eat water-melon I burp, when I eat durian (fruit from Asia with a foul smell yet delicious flavor) my stomach bloats up, when I eat a banana I feel like running to the toilet etc. - actually all this will not arise if you eat the fruit on an empty stomach. The fruit mixes with the putrefying other food and produces gas and hence you will bloat!
Graying hair, balding, nervous outburst, and dark circles under the eyes - all these will not happen if you take fruits on an empty stomach.
There is no such thing as some fruits, like orange and lemon are acidic, because all fruits become alkaline in our body, according to Dr. Herbert Shelton who did research on this matter. If you have mastered the correct way of eating fruits, you have the Secret of beauty, longevity, health, energy, happiness and normal weight.
When you need to drink fruit juice - drink only fresh fruit juice, NOT from the cans.. Don't even drink juice that has been heated up. Don't eat cooked fruits because you don't get the nutrients at all. You only get to taste.
Cooking destroys all the vitamins.
But eating a whole fruit is better than drinking the juice. If you should drink the juice, drink it mouthful by mouthful slowly, because you must let it mix with your saliva before swallowing it.
You can go on a 3-day fruit fast to cleanse your body. Just eat fruits and drink fruit juice throughout the 3 days and you will be surprised when your friends tell you how radiant you look!
KIWI: Tiny but mighty. This is a good source of potassium, magnesium, vitamin E & fiber. Its vitamin C content is twice that of an orange.
APPLE: An apple a day keeps the doctor away? Although an apple has a low vitamin C content, it has antioxidants & flavonoid which enhances the activity of vitamin C thereby helping to lower the risks of colon cancer, heart attack & stroke.
STRAWBERRY: Protective Fruit. Strawberries have the highest total antioxidant power among major fruits & protect the body from cancer-causing, blood vessel-clogging free radicals.
ORANGE: Sweetest medicine, eating 2 to 4 oranges a day may help keep colds away, lower cholesterol, prevent & dissolve kidney stones as well as lessens the risk of colon cancer.
WATERMELON: Coolest thirst quencher. Composed of 92% water, it is also packed with a giant dose of glutathione, which helps boost our immune system. They are also a key source of lycopene - the cancer fighting oxidant. Other nutrients found in watermelon are vitamin C & Potassium
GUAVA & PAPAYA: Top awards for vitamin C. They are the clear winners for their high vitamin C content. Guava is also rich in fiber, which helps prevent constipation. Papaya is rich in carotene; this is good for your eyes.
Drinking Cold water after a meal = Cancer! Can you believe this??
For those who like to drink cold water, this article is applicable to you.
It is nice to have a cup of cold drink after a meal. However, the cold water will solidify the oily stuff that you have just consumed. It will slow down the digestion.. Once this 'sludge' reacts with the acid, it will break down and be absorbed by the intestine faster than the solid food. It will line the intestine. Very soon, this will turn into fats and lead to cancer. It is best to drink hot soup or warm water after a meal.
A cardiologist says if everyone who gets this mail sends it to 10 people, you can be sure that we'll save at least one life. Read this...It could save your life!
A Cake for All Occasions
It took me a second, but make sure you read the story under the picture.
Keep in mind this actually did happen.
This cake is for someone who was moving office to a new job.
Keith
Okay so this is how the cake was ordered.
Wal-Mart Employee: 'Hello 'dis be Wal-Mart’s, how can I help you?'
Customer: ' I would like to order a cake for a going away party this week.'
Wal-Mart Employee: 'What you want on da cake?'
Customer: 'Best Wishes Suzanne' and underneath that 'we will miss you'.
STOP LAUGHING!
You can't fix stupidity,but this is true
Keep in mind this actually did happen.
This cake is for someone who was moving office to a new job.
Keith
Okay so this is how the cake was ordered.
Wal-Mart Employee: 'Hello 'dis be Wal-Mart’s, how can I help you?'
Customer: ' I would like to order a cake for a going away party this week.'
Wal-Mart Employee: 'What you want on da cake?'
Customer: 'Best Wishes Suzanne' and underneath that 'we will miss you'.
STOP LAUGHING!
You can't fix stupidity,but this is true
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
