Yikes! Shanks!! I was NOT AT ALL offended!! It takes a lot more than a thread like this to offend me. Whatever gave you the notion? Am very curious to know what it was in my post that made you think I was? Was it the hysterical shudder!?
My dear, I thought that would make everyone laugh! I constantly fret at this way of communication; it is sometimes rather hard to transliterate the tone of a post, isn't it? Rest assured, I wasn't.
Coming back to the issue -
The problem is in the intermixion of religion and nations, shanks. Whenever you adjectivise a religon and tag it on to a nation, the immediate implication is one of a fundamentalist state. India, like the rest of the world, has invested significant time and effort in keeping religion and governance separate and in maintatining that divide. Which is why I baulked at the loose construction. These things catch on before you know it and will sooner or later, set the vicious cycle of misrepresentation to serve petty interests rolling.
It is not mean to deny any community the right to tag on their relgion to the name of a state. Religion is a private business, is not the business of the state and I strongly feel, that any religious or sectarian group that would like that position altered, should NOT be pandered to. Nations like India that are intensely culturally diverse and that have always prided themselves on that fact, should always be on their guard to preserve unity in diversity.
Relax! oh cheerful one!
