If a motion picture can be banned from public display on the pretext that it might hurt the feelings of certain religious communities, shouldn't religion be banned on the context that it has been hurting and has the potency to continue to hurt the feelings of one and all?
If one go through the religious scripture of any and all religion, one would find ample amount of evidence that clearly put forth the point that each and every religion condemns the believers of each and every other religion in addition to condemning non-believers and certain stratum of their own religious community.
Coming back to the point, although I haven't seen the motion picture yet, but what I have heard from the news channel, stating the reason for the ban of the motion picture is that the motion picture speaks about some terrorist organisation outside the political boundary of Indian Republic and some organisation inside the political boundary of Indian Republic feels offended by that.
I don't see any reason why any organisation inside the Indian political boundary should feel offended by whatever has been said about the fictitious/non-fictitious terrorist organisation until and unless they are affiliated to that terrorist organisation outside the Indian political boundary.
Some political organisation are playing political games in order to gain some political mileage out of the whole issue and hence have banned the motion picture from public display in their ruling state on the pretext that the public display of the motion picture will disrupt the law and order situation. Well, in that state, all I have to say is that the anti-social elements who disrupt the law and order situation should be blocked instead of banning the motion picture.
On this context, for the political organisation who have banned Vishwaroop I will quote Benjamin Franklin, "Those who desire to give up freedom in order to gain security will not have, nor do they deserve, either one."