Desicritics Comments on Can Non-Christians Join Christian University Groups?

Comment by NeottCeaw

Sat, 26 Sep 2009 16:22:49 EDT

Питерские горячие новости Сезон о�...оты 2 скачать безвозмездно

Comment by anannowsmeS

Wed, 23 Sep 2009 05:19:37 EDT

cartoon hentai movie <img>http://tabget.com/jpg/2.jpg hardcore black anal sex anal free gay hot sex ebony gay cum best cam girl web non sexual harassment sexy maria sharapova wallpaper asian slut tiny gallery vette vicky lesbian strap on porn nude man in public beastie boy clothing

Comment by wpwipp5ash

Sun, 15 Jun 2008 20:52:36 EDT

pxkdsogsjoj8m4 p5d6slaa8v90qqcp [URL=http://www.685686.com/294082.html] 6ug3t58h9pm2jci [/URL] 85qo0gtf

Comment by m1y803f4l7

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:23:25 EDT

wns3vqt4wiystce http://www.194405.com/1095890.html iyvmx6f4rz

Comment by m1y803f4l7

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:22:58 EDT

wns3vqt4wiystce 17raeypgaxz3cdurr iyvmx6f4rz

Comment by m1y803f4l7

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:22:23 EDT

wns3vqt4wiystce [URL=http://www.334489.com/145084.html] 7zkxytye58 [/URL] iyvmx6f4rz

Comment by m1y803f4l7

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 15:22:21 EDT

wns3vqt4wiystce 06ee5dhgsu202nsg [URL=http://www.334489.com/145084.html] 7zkxytye58 [/URL] iyvmx6f4rz

Comment by kela

Sat, 15 Sep 2007 08:43:17 EDT

Man Singh your Hyperbolic vitriol is really becoming Hyperbore.For the last time the British did nothing to destroy the Indian educational system.Most of the Christian schools in India were established way back between the 18-19 th century and were primarily meant for British and Anglo- Indian children.In fact we should be grateful that these schools as well as their administrators began accepting Indian students and even stayed on after Independence.And they did a pretty good job assimilating India's diverse communities and cultures.For every one hater like you there probably thousands who are grateful and appreciate the christian missionary schools. the fact that the gurukul system lost favour with the masses was probably because they were closed systems which ignored their surroundings and didn't accept change and we all know what happens to those who refuse to change,they stagnate and eventually die

Comment by Irfan

Sat, 15 Sep 2007 03:42:55 EDT

To Mansingh: We all deviated from the main Topic, the topic was about christians allowing non-christians in their institution, anyways, in reply to your comments, about the origins of untouchability, honestly I do not know much about Hindu scriptures,what all I know is from TV serials or friendly Hindu sources etc. Unlike Manusmriti nobody can deny the authenticity of Mahabharat, in that you see the Pandavas (who were assumed to be of high virtue) deny Karn his status even after he was given kingship on the basis that he is born a low caste. That may give some insight that the Caste system is inherent part of culture. Well this is my assumption I could be wrong and doesn't mean to offend, but you need to check your thesis that put all the blame of castism on Muslims. And reminding muslims everytime that there forefathers were Hindus is not bad, it could be or may not be right, but reminding that they were converted due to their weakness or greed or brainwashing is unacceptable.

Comment by A. S. Mathew

Fri, 14 Sep 2007 18:44:01 EDT

The present Supreme court Chief Justice is from Kerala. He belongs to a lower class. When he went to a school, the high class Hindus won't sit near to him. When the teacher openly asked the students, who will sit close to him? Two Muslim students sat close to him, and the Christian boys told the teacher, we will ask our parent's permission and do accordingly. The next day, with the permission from their parents, the Christian boys sat close to him. This is in reponse to No 72 Irfan. As a Christian, I tell other Christians that we need to learn from the Muslims, how they worship "ALLAH" with equality, rich and poor sitting on the floor. Perhaps, the least discrimination is found in Muslim religion in the place of worship.

Comment by Man singh

Fri, 14 Sep 2007 18:41:02 EDT

Kela #73 "Mr man singh so you're actually saying the brahmins were a tool in the hands of the other land owning upper castes?" A certain minority component among Brahmins. Yes. They are rich today as otehr landlords. But rest of teh Brahmins who fought with invadres physically intellectually and morally are very poor weak landless and frustrated as secular propagnadist have put blames of all sins of landl lords on Brahm,ins in general and these poor fellows are suffereing out of it and are demoralised core. Chrsitain misisonereis(not all christians please) and Muslim jehadis(not all muslims please) are the biggest beneficiaries of this character assassination of Brahmins as they get free field fro conversion without any resistance that used to come from brahmins in earlier times. "south india were already under company rule in the 1700's." But there was no interference of British in education sector till then. Hence by that time it were pathshalas, madarsas and gurukuls that used to teach the people of almost all sections of society depending on their requirement. Of course you can not compare with todays situation. Point is that it were the Britsih who destroyed Indian education system and replaced it with english education system to permanently enslave us. Christian missions played a treacherous role as well to associate with British. If credit fro freedom might not have been given to Gandhi/nehru who used to be the most gavouraite choice of Bristh vis a vis Netaji, Bhagat Singh or savarkar, Christian misisonereis either might have been kicked out of teh country or put in prison by this time. thanks to Nehru British system is still being used in India to rule its massses and that's why crooks like teresa are getting Bharat ratna. Therefore I request all India loving people irrespective of cast creed or religion please read Indian history with Indian glasses and not with imperilaist glasses. Imperialist invaders will always try to denigrate us and our culture. Please have look with our point of view. You know lions have their own view about Hunters. But hunters always glorify tehmsleves and sing theor own glory. But for lions they are nothing more then cruel invaders.

Comment by Man Singh

Fri, 14 Sep 2007 18:23:09 EDT

Irfan #72 There are evidence that by 6th century ie time of Harshvardhna country was dominated by Budhism that never recognise castims. Muslim Arabs strated invading in 7th century. It is big lie to say that "but untouchability is age old, sanctioned by many of the Hindu scriptures( Manu Smriti is one which predate Islamic invasion by more than 1000 years)." Smritis are opinions of some people and not scriptures and there was no time in history when Indian society was ruled by smritis. can you tell when India was ruled as per manusmriti? manu smriti was made `scripture' only during muslim rule when landlords appointed by invaders established sytem similar to slavery Arabs used to practice. India was not having any slavery system before that. " The story that Brahmins evolved from the mouth of God and Sudras from legs, define the basics of class division." Does your statement says untouchability anywhere? Does legs of a human being are untoichable to hands ? Moreover we touch the feet of God ie Shudra part of God then how come Shudra be an untouchable. There are many evidences in ramayan and other puranas to prove that shudras to be involved in all temple worship etc. though Bhakti marg was recommended as best way for them to get Moksha due to nature of work they perform. Moreover your statement never prove that varna is based by birth. Bhagwadgeta chapter 18 very clearly says that it is natural Gunas and karmas ie tendencies and actions of a person beased on humans has been clasified to set the optimum method of their liberation as a Doctir gived best medicine depending upon situation of the patient. "It is bad to put all the blame on Muslims, in fact the cast differences in 1000 AD helped the Muslims to set a foot in India,(Alberunis Tarikh-hind mentions about the class divisions in India of that time)" Alberuni was associate of invaders and he will prefer to write the worst about invaded country and their people. Hindu forefathers of Muslims of today under greed terror or ignorance surrendered to invaders and converted. After conversion they are brainwashed so negatively about their native culture and religion of their forfathers so that they may not think of coming back home. Alberuni's writings form teh part of same imperialistic attitude. Britsih als did the same to permannently enslave Indians. You sound to be a sensible muslim. Please think deeply what an invader , dacoit or tyrant will write about invaded and defeated race. That's what Muslim invaders and British invaders wrote about our common forfathers and unfortunately we belive them?

Comment by kela

Fri, 14 Sep 2007 01:15:09 EDT

Mr man singh so you're actually saying the brahmins were a tool in the hands of the other land owning upper castes? "Don'nt talk nonsense now. Read the composition of the students based on casts and community before commenting. Even muslim women were registered in schools." i am not typing non-sense.You haven't mentioned what the survey was about?was it a report on the indigenous schooling system ?as far as i know Thomas Munro was a soldier with the East India company and he was made governor of madras in 1820.many parts of south india were already under company rule in the 1700's.And before british rule the muslims were ruling

Comment by Irfan

Thu, 13 Sep 2007 02:00:57 EDT

For Man Singh #2 : You put all the blame from castism to untouchability on the Muslims. You mean everything started by the invasion of Mahmud of Ghazni, you may be partly right, but untouchability is age old, sanctioned by many of the Hindu scriptures( Manu Smriti is one which predate Islamic invasion by more than 1000 years). The story that Brahmins evolved from the mouth and Sudras from legs, define the basics of class division. It is bad to put all the blame on Muslims, in fact the cast differences in 1000 AD helped the Muslims to set a foot in India,(Alberunis Tarikh-hind mentions about the class divisions in India of that time) Thanks

Comment by Man Singh

Wed, 12 Sep 2007 14:09:38 EDT

Kela # 67 "Francois Gautier is a RSS/BJP mark." being a RSS/BJP mark is not a crime ? You challenge the data published by him. he gave an example of Sulabh International "That report of Sir Thomas Munro from which you quote "Thomas Munro reported that for areas of the Madras Presidency "every village had a school". Later as Governor of the Madras Presidency he reviewed reports to estimate that "there is one school for every 1000 of the population". Whatever you call them schools gurukul or Madarasa, literacy rate before British rule in India waa much better then it is even today and you are accepting it. Good. " - it says schools,it doesnt say gurukuls which were the "indigenous" institutions for imparting education to upper castes." Don'nt talk nonsense now. Read the composition of the students based on casts and community before commenting. Even muslim women were registered in schools. "u mention landlords,since when did lowercaste start owning land? only after independence and thanks to land reformation acts like the communists did in kerala" This reflects again your ignorance mathew. Jaat, Gurjar, Yadav and Kurmi all are landlords and fall in OBC catergory today. please verify facts before giving opinions. "Again most of the christian missionaries arrived in India much before the British arrived.The SYrian catholics of kerala and then the portguese came much before the british." Mathew Syrian catholics are well respected in India. They never converted anybody. They rather stick to Indian culture and traditions and never created separatism. Missioneries associated with Putgese and Britsih acted as their agents and did the ground work for their imperialism and shown cruelty and assault on Indian people. "Moreover the british unlike the muslims were not botehred about changing indian culture .they came to loot and plunder." This statememnt is absolute lie. Britsih were more shrewed and cruel then muslims. Muslims did physiacl damage while British damaged the whole educational system of India and established sort of permanent mental slavery on Indians. This statement of yours was sued to dilute anger of Indians against Britsih during freedom movement to demonise muslims. In reality Muslims in many aspects were better then British. At least they were truthful and never hide what they did. British and christian missioneries are crooks and they do things clandstinely. Thye have motives behind each of their acts. Your defence of British rule proves that christian missions worked hand in hand with imperilaists and helped in enslaving India. It so shameful. isn'nt it? "The talk of Brhamin proverty is just a myth" What a cruel statement is it? You talk of jesus's love and compassion for humanity on one side and trying to give blow to a dying person only because brahmins in spite of their poverty challenged chrsitains on intellectula and philosophical level? out of 50 million Brahmins may be few are landlords, may be children of these landlords Brahmins are government officers but remaining 45 million are in such a despearte situation and working as priests at Rs 500 a month of less? There are many who are illetral and can not act even as priests. "i've never come across any so far." I invite you to my village and I will show you how brahmins are as economically bad as SC. "Brhamins hold high positions in the executive and even monopolise the private sector such as the media.I know of many brahmins who get top jobs because of their connections and not their ability" Yes these all brahmins are from landlords background. Just investigate kela. They are part of those traitors team who associated with foreign invaders like chrsitian missioneries and enjoying the fruits of their `gaddari' with the motherland. Therefore they are not in top positions because they are Brahmins but because they are landlords. Therefore stop demonising brahmins for the sins of traitor landlords. there are many landlords like Rajshekhar reddy Andhra CM who are christians also. It has become a fashion to blame Brahmins for wrongdoings of landlords in india. Most of the congress leaders like Arjun Singh, Shivraaj patil, Rajshekahra Reddy (Christian) Ajit Jogi, VP Singh, Kapil Sibbal, S jaypal Reddy and many more who were opressive landlords and enjoying in free India as well. same way a fraction among Brahmins may be rich and influencial, rest are weak and poor. kela, theories established by British propagandists and their associate missionereis against Brahmins are being challenged with facts and figeures. You also plese come with evidence when (during what era) of history Brahmins stopped other community from going to schools. India was ruled by Budhsist from 327 BC till 7th century By Muslims from 7th century to 18th Century By Christain British 18th century till 1947 Secular constitiution 1947 till date? When the hell Brahmins were in dominating position in last 2500 years? Yes before 2500 years of course anybody educated and morally strong person was called `Brahmin' and hence naturally just like today those who qualify competition get admissions. same way those qualified during those days got admisisons. Why you are demonising poor Brahmins to shield Britsih invaders, christian missioneries and landlords appointed by these foreign invaders? Do you any solid evidence to prove your points others then simply parroting views of imperialists kela?

Comment by Chandra

Wed, 12 Sep 2007 07:34:20 EDT

Kela Seems you are back to your original self. Good :-). I am definitely happy to see you around. Just ensure that you are not offending people. Ok, to your point. Nobody is preventing people from converting. I have only said, bribery and hocus pocus should not be allowed. That is exploitation. It is not allowed in elections and should not be allowed in conversions Here is my original statement "A majority of Adults in India choosing christianity do it either due to hocus pocus or because they are offered money. No wonder the demographic group most likely to 'choose' christianity are the uneducated and poor. Therefore it is a big deal" rgds

Comment by kela

Wed, 12 Sep 2007 05:36:43 EDT

Hi Chandra,those rules are one thing and actual implementation another.Everyone knows what goes on during elections :).However my point was if you can trust them to vote our countries leaders surely they are good enough to decide which religion to follow :)

Comment by Chandra

Wed, 12 Sep 2007 03:40:51 EDT

Kela 56 Welcome back!! About voting, I am sure you are aware of election malpractice rules that clearly state that you cannot pay money to someone for their vote :-). This is the same.

Comment by kela

Wed, 12 Sep 2007 01:04:51 EDT

Francois Gautier is a RSS/BJP mark. That report of Sir Thomas Munro from which you quote "Thomas Munro reported that for areas of the Madras Presidency "every village had a school". Later as Governor of the Madras Presidency he reviewed reports to estimate that "there is one school for every 1000 of the population"." - it says schools,it doesnt say gurukuls which were the "indigenous" institutions for imparting education to upper castes. u mention landlords,since when did lowercaste start owning land? only after independence and thanks to land reformation acts like the communists did in kerala Again most of the christian missionaries arrived in India much before the British arrived.The SYrian catholics of kerala and then the portguese came much before the british.Moreover the british unlike the muslims were not botehred about changing indian culture .they came to loot and plunder. The talk of Brhamin proverty is just a myth,i've never come across any so far.Brhamins hold high positions in the executive and even monopolise the private sector such as the media.I know of many brahmins who get top jobs because of their connections and not their ability

Comment by Man Singh

Tue, 11 Sep 2007 16:14:04 EDT

Kela # 65 The refernce book is alreday marked in my post. It was The Beautiful Tree Dharampal published by (Biblia Impex, Delhi, 1983}. Original report of Sir Thomas Munro may be found in archives of madreas Presidency and British National archives in London probably. Again yoiu are using wrong wordings under infulence of imperialist propagands. Right wordings is `landlords' and not upper cast. Situation of landless upper cast is as bed as landless OBC or SC/ST. I have seen Brahmins cleaning toilets. Therefore we should stop blaming Brahmins for the sins of greedy landlords appointed by foreign invaders. I put evidence prooving that it is a big lie that Brahmins monopolised education. You can not bring a single evidence in this regard. Think little bit beyong imperialists propagnda kela. 700 year Muslims ruled the country. 200 years British ruled the country. last 50 years secular constitution ruled the country. When the hell Brahmins monopolised the education? Read www.rediff.com/Are Brahmins the Dalits of today? May 23, 2006 By Francois Gautier Therefore we should stop penalising Brahmins for the sins of greedy landlords appointed by foreign invaders. Of course there might be some brahmins among landlorfds as well.

Comment by kela

Tue, 11 Sep 2007 14:52:31 EDT

a handful of british managed to rule india with the help of the upper castes..divide and rule like you mentioned.as regards all that data tell me where can i find those original records ?it is no lie when i say that brahmins had monopolised education.

Comment by Man Singh

Tue, 11 Sep 2007 10:52:03 EDT

Kela #63 "You see the Hindu upper castes thrived on denying education to the lower castes which make up more than 50% of India's population." can you bring some evidence to support your ststaement other then some leis spread by imperialists to `divide and rule' and chrsitain missioneries associated in such lies. India was rulked by Muslims for 700 years and Britsih by 200 years when the hell upper cast were having a say in making a decision who should be educated and who should be not? last 55 years India is being rules by secular constitution. Please tell the people which time period in India history upper cast ruled the education system of India? Yes landlords appointed by foreign invaders dominated scene of life in India for last 1000 years and these landlords come from a wide range of communities upper as well lower. Thakurs (upper cast), yadav landlords (OBC), Jaatlandlords (OBC) Kurmu landlords (OBC) Lodha (OBC) landlords. To open your eyes I would like to mention a educational survey of India in 1821 by British before creating english education policy, which very clearly mentuiones that around 40% of students are coming from SC/OBC communities. This report publihsed by madras presidency speaks volumes about ststus of various communities before Britsih established their educational system after destroying madarsa, Gurukul, pathshala system of tradition India those these. Brish crookedly tried to `demonise the victims' and christian missioneries due to their vested interests tried toi be the heroes. Truth is that Indian educational system was deliberately destroyed. Only Christian missions were having resources to establish schoos those days under Britsih patronage. Within 50 years of independence scenerio has changed. Non Christians are opening schools nowadays and you will see after 150 years monopoly of christiam missions will be completely broken. you have to give 200 years time for a community opressed for 1000 years by foreign invaders. Clearly culprit is not so demonised `upper cast' but the Britsih imperialists and their local associates ie Chriistian misisoneries who helped imperiliats invaders to esecute their plans. After independence of India though such traitors should have been kicked out of India, but pro Britsih Nehru kept them in by compromising the gignity of this ancient nation. I am quoting some of the exerpts: I draw upon Shri Dharampal's book. The Beautiful Tree, (Biblia Impex, Delhi, 1983} extensively to demonstrate this. Shri Dharmpal, a noted Gandhian and historian, did extensive research in India and abroad and draws mainly from British records of 18th and early 19th centuries. He draws heavily from the reports and writings of English officers (not historians) like Thumas Munro, John Bright, William Lam, and William Digby, Dr. G.W. Leitner and others. In 1812-13, Thomas Munro reported that for areas of the Madras Presidency "every village had a school". Later as Governor of the Madras Presidency he reviewed reports to estimate that "there is one school for every 1000 of the population". William Adam, a former Baptist missionary turned Journalist, in first report in 1835 observed that every village had at least one school; and that there seemed to be about 1,00,000 schools in Bengal and Bihar in the 1830s. G.L.Prendergast, Bombay Presidency council member stated in 1821 "that in the newly extended Presidency of Bombay "there is hardly a village, great or small, throughout our territories, in which there is not at least one school, and in larger villages more." In his report on indigenous education in the Punjab, Dr. G.W. Leitner, one time Principal of Government College, Lahore, and for some time acting Director of Public Instruction in the Punjab, stated that "there was not a mosque, a temple, a dharmasala that had not a school attached to it." These observations made in 1852 show that the spread of education in the Punjab around 1850 was of a similar extent to that in Bombay. The Madras Presidency and Bengal-Bihar data concerning the background of the taught and the teachers presents a kind of revelation. The data is in sharp contrast to the various scholarly pronouncements of the past 100 years or more, which give the impression that education of any sort in India, till very recently, was almost exclusively restricted to the twice born among the Hindus and, and among Muslims, to those of the ruling elite. The actual situation was different, if not contrary. In the districts of Madras Presidency and two districts of Bihar for which data is available, it was found that children from communities termed 'Sudras' and the castes considered below them predominated in the thousands. In the Tamil-speaking areas of Madras Presidency, 'Sudras' and 'AtiSudras' comprised 70-80 per cent of all school going children. Among the Oriya-speaking areas of the same Presidency, the percentage of children belonging to these two castes was 62 per cent; in Malyalam-speaking areas it was 54 per cent; and in Telugu-speaking areas it was 35-40 per cent. There were 11,575 schools with 1,57,195 children in Madras Presidency and there were 1,094 colleges. Nearly 25 per cent of all children used to go to school and a large percentage of children studied at home. The number of children doing home schooling in Madras district alone was 26,446 while in the city 5,523 children were going to school. The situation in India with regard to education in 1500 (and it should be remembered that it is a greatly damaged and disorganised India that one is referring to) does not in any sense look inferior to what existed in England then; and in many respects Indian schooling seems to have been much more extensive. That the number of children going to school actually declined during the British period is revealed by one data of the Malabar area. Between 1822-1825 there were 11,963 boys and 2,190 girls going to school. Of these girls 1,122 belonged to Muslim families. In 1884-85, when the population had almost doubled, the number of Muslim girls going to school declined to only 705 while the population of Malabar had increased two-fold. Do u still blame `upper cast' for the plight of OBC in India today kela?

Comment by kela

Tue, 11 Sep 2007 07:00:12 EDT

Ruvy thats because all the top educational institutions are owned by Christian organisations.You see the Hindu upper castes thrived on denying education to the lower castes which make up more than 50% of India's population.That was the only way the minority could dominate the majority .Christian organisations came here and made right the wrong

Comment by Ruvy in Jerusalem

Tue, 11 Sep 2007 02:09:28 EDT

I've followed this thread carefully. In doing so, I have one big question that continues to go unanswered. Why would anyone who is not a Christian want to join a Christian organization in India? What is the gain? Who needs the bastards? I can see a non-Christian hankering to join one in America, where, as a majority religion, Christianity has some caché, and being part of a Christian club of some sort may benefit the non-Christian member. But India?

Comment by A. S. Mathew

Mon, 10 Sep 2007 20:18:31 EDT

Mr. Man Singh, bitterness and anger in any direction can destroy our own peace and happiness. I am not divinely called to protect Christianity. Bill Ladden is going to warn the U.S. in the next video celebrating the 9/11, if Americans are not converting to Islam, he has planned some serious attacks on America. You are a strong believer in Hinduism, but you act like, you are the sole custodian to protect Hinduism. Are you concerned with the Hindus being influenced with Marxism and Naxalite ideology? What you plan to do with that? Or, are you simply alarmed by the converts to Christianity? If an Hindu is making a decision to covert to Christianity or to Naxalite movement, which one you prefer? Please answer that question, this is a plain request.