Attacks on Churches and Christians in India - Violence in Mangalore

Well written Kim ... Good Job!!!!!!!!

wow, Mangalore seems to get into national news only for communal clashes these days.

All kind of violence is against the will of the Lord. Howerver what the misguided missionaries are doing is also against everything the Lord Jesus ever stood for. Instead of realizing that true service to the Lord can be rendered by first realizing him within, they go out to demean and hurt a way of life they understand nothing about. Converting people to christianity just to increase numbers, while being clueless that about the true message of the Christ is blasphemy. Little do these mis-guided people understand that the propaganda they are spreading is the message of Ireaneous and Constantine, perhaps the two people most responsible for trying to erase the image of the real Jesus from peoples mind. May lord have mercy on this false missionaries and show them the way.

Thanks Ivan.

Sandeep - a clash is when both sides react with violence. In this particular incident, it has been one sided.

at the poster above: the missionaries were mostly Protestant groups. So I don't know what Saint Irenaeus' teaching and the Roman Emperor Constantine's views had to do with this.

Anyways for your reference please see what the Lord said - MT 28:19 - "Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit,teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you"

Peace.

I'm from Mangalore too. It is sad to see my city in the news these days for all the bad reasons. There was a time when it used to be a retirees paradise. Now I don't know what will happen :(

The Mangalorean Catholic community had to bear up with Tippu Sultan's oppression during the 18th century when many of them were killed/forcibly converted. Now after some peace for 2-3 generations, the test of faith has fallen to our generation.

May God grant us the ability to withstand this assault.

Peace.

Missionaries playing victimology. Nice try.

Do we see elections nearby? The international battle cry of 'missionaries are in danger in India' has been added to political menu ever since Sonia has stepped into the ring. The rallying cries of 'Islam is in Danger', 'Secularism is in Danger', 'Dalits are in Danger', 'Minorities are in danger' have become old worn-out hats. All they have to do is to create tin-pots in BJP-ruled states, and they think they can win political battles by mobilizing and uniting the coalitions of the 'victimized', now that victimized Aam Adami card will not work this time.

"Go, therefore, and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the holy Spirit,teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you"

Is the above compatible with secular democracy?
Quran is telling its followers almost same thing. How are we going to learn to live with each other in peace?

In any secular democracy people must respect all religions. That means one must respect religion of others as well. Conversion activity shows lack of such respect. How can you have respect for some one's religion when you are telling him/her that yours is better than his/her. Once you are in violation of this basic requirement of a secular democracy all sort of other problems follow. Religious rivalries to begin with.

Firstly, "In any secular democracy people must respect all religions." is a lot of crap. No one is obliged to pretend others' beliefs are okay. In a free secular country, one should be free to disagree with the beliefs of others and express such disagreement (in a non-violent manner). Any disagreement is bound to be insulting to someone, and that someone should learn to take it and either shut up or provide an equally non-violent rebuttal. Even if this disagreement comes in a violent form, the counterattack should be directed at the violent ones, instead of taking the lazy and cowardly route of damaging property and destroying lives of innocents.

Secondly, "Christians have always believed in being peace loving, patient and tolerant" is also a lot of crap. Or maybe in belief but definitely not always in practice. From the Goa Inquisition to the current Christian-identity separatism in the Northeastern States, this claim does not even hold true within India, let alone the rest of the world, where Christians have not shown themselves to be particularly beyond aggression, murder and pillage. What is happening in India to Christians right now is very wrong (see previous paragraph), but pretending as if Christians were universally and historically peaceful, inside or outside India, is a crock of bull.

All this fuss and destruction because some tribal bumpkins are exchanging one delusion for another (also known as converting).

Thirdly, these attacks are NOT being downplayed in the news. On the contrary, a Google search for this issue will reveal news on it from almost every Indian news agency of significance. Please do not exaggerate.

Sohan

"one should be free to disagree with the beliefs of others and express such disagreement (in a non-violent manner)."

Thanks for showing us another face of secularism - for we have people here who would vouch that genuine secularism resides in tolerance and acceptance of not just all kinds of religions, but all kinds of minorities. That is why I call secularism hydra-headed, for nobody knows what its real face is.

The main problem I can see with kind of secularism that rests on freedom to insult each other's faith and beliefs - is that it can not know when enough is enough, what is fair game and what is off-limit. That it gives people license to insult in whatever manner they see fit, and you assume that people will be able to confine it to non-violent speech only, just because you wish so. How far pissing contests will escalate would depend on how far both sides would be willing to take them - and when there is no love lost between both warring sides, there is very little that can hold them back, no bridges would remain intact that can bring back both sides to reconciliation. Right to engage in insults can not be separated from right to engage in aggression and warfare - they all would come as one package.

What earns secularism a mandate is when it tries to build bridges among diverse beliefs and communities, by fostering atmosphere of mutual respect and tolerance among them. Sure, that does not take away your right to reject whatever you do not want to believe in and practice only what you believe in, but if you like to hold on to whatever you believe in, it is imperative that you too respect the right of others to believe in whatever they choose to believe in, even if you may think it is not something you would believe in personally. The 'live and let live' spirit, mutual tolerance, bridges of goodwill have to manifest not only at individual level among individuals, but also among communities and among religions too. If does nobody no good if religionists use the right to insult as license to engage in religious wars. And Hindus do believe that xianity and Islam are at war with Hinduism - so respect and tolerance for Hinduism is going to be the precondition for same being extended by Hindus, and to build bridges among various faiths in India. And that can be the only foundation of genuine secularism in India.

I am following Mangalore development through www.daijiworld.com where i get hourly update
Shocked to see Police lathi charge on Catholic nums, women, old people etc...pls pray for all

God works in his own ways ... this is an opportunity for us Christians to stand united and work for Christ and preach his good news of hope and love which is the main objective of being a Christian... and to all my fellow brothers who think they can persecute us and wipe us away they need to know that history has proved that the blood of martyrs has been the seed of Christianity ... our God doesn't need foreign money or force to increase the number of people who trust in him .. when there is persecution we grow.... he is much more powerful than that... even Saul persecuted the early church but God changed him and made him an one among his greatest apostles. In the name of Jesus we forgive all the peolple responsible for the voilence and pray that they may see the light of Christ just as Paul did.

Just as moslems fail to distance themselves from Jehadis and than decry Islamophobia at well-deserved reactions to Jehadism, xians are similarly guilty of not disassociating themselves from missionaries and conversion rackets, and than feigning persecution and victimology when missionary rackets receive well-deserved reactions from Hindus. It probably helps them internationalize their propaganda of victimology and mobilize pan-xian funds, solidarity and political support for their nefarious missions in India

This sounds like Sonia politics of using missionaries to instigate dis-harmony with Hindus in BJP ruled states in order to distabilize BJP government and distract it from its political mandate. Just as Sonia's Jehadi vote bank is busy terrorizing BJP ruled states, its xian vote bank seems busy locking horns with Hindus to create international propaganda of victimology. Now that congress has no cards left as its victimology of aam adami can not work this time around, we can see xian victimology being deployed to shore up congress. If you recall, when Sonia entered Indian politics and needed to gain foothold in congress and legitimacy in Indian politics, we had seen sudden surge in xian conflicts with Hindus and subsequent international propaganda to mobilize xian solidarity and demonization of Hindu Organizations and BJP.

KIM,UR ARICLE IS REALY GOOD BUT WHAT WAY THEY SELECTED IS NOT CORRECT,BUT ALSO THINK WHY THEY R DOING JOB FOR CONVERSION TO PEOPLE SO WHAT THEY DID IS K ONLY WAY IS NOT GOOD.ANY WAY WE R THE HUMAN BEING ONLY FIRST PASTER SHOLD LEARN

Sohan:

1. ""Firstly, "In any secular democracy people must respect all religions." is a lot of crap.""

2. ""Secondly, "Christians have always believed in being peace loving, patient and tolerant" is also a lot of crap.""

Thanks for applying the "crap detector" to such delusions.

1. Secularism does NOT imply "respect for all religions". If followers of religions are not willing to respect the non-followers of religion, they should be disrespected too, non-violently of course.

2. To claim that followers of any religion are necessarily non-violent/peaceful or violent/bloody is to: ignore history and to put too much onus on religion alone. at the end of the day the existing laws should be applied to break up and put an end to hoodlums regardless of the so-called provocations, and imagined or real insults to one's religiosity.

Is this OK, just because it is being done against Catholics/Christians in India who have historically been as non-violent as the Jains and buddhists (other minorities) in India?

While its not OK that each and every Christian is blamed and attacked for the faults of other Christians, to say that Christians have been as non-violent in India as Buddhists and Jains is completely false.

Christian groups and missionaries have been funding terrorist groups in the North East. These groups, among their other activities, have been terrorizing Hindu tribes (who are a minority in most of these states) into converting into Christianity. For proof, here's a report from none other than the BBC: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/717775.stm

The National Socialist Council of Nagaland-Isak-Muivah is also accused of having a Christian agenda among its other objectives.

Then of course you have the latest example of the murder of Swami Laxmanananda in Orissa. The Maoists denied responsibility in the murder of the Swami which points to the explicit involvement of Christian groups in planning and organizing the murder. There's evidence from the nation's most respected newspaper: http://www.hindu.com/2008/08/29/stories/2008082952080300.htm

A letter written by the Central Committee says that Maoist cadres in Kandhamal were hired for money by communal Christian miscreants for the murder of the VHP leader and his associates.

Here's what Ashok Sahu, a retired IPS officer, specialising in Maoist extremism says about the Christian involvement in the Swami's murder: http://www.rediff.com/news/2008/aug/28orissa1.htm

Therefore, its not all rosy as far as Christian violence/nonviolence is concerned.

Why I point this out is that for reconciliation to occur between two conflicting groups, the two groups must recognize that there is a problem and that there is a problem on both sides. The Hindu side must recognize that there are more civilized ways of dealing with what the Christian missionaries and groups are doing. The Christians must do a fundamental review of their conversion policy. They must review the morality of their actions - bribing poor tribes, taking advantage of their situation, converting them simply to increase the numbers.

Two questions need to be asked:

1. Are they here to spread the message of Christ or are they here to spread the tribe of Christ?

2. Are they here to love thy neighbour or are they here to convert thy neighbour?

Honesty is the first prerequisite for reconciliation. All this nonsense that low caste groups need to be brought out of caste discrimination and all... the argument just doesnt convince. If the low caste groups have problems, they know bloody well how to deal with it. Just in the afternoon, all those bastards who participated in the Khairlanji massacre were pronounced guilty by the court within one year of its occurence. It shows that the law and order system is working although with many many problems (of which all are common to everyone in the country.)

If the Christian missionaries and groups are here to spread the message of Christ and love thy neighbour, they can do just that, they're really welcome. But making conversion a precondition for getting the message of Christ and love is like a government official asking a citizen for a bribe to provide basic services.

As of now, organized conversion by Christian missionaries and groups by offering bribes to poor people is plain corruption with a different name. No wonder many people are angry.

hi Atlantean
For arguement sake have you come across any body who has been "forcibly converted" and about the involvement of christian movement hiring the Maoist to kill the VHP leader... if we were the ones who use money to kill and destroy a lot many people would have been killed in mangalore by now.... but we c just an increase in the number of christians dying... think about it... and if we were converting poor tribes what do we gain from it and we would be able to wipe out poverty sice there would be no poor people and all of them would receive money
and dear friend if you worried about conversions and think persecuting us christians is pretty ok... go ahead ... it will only lead to increase in the not just in number but our faith...
and if you are as well read as you sound u will know from history during persecution is when we have grown... our god just goes ahead and proves that he is more mightier then any human force...

think again before you acuse someoone else...

Jean

When conversions are not about questions of theology but out of human condition, it is considered engineering and exploiting human condition for harvesting converts. A nafarious nexus exists with state sponsored ideologies that produce human conditions for missionaries to harvest souls. Most of the time, mission of conversion is not to convert people to xianity per se, but to convert them to such ideologies that benefit xian missions. That is why people judge missionaries not by their charity and education fronts but by their larger agenda.

Sure, any hungry can be lead to whoever offers a rice bowl and he would run wagging his tail voluntarily - but it is still a coerced conversion. If xianity is such a great religion, why does it need to use non-religious means and non-religious inducements to recruit and harvest?

Majority of xians and their places of worship are never harmed - if hindus were so much against them, they would have disappeared long time ago. Hindus should make a distinction between peace-loving xians and hate-mongering missionaries. But it is disturbing to see xians embracing hate-mongering missionaries which makes it increasingly difficult to tell xians and missionaries apart, and therefore increasingly difficult to confine missionary-provoked reactions to missionaries alone. Just as moslems' inability and unwillingness to distance themselves from jehadis make them indistinguishable from Jehadis, which set them up to be recepient of any backlash against Jehadis - xians are following in the same dangerous trap, like sacrificial lambs led by their mullahs. Not since British colonialism, missionaries and xians have been so embolden, thanks to Sonia.

Rioting and acts of lawlessness by ANYone call for swift police action and punishment. If that is allowed, we are NOT a civil society. Having said that, I have myself come across missionary pamphlets which ask you to "embrace jesus the ONLY true lord". The basic premise of Christianity and Islam is - my faith is superior to yours so convert. how can this attitude ever reconcile with a secular democracy? [EDITED - HATE SPEECH - STICK WITH ONE NICK]

[EDITED - HATE SPEECH]

It's interesting how casually hate speech is tossed around, fortunately, we have an edit button

I'm only going to respond to the rational and logical points in the comments that haven't been answered in subsequent comments. The others, I'm just going to ignore as hate speech, no matter which religion it is against.

Before I start responding, one clarification:

Most missionaries who are accused of conversions are not from the older faiths but the newer churches popping up. To very broadly explain to someone who doesn't understand the differences among Christian faiths, I would very broadly liken the missionaries from "new" churches to the Hare Rama Hare Krishna missionaries.

Bhagwaan Krishn has been worshiped for ages, the Hare Rama Hare Krishna missionaries are a relatively recent group who go out actively preaching and promoting their faith and actively strive for conversions in USA and the rest of the Western world.

Does that make all Hindu priests, missionaries who convert? No. Same way, not all Catholic priests, nuns, pastors, churches are actively involved in conversions. Just some select churches and some select missionaries.

#7 Kerty,
Missionaries are not playing victimology. Ordinary citizens who are being victimised for their faith are asking (not rioting, not demanding, just asking and praying) for peace. Huge difference.

This is not a conspiracy in BJP led states. The Bajrang Dal has stated (not confessed, but proudly stated) that they are behind what happened in Mangalore.

hi Kirty
i am a catholic and have a couple of the new life group coming repeatedly to my house asking us to convert and of course mentioning that we have a lot of wrong methods of worship like idol worship... doesnt mean that we beat them up and chase them away from the house ...

and if conversion of the poor with money troubles you so much which i personally think is a false accusations you should work towards educating and helping the poor not work on destroying places of worship.

#5 and #8

Matthew 28:19 is often used by missionaries to justify what they are doing and by people who want to protest that the Christian religion requires its believers to actively convert.

The problem is the context is never spoken about.

According to the Bible, Jesus said this when he had risen from the dead. The Chief priest and elders had bribed the soldiers guarding His tomb to tell the people that Jesus' disciples had stolen His body at night and thus disprove the miracle of His Resurrection.

Christ appeared to His disciple and told them that He was really alive and would be with them always if they went out and spoke the truth about His resurrection and spread the Good news.

If you would like to read the entire chapter:
http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?book_id=47&chapter=28&version=31

Yes, every New Religion or religious sect(I use new to describe any religion that was founded during a period of history that has been documented) has aspired for conversions to help grow the religion. That IS how new religions are spread right?

When you come to Older religions, like Hinduism the Pharaonic religions, the ancient Norse, Olympian and other religions which existed before the written word, how would you find something written about conversions?

Also with these Older religions, which existed before traveling was commonplace, everyone who lived in an area, shared the same religious beliefs. So again, no question of converting being mentioned in the early origins of these religions.

In my opinion, telling other people about your religion or showing them about it through leading a good life is the tolerant way to help others understand your beliefs. Healthy debates about beliefs are necessary for understanding. Forcing people to listen to you is not tolerant at all and violence is unpardonable.

Conversion needs to stop.There are many ways to reach god.Whoever tries to undermine or disrespect other religion are in fact cowards and are a liability to their own religion and faith.Look at the situation in kerala no christian will ever buy or anything from hindus.Where are we heading to?Let the god punish those who commits these sins.SAY NO TO RELIGIOUS FANATICISM .

#9.
Sohan, I agree with your first paragraph about disagreement using non violent methods.

The Goa inquisiton was not conducted by Indian Christians, but the Portugese and the Spanish. My statement of Indian Christians being tolerant and non violent still stands.

You do not need to imagine but just look at past examples as to what happens in India if any Hindu or Muslim "religious sensibility" is hurt. Forget breaking statues, the violence following mud on statues (of mortals, not even Gods)leads to mobs and riots around the country.

Indian Christians have by and large been active contributing members of the Indian society.

What is happening in the North East is not a "Christian" problem but one of marginalisation and its subsequent fallout.

Thirdly, not a single local news channel was showing this news yesterday. The same channels which consider a commissioners lost dog being found as breaking news and show round the clock updates of people who have predicted they are going to die at a particular time and children who have fallen down a well.

#13. Likening Jehadis who believe in violence and terror, to Missionaries who convert, hmmmmmmmmmmmm stretch of imagination?

Kim #29

I used Jehadis to show an analogy. We know Jehdis and missionaries use different tactics and have different agenda.

Kim #23, #24

"..not all Catholic priests, nuns, pastors, churches are actively involved in conversions. Just some select churches and some select missionaries."

And that is why you don't see every xian and every xian place of worship being attacked. The conflicts happen to occur only in few isolated trouble spots where Missionaries are active and provocative and hindus make it a point to react.

Lets face it, Hindus and xians have not been able to build bridges of mutual respect, mutual goodwill, live and let live in India - and when Pope comes to India and announces his mission to harvest souls in India and declares India to be ripe for xianization, and dedicates the next millennium for such mission, and exhorts the faithful to fulfill such mission, you don't expect Hindus not to sit up and not take notice. When nice xians try to provide apologetics and cover for missionaries and conversion rackets, it only raises shadows of suspicion and distrust towards all of xians, not just missionaries. So when backlash and conflicts happens between hindus and missionaries, those distinctions between peaceful xians and mischievous missionaries are going to be blurred too. It is for those peace-loving tolerant xians to maintain the distinctions from intolerant ones and disassociate themselves from missionaries - which I frankly do not see either before or during any flash points, than how do you expect hindus to do the same? Even than, Hindu reaction have always remained restrained and localized, while xians go national and international with
unrestrained falsehood and propaganda. That is why I termed it victimology.

kim

"My statement of Indian Christians being tolerant and non violent still stands"

I am glad you qualified that with 'indian christian'. And they remain tolerant and non-violent not out of choice but out of compulsions. We know what introduction of missionaries have done to africa, latin america, America, mexico, australia, new zealand, east timor, phillipines, Korea etc. We have seen live demonstration of tolerance and non-violence of xianity in action there.

"What is happening in the North East is not a "Christian" problem but one of marginalisation and its subsequent fallout."

Funny, Jehadis feel the same way, and they too want out from India as soon as they have demographics in their favor. North East suffers no more marginalization than any other part of India - it just happens to be a xian majority area due to conversions of tribals and missionaries have succeeded in making it their major political base.

Jean #25

Please re-read my posts in this thread. I have tried to highlight issues that are at the root of troubled relationship between hindus and xians in India. Tolerance and respect are two way streets. If you want to keep living in denial, and keep repeating same propaganda talking points, please help yourself by all means. You wont be alone. Too many xians are taking the same route, and have become part of the problem rather than part of the solution, and yet wishing and praying for ground realities to change in India - which means they do not want the problem to go away, but want to hold it captive so it can be exploited for some mission .

#16 You have misrepresented some facts.

The BBC article does not offer proof that Christians are funding terrorist groups in the North East. It reports that the Tripura State Government announced that it had such proof. Huge difference in credibility between a BBC investigative report and a press report issued by a ministry.

The Hindu article talks about a letter that is suspected to have been written by the Maoists, proclaiming their innocence and pointing the finger elsewhere.

The genuineness of the letter has not been proven yet.

A few days later maoists circulated a letter claiming that they HAD done it.
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/India/Maoists_claim_they_killed_fascist_VHP_leader_in_Orissa/articleshow/3423908.cms

You may like to read a more recent article published in Hindu's magazine, Front Line which has these snippets to offer.
http://www.hinduonnet.com/fline/stories/20080926251902900.htm

It is not a riot but a unilateral assault on the life and property of minorities by the members of Hindu communal organisations.Behind it is an effective organisation and careful planning with a view to demarcating and isolating religious minorities from the national mainstream.

The communal trajectory of Orissa has very closely followed the Gujarat prototype. What the Sangh Parivar organisations successfully experimented with in Gujarat was to launch a series of religion-centred programmes and institutions. Their aim was to create religious solidarity on the one hand and religious antagonism on the other.

the communalisation of Orissa was primarily based on an anti-Christian project. All activities of Christian organisations and institutions were represented as steps towards evangelisation. Although the Christian population has not marked any increase in the past two decades, Christian missionaries were depicted as a threat to the future strength of the Hindu community.

Lately, the Parivar has used force on the converts in a variety of ways. The converted women are taken to the village square, stripped and tonsured.

The suggestion in the media that the swami was chosen as a useful scapegoat by the VHP itself cannot be dismissed lightly, given the fascist track record of the Parivar.

#19
..."if hindus were so much against them, they would have disappeared long time ago"...

Until a couple of years ago, India was moving naturally towards, peace, secularism and meritocracy.

Down South (at least) in India, religion was ceasing to matter in schools, colleges, the workplace....

Couple of politicians decided communalism would help them build better votebanks and thus started the downward spiral.

Not all Hindus/Christians/Muslims are bad/wrong. Some vested interests are fueling distrust, and communalism.

Talking about Christians and Muslims distancing themselves from the radicals, I don't see Hindus clamoring to distance themselves from the violence perpetrated by the Bajrang Dal/VHP/Shiv Sena and others, do you?

Why expect a distancing from only some communities?

#20.
The basic premise of any monotheistic religion is that there IS only one God.

That the God they believe in, is that One true God, would be a pre-requisite for their faith, wouldn't it?

#25
Thank you for emphasising, that even Catholics do not appreciate the proselytizing by the zealots of churches.

#27

I agree to
SAY NO TO RELIGIOUS FANATICISM.

Kerty
#30
Thank you for acknowledging that Jehadis and missionaries use different tactics and have different agendas.

It helps clarify part of what you say in #13, but saying the reactions from Hindus are well deserved?

Come on. Physical Violence is never deserved unless in self defence against a similar physically violent threat.

Also, its not all Hindus who react that way. Don't denounce a community based on the actions of a select few.

#31
You have your facts wrong. If you read my original article, you will see that I have clearly explained that 90% of the churches attacked in Karnataka were not involved in active conversions.

You talk about statements by the current Pope. You must also know then that he isn't even half as popular or beloved by Christians as Pope John Paul the II, who did visit India and leave without any controversy.

I'm not going to go into the rest of your rant. Except to say that rarely have reactions been localised.

#32
When you talk about what happened in other countries, you are talking about conversion and other activities that took place decades back.

The point of life is to learn from past mistakes and move forwards.

All religions are bad. They have done more harm than good. Just look at the history of last two thosand years. But those religins which claim to have found right god and attempt to show this god to all others are the worse when it comes to causing conflicts. And that is what is happening here. The rest is just detail. And this will continue in one form or another as long those with their right god whether you call them jihadies or missionaries keep telling others that theirs are wrong. Please there is no right god, if at all there is one. For crying out loud keep your right god to youself and let others live peace. Any other way there is going to be ongoing conflicts.

In the developed countries conversion is not an unmanageable problem if it is a problem at all. Perhaps it is because no particular segment of their society is vulnerable. In India hindus need to pay specific attention to vulnerable segment and strenghen their social and economic well being. If they can live with respect and dignity they will see no need to change their religion. VHP need to undertake work that will strenghten them.

kim #39

"Physical Violence is never deserved unless in self defence against a similar physically violent threat."

When you unleash religious wars for conquests of souls and land, there can't remain the safety net of non-violent discourse and civilian niceties.

"That the God they believe in, is that One true God, would be a pre-requisite for their faith, wouldn't it?"

We all believe whatever we believe is the truth, that is why we belive what we believe - that is what makes us all God conscious. It is when we go around telling others that whatever they believe in is not true god and that they must convert to our God and accept him as the sole savior or face damnation that harmless belief in God becomes an instrument of intolerance, aggression and religious warfare. That is why monotheism has been historically plagued by crusades, jehads, conquests, colonialism, why there is a long list of nations where it has left a bloody trail.

"90% of the churches attacked in Karnataka were not involved in active conversions. "

That should be all the more alarming if lines are so blurred between churches that sponsor conversions and those who do not. I am sure it is an issue of perception among hindus that mistakenly hold that all churches are affiliated with missionary activities. There should be efforts by xians and hindus to correct the mis-perceptions. Until xians publicly begin to disassociate themselves from missionaries, the distinctions would remain blurred.

Your point that Hindus are not disassociating themselves from VHP type organizations, and therefore why should xians be required to disassociate from Missionaries, is not true or relevant. VHP and BD do have nation wide following but very small % of Hindus actually associate with them, majority of Hindus do actively disassociate themselves from them - that is why VHP and BD pick and choose highly emotive issues, knowing that most Hindus would identify with such issues. So association of most Hindus is never with VHP or BD per se but with highly emotive issues that affect Hindus. You would find more vocal critics of VHP/BD among Hindus than among non-hindus.

"You talk about statements by the current Pope. You must also know then that he isn't even half as popular or beloved by Christians as Pope John Paul the II"

It does not matter what past popes did or didn't do. It is what current pope says what he intends to do is what counts.

"I'm not going to go into the rest of your rant. Except to say that rarely have reactions been localised"

Can you give us example of reactions that were not confined to localities where they arouse? When conflicts happened in Dang, Orissa and Manglore, did they escalate to other regions?


"When you talk about what happened in other countries, you are talking about conversion and other activities that took place decades back.
The point of life is to learn from past mistakes and move forwards."

History does not live in compartments. Unless people decide to make a conscious break from a history, history lives on seamlessly and uninterrupted into present tense and into future. And those who refuse to learn from it are doomed to repeat same blunders. How have xians reformed from bloody trail of missionary history that we should all forget and move on? Have xians taken a break from their missionary past? Have they disowned missionaries? Just because it happened only in other countries, should hindus not learn any lessons from it and live instead in denial?

The author is highly baised

kerty
I'm from the North East
Manipuris in Manipur are not Christians
Assamese are not Christians
Get your General Knowledge right.

If Christian missionaries are hell bent on converting Indians, I would say, let them start converting the Muslims here. That would be good for everyone in this country (including the converts). In fact, the Indian govt should offer incentives to Christian missionaries to convert the Muslims.

Led:

""If Christian missionaries are hell bent on converting Indians, I would say...""

i thought the new converts are promised visions of heaven, not hell...

Jeff:

""kerty
I'm from the North East
Manipuris in Manipur are not Christians
Assamese are not Christians
Get your General Knowledge right.""

when the ultimate goal is to spout self-righteous prejudiced ideology, who gives a fish about general knowledge?

Basically, missionaries are idiots who are finally getting their just desserts. "Donot pray Hindu Gods" is the tamest thing I have heard from missionary nuts. There are capable of the vilest comments on the Hindu religion. Stoking internal conflict of any sort is not a good thing at all but the right to propagate and religious freedom does not give one the right to abuse Hindus and their followers.

Morris

The problem of conversion is not just an issue of casteism alone. If it was, can anyone explain why missionaries are aggressively seeking reservations for their converted folks.

Kim

When the whole of the developed world is getting rid of religion, why is it that western backed missionaries are bent on telling 'Fantastic' stories about christianity.It is a fraud. No wonder, you donot see educated folks changing religions. I have not seen you condemn conversions.

perhaps everyone should voluntarily convert to Hinduism in India; all problems will be solved. we will have true secularism, tolerance, pluralism and everyone will live happily ever after and even after after.

Chandra

That is simple. They want benefits from both sides. They can tell their converts that you have not lost what you would have gotten had you not converted. The risk is that some of them may want to go back to reap the benefits of reservation. May be I do not understand this issue at all.

like i said, everyone should be converted, not just to hinduism, but as brahmins. no conflict, no issue about reservations, no problems but eternal bliss.

common sense, interesting suggestion.

To whoever opened the topic on reservations: Weren't reservations supposed to be for the marginalised who hadn't moved forward because of the backgrounds or areas they came for?

How does it matter what their religion is? It doesn't change the marginalisation they have faced for centuries does it?

To whoever it was that said "I did not condemn conversion" : If you had read the article and the comments, you would have realised that I have clearly stated that I do not approve of conversion by force or coercion or inducement. If someone wants to convert because they truly believe in a different religion, then it is that individuals decision, why does anyone else have to get involved?

Human beings can only condemn actions, lets leave the condemning of people to higher powers.

Kim writes:
"Weren't reservations supposed to be for the marginalised who hadn't moved forward because of the backgrounds or areas they came for?"

No, your comments are totally inaccurate, and betray extreme ignorance on the subject. There are dirt-poor people who are Brahmins (so-called "upper castes") who are absolutely not allowed any type of reservation or affirmative-action whatsoever, because the reservations policy is not at all based on economic status, but purely on ethnicity. This stems from the belief that certain sections of the Hindu community have some kind of stigma of being from a "low-caste" (absolute nonsense, in my opinion)

Therefore, according to this logic, if you're not a Hindu, then you're not from one of the stigmatized sections of Hinduism, and therefore the policy doesn't recognize your right to reservations. I personally believe the whole affirmative action nonsense to be a bunch of garbage, since there are plenty of well-off "low-caste" persons who greedily avail themselves of it. The myth of discrimination is simply sewn by the beneficiaries of the reservations, so that they can get more gravy for themselves. It's also spread by proselytizers who want to poach from another ethnic group to expand their own flock.

Applauds Sanjay for comment #54. Nobody could have worded it better :-)

Chandra: "The problem of conversion is not just an issue of casteism alone. If it was, can anyone explain why missionaries are aggressively seeking reservations for their converted folks".

Exactly ! They can't have the cake and eat it too !

"When the Bajrang Dal says that conversions are illegal, (and all the other things they do with tis as their cause) aren't they infact enforcing that "you cannot worship any God other than a Hindu God".

No they aren't enforcing that. Just shift the veil of bias off your squint and you'll realize that. Trust me, it isn't rocket science to figure that out.

"I do not approve of conversion by force or coercion or inducement". Finally something sensible !

Kim wrote:
2. When the Bajrang Dal says that conversions are illegal, (and all the other things they do with tis as their cause) aren't they infact enforcing that "you cannot worship any God other than a Hindu God"
---

I totally disagree with your conclusions. If Mail-Order Bride services are illegal, is it saying that "you can't marry anyone, except a local son of the soil"? If prostitution between consenting adults is illegal, is it saying that "you can't sleep with anybody you want"?

I think it's saying that it's illegal to exploit poor people by dangling financial/economic rewards in front of them.

Hi all,

Here are my two cents:

1) After long discussions with orthodox Christians of various denominations in the USA during my graduate student days, I have come to realize that Christians simply do not get it when it comes to issues related to proselytism. It is an inherent part of their religious dogma. You argue with somebody when there is some common shared basis to build your arguments upon. Otherwise, it is futile. In my opinion, this is one issue where Hinduism and Judea-Christian faiths have no common ground.

2) I think it is OK if an individual converts to any religion if he/she sees materialistic benefits. Poverty is grinding in India and lack of opportunities prevent people to climb up the social ladder. If they can take the short-cut, let them take it. Why begrudge them a better life? After all, its a very personal decision.

3) Resorting to violence to resolve any issue is despicable and needs to be prevented. Only winners during societal violence are the entrenched power structures. The rest all are losers.

4) May be, Hindus can change their strategy in dealing with the issue of proselytism. Any innovative ideas that do not involve violence? That would be a step forward. At the moment, I do not have any.

Regards,

I read all the comments with a lot of patience ... few thought come to my mind :-

1. How hardened our views have become as a society. Tolerance and dialogue seems to be loosing its place.

2. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE ANY RELIGION ? - love , peace, faith, harmony - is it not !!!!

Rest my case with point no. 2

Brajesh

All will agree with what you said in #2. However some will insist on putting a condition: do it through my god because that is the right one. And that is the issue here. Even smart people are not being able to say that there is no such thing as right god. They continue perptuating this myth.

"I do not approve of conversion by force or coercion or inducement".

Is ther any other kind of conversion? Really?
Rare, if any. As I said earlier there are very few conversions in developed democracies. There people can exercise their free will. There too religious missions operate health and education facilites. Vey rarely a member from minority approach them and ask for conversion. I am sure there are some but each one has its own circumstances. One wonders why it happens in asia and africa and particularly in under privileged segments of their society. Simple answer. They are vulnerable and subject to coersion inducement etc.. Some of us are not willing to leave each other alone with their belief. And that is the cause of your #1. My way is right way.

Brajesh

"2. WHAT IS THE PURPOSE ANY RELIGION ? - love , peace, faith, harmony - is it not !!!!
Rest my case with point no. 2"

Is that naivety and ignorance or is that wishful idealism, or living in denial? If pages of history and events unfolding in present tense can't remove the cobwebs, I doubt anything else can.

Communities, castes, nations, political factions, political ideologies etc they all strive to be good and do good but do you think they can live in harmony and peace?

Tell me which nation does not proclaim to be for welfare, progress, love, peace and yet don't they sit on pile of bloodiest war machines and engage in wars that hate, kill, destroy? Don't they? Is there a contradiction in what they proclaim to stand for and what they have to do in real practical situations? Unfortunately, they don't have the luxury of living in denial or in fool's idealism, they have to deal with real world with real problems.

Anindo:

" May be, Hindus can change their strategy in dealing with the issue of proselytism. Any innovative ideas that do not involve violence? That would be a step forward. At the moment, I do not have any. "

Sure, here is an idea from the alok rai. take it or leave it:

"it amuses me to no end when people complain of monetary inducedments for conversion. a simple solution that would be to outbid the bidders. the poor then can convert and reconvert a few times and laugh all the way to the bank"


i have yet to find a natural law that states that people are not free to chose their religion, except for the fact that such crap is practised in saudi arabia and other countries dominated by islam. but just because it is practised in such theocratic dictatorship, why must they be the role models for India? if people are induced for monetary rewards to convert, offer them more money to reconvert to your religion of choice. if they are coerced, go to their help only if they ask for help in getting uncoerced. so what if all of india adopts religion x, y or rejects all of them? why is it anybody's business? if the christians are busy converting others, those others who are concerned should also do the same. why is there a need for conflict and violence?

commonsense wrote:
"if the christians are busy converting others, those others who are concerned should also do the same. why is there a need for conflict and violence?"

But why was that 80-year old man assassinated, then? According to your statement above, this doesn't qualify as violence. Because the current riots started after this old man was assassinated, and yet you're question (accusation) about violence seems directed specifically at Hindus.

Just like the Godhra train-burning. The burning of the train triggered the subsequent riots, but nobody even wants to acknowledge this fact. Our "liberal" lecturers want us to believe that it was all "spontaneous evil" from the Hindus.

And this seems to be a recurrent pattern. The violence seems to get started by the more aggressive religious groups, but they manage to shift the blame onto others. It really proves once again that the meek won't inherit the earth. You can be meek all the time, and you'll still get blamed. I'm not in favor of being meek.

cs

".....that such crap is practised in saudi arabia and other countries dominated by islam. but just because it is practised in such theocratic dictatorship, why must they be the role models...."

I guess that is the question you should ask your secularist fundies.

"if the christians are busy converting others, those others who are concerned should also do the same. why is there a need for conflict and violence?"

Conflicts occur when xians decide to protest against what hindus have decided to protest against what xians have decided to protest against what Hindus do/believe and do not do/believe. At what point it would get violent, nobody can predict, but it leads to conflicts, that is for sure.

One thing we do know for sure is that whenever hindus try to reconvert the converts, such localities instantly become epicenter of major conflicts and violence, because xians react very angrily against Hindu efforts to reconvert - what ensues is a propaganda war and war of words as to whose god is better and whose god is a fraud. All that it takes to break the camel's back is one act of vandalism or altercation to blow it up into a full scale religious war.

If conversions are the root of problems, than re-conversions only compounds the problem. It adds more fire to the fuel. Best thing to do is to ban missionaries and ban xian conversion missions until such time when both communities have built enough bridges of trust and goodwill that conversions do not matter to hindus or xians. There is a conflict-free revolving door among all religions and sects in India except with Islam and Xianity - secularism has a mandate is to build one, but secularists have run out of ideas, at best, their ideas seek to perpetuate the hostilities and prevent any genuine reconciliation at root cause levels.

CS

Your arguments are silly. By your argument you are perfectly OK with people being provided ecstacy on the street because the ecstacy salesperson is promising Nirvana. The right to change one's religion is not impacted by regulating those who wish to change the religious beliefs of others. Those who wish to change the religion of others will have to

a. Not abuse people or other religious beliefs
b. Resort to short term financial inducements

The problem with Alok Rai's argument is that he views religion as some sort of discount store. Instead of dealing with the problem, his suggestions will only complicate the situation. The current competation between Hindu activists and missionaries is exactly what Alok Rai wants and we know where that one is going.

lastly, there is a myth that converted christians do better than others. There isn't a single piece of data that supports that notion. The christians who do well in society continue to be folks who became christians a few hundred or thousand years ago. Most Missionaries have no desire to help anybody. They are only interested (in a manical way) to spread the good work. The church structure provides them access to huge funds but once the person converts, the support from the church diminishes. No wonder the demand for reseervations.

Sanjay:

""But why was that 80-year old man assassinated, then? According to your statement above, this doesn't qualify as violence. Because the current riots started after this old man was assassinated, and yet you're question (accusation) about violence seems directed specifically at Hindus.Just like the Godhra train-burning.""

I or no one else has no need to define violence and conflict. we all know it when we see it. i am not defending any violence by armed or unarmed vigilantes, thekedaars of any religion. where did you find me saying that the killing of the 80 year old man or the godhra train-burning as "not violence". You must be reading your own mind. If you and your friends see every incident thru Hindu, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, Jain perspective, you will forever be trapped in your own sectarianism. For Indian citizens there is a chance to see things from a human perspective that is beyond religion.

Chandra:

""Your arguments are silly. By your argument you are perfectly OK with people being provided ecstacy on the street because the ecstacy salesperson is promising Nirvana.""

Maybe, but I can only offer what I think, and if they sound silly so be it. As for Ecstasy being sold on the street, you can find plenty of "legal" drug shops in Tokyo. How is that different from alcohol being sold everywhere? Because one is seen and labeled as a "drug" and he other isnt? But we digress....

Chandra:

(people should not)

""a. Not abuse people or other religious beliefs""

sure I totally agree! but if this does happen, thekdaars of religion must not engage in self-righteous vandalism. this applies to all religious groups, so no point in Kerty pointing out, as he will, about riots over muhammad cartoons, the satanic verses etc. people have a right to get upset if they are upset, but vandalism and violence is stupid gangsterism. if so-called secular politicians allow on group (let's say the muslims) to riot over something and then bow to their wishes to ban a book or a cartoon, then the politicans are the ones at fault, not some innocent friend or relative of someone who happens to be from the so-called "same community". Where is the justification in taking the law in one's own hands, even if the existing laws may not be perfect? And I say that in a general way that applies to Christians, Muslims, Hindus and everyone. Why must we make stupid excuses such as some muslim thekedaar saying "the hindus provoked us" or the hindu or christian thekedaar saying just the opposite. Plain stupid, not to mentione painful in terms of the divides it creates between indian citizens who are sick and tired of this crap, regardless of who instigates or sustains it.

Chandra:
(should not)
"b. Resort to short term financial inducements""

not sure what this means. as opposed to long term financial inducements, which would be ok??

Chandra:
""The current competation between Hindu activists and missionaries is exactly what Alok Rai wants and we know where that one is going.

lastly, there is a myth that converted christians do better than others. There isn't a single piece of data that supports that notion""

It really is irrelevant, totally irrelevant whether the proportion of followers of any religion increases, decreases or stabilizes. From the point of view of secular democracy. So whether the newly converted christians are doing better or worse is their business. if people are upset that they have been lured away by short term financial inducement, they can put their money where there mouth is by luring them back with better inducements. A whole new business in financial inducements and religion could develop.

As for religion not being a business, there is enough evidence to show that religion is not just about religion but much more. On how religion is indeed quite like business, with mergers, split, hostile and non-hostile takeovers, strategies of marketing, advertizing, monopolies (saudi arabia etc.), laissez-faire (USA, Europe etc) etc. pick up any book by a guy called Rodney Stark. Religion is not literally a product manufactured in the heavens, so not surprisingly it has all the traits that ther social institutions have.

Kerty # 63

Kerty, instead of beating about the bush while beating up secularism, garv sey kaho hum hindu chauvinist hain! You would not have to be so long-winded as me then, nor would have to seek the cover of "i'm not politically correct"

cs

"For Indian citizens there is a chance to see things from a human perspective that is beyond religion."

Indians should renounce all their myrid identities, affiliations, associations, orientations and convert themselves to some lowest and commonest denominators of 'human perspective', as defined by whatever flavor of humanist ideology that may win over electoral power over the state. Indians who grow or seek to grow beyond prescribed human dimensions should be declared Kaffirs, and sects unto themselves and hence-forth declared sectarian, communal and un-indian.

Why not open humanist church, type up its own humanist bible and start converting all those heathen know-nots so they can be saved from their false Gods and false sectarian pursuits to nowhere. Make a common cause with missionaries and let missionaries help convert heathens from false gods and casteism while humanists convert them from false sectarianism and communalism. Hasn't that been the true agenda of secualrists in India?

CS suggested that people in India should voluntarily convert to hinduism. But I don't see how that could solve the problem because hindus do not have a right god. Right god belongs to christians or muslims. Pakistan would not like to see Indians wasting their lives worshing wrong gods. Of course they would like to help. Would'nt you want to help your neighbour if you see him/her lost. That is what missionaries are doing at present. The real answer is everone should convert to one of the two paths with right god.

Then the world would be divided in two: believers and christians. Hopefully they will agree to live in peace. Would they? Could there be two right god? Or each would think that the other has a wrong god and would want to help. And that unsolicited is the problem.

So you see how absurd it gets. So there is no such thing as right god or wrong god. Each one's god is right for him/her. You don't have to respect every one's god but you have to leave him/her alone to worship his/her god in peace.
Any other way is continuation of conflicts.

Morris:

""CS suggested that people in India should voluntarily convert to hinduism. But I don't see how that could solve the problem because hindus do not have a right god. Right god belongs to christians or muslims."'

Well if you claim that Hindus do not have a right god, it also logically follows that they cannot logically object to others following any god they chose, right or wrong. the christians, muslims, jews, zorastrians, spaghetti monsterites etc. may claim they have access to the right god, be it spaghetti. But if you seriously claim that hindus do not have a right god, I canno figure out how exactly they (more to the point, their thekedaars) could object to somebody worshipping the spaghetti monster or anything else for that matter. So, what seems to be the problem here? if there are multiple paths to salvation with no right or wrong path, why is it, logically, hard to fathom that some may choose to follow a path that they believe is right? Since you have already claimed, like a good thekedaar of Hinduism, that there is no right path, anything goes? So what seems to be the problem if someone chooses to worship or not to worship a particular god? Or tries to convert others to it. I am not making a religious or anti-religious argument, but a logical one. Personally I would never touch any religion with a ten foot wooden or even a non-wooden pole. I remember Aaman's pithy comment "all religion is crap". I would add, "all religion without exceptions are crap and have caused more problems than solved them". So, if uncompromising secularism is enforced, as in France, as in Japan, Singapore etc. etc. it is, who gives two shakes of a goldfish which religion one does or does not follow?

Chandra:

""The problem with Alok Rai's argument is that he views religion as some sort of discount store.""

To the contrary, people who complain about financial inducement as a major factor in conversion reduce religion to a discount store.

Alok Rai's point is not to encourage endless conversion or re-conversion, but to satirize this argument and to point out that which religion one follows should be irrelevant to public policy in a secular polity. If this is not the case, it is the fault of the state and the politicians, not the followers or non-followers of some religion or non-religion.

Kerty #68

Kerty, instead of beating about the bush while beating up secularism, garv sey kaho hum hindu chauvinist hain! You would not have to be so long-winded as me then, nor would have to seek the cover of "i'm not politically correct". And, while you're at it don't forget to heap more abuse on homosexuals.

cs

"people who complain about financial inducement as a major factor in conversion reduce religion to a discount store"

Who really reduces religion to a discount store? Those who offer financial inducements as theology or those who object to it?

cs

"which religion one follows should be irrelevant to public policy in a secular polity. If this is not the case, it is the fault of the state and the politicians, not the followers or non-followers of some religion or non-religion."

In a netshell, what you are saying is that secular polity is not responsible nor accountable for any flaws or mis-implementation - all flaws rest with state, politicians and people who choose those wrongful politicians. Would you allow the same defence to moslems if they say their religion is not flawed or violent but flaws lie with people and moslem rulers who are not pure enough? I am sure Hindus would love to have similar immunity from criticism too.

Religions, ideologies and philosophies are not judged by their own claims but by what they actually deliver, by kind of followers they produce, by kind of realities they shape, the company they keep.

I am repeating over and over again that every one has right god. So I did not say that hindus or for that matter those monotheists have wrong god except that those monotheists think and preach that others have wrong gods. And that is where the trouble start. If you cannot understand this then you have a hidden agenda.I do not.

Kerty:

""Indians should renounce all their myrid identities, affiliations, associations, orientations and convert themselves to some lowest and commonest denominators of 'human perspective'""

Damn you are right! With the help of new technology, I think all indians should have barcodes imprinted on their wrists. This barcode should record all their "myrid identities, affiliations, associations, orientations" to ensure that they never deviate from them. If they do, they should be publicly flogged, all in the name of course, of preserving "tradition"". However, if their "orientation" happens to be gay or lesbian, they should be flogged for disrespecting Hindu tradition, as defined by thekedaar Kerty, and be forced to deviate towards compulsive heterosexuality. As for the lowest common denominator or LCD, once they have conformed to the strictures of indigenous traditions, I really don't care if their other kartoots are broadcast on LCD monitors or not.

cs

"if uncompromising secularism is enforced, as in France, as in Japan, Singapore etc. etc. it is, who gives two shakes of a goldfish which religion one does or does not follow?"

That is a big 'if'. If wishes were horses, we could fly.

Since India is India and not france or singapore, since state and politicians are flawed, since people are deeply rooted in myrid religions, where does that leave us and where do we go from here? We are not looking for lectures about theory or hypotheticals or utopian illusions, but concrete solutions to real and immediate problems Indians are facing.

Morris:

""I am repeating over and over again that every one has right god. So I did not say that hindus or for that matter those monotheists have wrong god except that those monotheists think and preach that others have wrong gods.""

Try this for logical size.

1. The monotheists believe that they have the "right" (ugh!) god.

2. The Hindus (according to you admittedly)do not give a hoot about right or wrong god, since their are literally zillions of paths to salvation.

3. Who is being hypocritical here? I am not talking of Hinduism, but their self-appointed thekedaars.

4. The monotheists DO NOT claim that every path is equally valid.

5. But according to you, the Hindus do. So why do you (not the Hindus, but you) object when some deluded folks such as the monotheists follow a particular path? It may not be the RIGHT path, but according to your interpretation of Hinduism, it is certainly NOT the wrong path, since there IS NO wrong path. What exactly is the problems if indeed there are a plurality of pathways to salvation.

6. For the record again, organized or even disorganized religion can go to hell as far as I am concerned. But the hypocritical eating of one's samosa and having it too, must be pointed out.

Kerty # 77:

Kerty #68

Kerty, instead of beating about the bush while beating up secularism, garv sey kaho hum hindu chauvinist hain! You would not have to be so long-winded as me then, nor would have to seek the cover of "i'm not politically correct". And, while you're at it don't forget to heap more abuse on homosexuals, since I agree with you that they are an invention of monotheistic religions to subvert our traditional, pure, indigenous traditions and cultures. Do you think Hitler was right in gassing, boiling and quartering them? A rhetorical question.

Morris:

""If you cannot understand this then you have a hidden agenda.I do not.""

My hidden agenda has always been in the open, not hidden. To be crude about it, it is this: screw all religions and promote secularism. Secularism may not be perfect, but there is no alternative to it.

CS

You completely miss the point about conversions. You will have to live amongst the converts to know what it is. I have in the past talked about 2 major concerns with conversion in India

- It is a national security threat: Converts have demonstrated, jut like 'some' muslims of a strong pro-western slant. In fact there are hundreds of cases where missionaries have particpated in US and European Govt hearings dsigned to abuse India. I know we are not perfect but have u heard of Yanks testifying in the Indian parliament about how bad racism is in India. Now to the security threat- Google, Catholic Bishops India nuclear test. The CBCI has no business being in politics. Their comments on the nuclear tests were totally uncalled for.

- It is a cause for internal conflict: Simple example is in Orissa. Most people think that the conflict in Khandhamal is because of disagreement over religious beliefs. No, it is because of competition. The missionary folks for many years have been asking the Govt to reclassify backward class christians to tribals. How idiotic cam that be? Missionaries across India have created a belief system that attempts to persuade their converts that the primary reason for their failure is the domination of Hindus. There is no reason to believe that is the case. We are a screwed up country in general.

Only if you accept that this is a serious security concern that you will understand other arguments. It is not about right to preach and practice. In fact until recently most of the attacks have been on missionaries but not surprisingly have extended to christians themselves. I donot think christians are a problem but the missionaries surely are. While we cannot prevent conversion, missionaries should not be allowed to operate any more.

CS #785.

'But according to you, the Hindus do. So why do you (not the Hindus, but you) object when some deluded folks such as the monotheists follow a particular path? It may not be the RIGHT path, but according to your interpretation of Hinduism, it is certainly NOT the wrong path, since there IS NO wrong path. What exactly is the problems if indeed there are a plurality of pathways to salvation.'

What exactly is the problem. None whatsoever. And I have repeated that also many times. All I am saying is that what is right for you may not be right for me. So leave me alone. If you like speggeti enjoy it but don't insist that everyone should like it too. And if it is your philosophy that spegetti is for everone and you try to practice that then I reject that. And if you are sincere about secularism you too should reject that. Is that so hard to understand? Where is the hypocracy here. I wonder about your secularism.

cs

"5. But according to you, the Hindus do. So why do you (not the Hindus, but you) object when some deluded folks such as the monotheists follow a particular path? It may not be the RIGHT path, but according to your interpretation of Hinduism, it is certainly NOT the wrong path, since there IS NO wrong path. What exactly is the problems if indeed there are a plurality of pathways to salvation."

Nobody cares what path one follows as long as one acknowledges that whatever others follow are not wrong paths either. What raises red flags is not that someone chooses to follow different path, it is when someone claims all other paths are wrong and his path is only right one. One has to be intellectually dishonest to see rejection of that which rejects pluralism as anti-pluralism. Its like calling hatred of hate as hatred, steadfast resistance to fundamentalism as fundamentalism, fight against theocracy as theocracy, opposition to communalism as communal - these kind of desperate relativism, equivelancy and obsfucation amounts to intellectual frauds. Why not stick to passing off assinine and childish sarcasm as common sense?

I have had personal experience of classmates trying to "convert" me. They would sit on either side of me during lunch and "share" dripping pieces of chicken and mutton over my curd rice box. I love Christ but do not care for these fools who call themselves christians. I continue to practice Hinduism as I enjoy the "color" and variety of it. Om Nama shivaya.

Chandra:

"CS, You completely miss the point about conversions. You will have to live amongst the converts to know what it is."

- ""It is a national security threat: Converts have demonstrated, jut like 'some' muslims of a strong pro-western slant."

- It is a cause for internal conflict: Simple example is in Orissa.""

Both issues, "national securitÿ" and "internal conflict" can be take care of by the existing and perhaps additional laws. Red herrings really. If these laws don't work, is there any anti-conversion law? Are any laws being contravened? How does gangsterism from any side help to lower the temperature that causes more conflict? What am I missing?

Morris:

""What exactly is the problem. None whatsoever. And I have repeated that also many times. All I am saying is that what is right for you may not be right for me. So leave me alone. If you like speggeti enjoy it but don't insist that everyone should like it too.""

The point is that the next time the spaghetti monsters try to convince you of the superiority of spaghetti, tell them politely or crudely to fuck off. What is the problem? Why are you concerned if others begin to acquire a taste for spaghetti? Do we need taste inspectors and monitors? Since when and why? Must we monitor what others should eat, believe, sleep and drink? Again, what exactly is it that I'm missing?

Kerty:

""What raises red flags is not that someone chooses to follow different path, it is when someone claims all other paths are wrong and his path is only right one. One has to be intellectually dishonest to see rejection of that which rejects pluralism as anti-pluralism. Its like calling hatred of hate as hatred, steadfast resistance to fundamentalism as fundamentalism....etc.etc. etc.""

Really? What really raises red flags about intellectual dishonesty is when someone who heaps abuse on gays and lesbians presumes to preach the value of pluralism, etc. etc. garv sey kaho hum hindu supremacist hain, and be done with it.

Shanti:

""I have had personal experience of classmates trying to "convert" me. They would sit on either side of me during lunch and "share" dripping pieces of chicken and mutton over my curd rice box. I love Christ but do not care for these fools who call themselves christians. I continue to practice Hinduism as I enjoy the "color" and variety of it. Om Nama shivaya.""

Good for you! You know who you are and are not insecure enough to go nuts if someone tries to talk you into converting. They may have tried, and yes it's irritating for others to be sell you some crap you are not interested in, but their assinine attempts to convert you did not result in some major national security crisis, nor did it precipitate major riots. I would say that you are secure in your beliefs, unlike the others, including the converting missionaries, who feel they ought to be selling some product called evangelical christianity. Please enjoy the color and variety of whatever religion you chose to follow or not to follow.

Morris:

""And if it is your philosophy that spegetti is for everone and you try to practice that then I reject that. And if you are sincere about secularism you too should reject that. Is that so hard to understand? Where is the hypocracy here. I wonder about your secularism.""

To the contrary, if my philosophy is secularism, as it is, then I don't give a rat's ass if you eat spaghetti or fried worms. it's your call since it has no bearing on the framing of laws.

If you claim that you are for pluralism and that there are zillions of pathways to so-called salvation, THEN you should have no objection to spaghetti eaters trying to convince others to try and like spaghetti. If you object to it then you are a hypocrite, since you may like it or not, but spaghetti is just another way to so-called salvation. You may not like it, but given your profession of pluralism, you cannot dislike it either, unless you cannot even recognize hypocrisy even if you consume it for breakfast.

I guess the net result of all this is everyone needs to be bar-coded such that they can be monitored by the kertys to ensure that the existing demographics about linguistic, religious, regional, gastronomic, style of shitting and peeing etc. variety are stabilized forever, otherwise some catasprophe may befall our country. Similarly, kerty will have to take the KKK's warning about the US being flooded by by non-whites, seriously, since following the above "logic" perhaps they do have a point about "white America" being overwhelmed by non-whites. I assume kerty is packing his bags to assume the role of the bar-code inspector general to enforce cultural, regional and religious variety in India by making sure nobody ever believes or practices anything they were originally practising. Big brotherly biometrics and barcodes to the rescue.

CS

I dont think anybody is able to understand what you are arguing. Atleast I am not. Anyway to repudiate your point

The anti-conversion law does not prevent a person from changing his/her religion. It only asks for the individuals to inform the local administrator. It is a fairly easy task. Having said that, even in states with Anti-conversion law, less than 5% bother to inform the local administrator.

Your argument about about current laws being able to deal with national security is incorrect. No law in India says that campaigning against your own country with Govts of other countries is anti-national. If there is one, please show that to me.

cs

"What really raises red flags about intellectual dishonesty is when someone who heaps abuse on gays and lesbians presumes to preach the value of pluralism"

I didn't know gays and lesbians is a religious sect or a religion. Are we supposed to accept only sexual perversions as plularism - because there are whole slew of them ie incest, beastiality, bd/sm, non-consentual, pedophilia.

Sex is a deeply personal and private matter and that is where it belongs, not in public domain as a lifestyle, sect, religion or as litmus test of pluralism. Those who champion otherwise have an agenda to relegate religion itself to such status (confined to deeply personal and private domain) and de-recognize and abolish pluralism that prevail in religious, cultural and social spheres. They like to push pluralism from mainstream to fringe underground and pull out sexual perversions from fringe underground to mainstream public domain, and acceptance of such mainstreaming in public domain as a sole test of tolerance and pluralism. Come on now. Just as one can't disguise enemies of secularism(ie jehadis, missionaries) as champions of secularism, one can not befool proponents of monolith as champions of pluralism and tolerance, one can't pass off negationist of pluralism as pluralists. That is intellectual fraud on which much of secularist arguments and activism rely on.

Photographic evidence of the police brutality against Christian women and nuns who were praying quietly inside a church (in Mangalore)

http://tinyurl.com/4d2s6s

cs

"there are zillions of pathways to so-called salvation, THEN you should have no objection to spaghetti eaters trying to convince others to try and like spaghetti. If you object to it then you are a hypocrite, since you may like it or not, but spaghetti is just another way to so-called salvation."

Is that assinine and childish sarcasm or common sense or neither? Because it reeks of contempt and trivialization of religious pluralism. Your arguments rest on mockingly elevating spaghetti-eating and gay-humping to status of religious paths, and framing litmus tests of tolerance and pluralism to be accommodation of only those religions that do not tolerate religious pluralism or democracy in spiritual arena, and classifying only personal quirks and sexual habits as pluralism while de-recognizing any pluralism beyond. That is intellectual fraud, not common sense.

cs

"if my philosophy is secularism, as it is, then I don't give a rat's ass if you eat spaghetti or fried worms."

Nobody gives a rat's ass about your personal philosophy of secularism or secularism practiced in your dreamland - people give a rat's ass only to what is practiced in public domain in India. If your secularism is your private matter subject to only your private definitions, than you should not give rat's ass if secularism practiced by others is questioned and debated.

Obsfucations and trivializations do not lead to honest and healthy debate - and that has hurt secularism more than helped. Secularists circumvented the open debate when they decided to sneak secularism in the constitution during Indira Emergency, and ever since, secularism has maintained similar steadfast non-democratic streak by avoiding, obsfucating, trivializing and demonizing any debate on secularism, relying on jehadi and missionary extremism to preempt and degenerate the debates into street-fests.

cs

""national securitÿ" and "internal conflict" can be take care of by the existing and perhaps additional laws. "

Really? Can you give examples in india?

On the contrary, spacious secular arguments are given for not enforcing existing laws and rejecting needs for additional laws.

The secular view is that India is not a nation, but only a republic, and since India is not a 'nation', issue of 'national 'security' is an oxymoron. That India is only a sum of constitution, secular laws and votebanks - all else (including territories and security interests) is sacrificable to preserve and protect 'constitution, secular laws and votebanks'. Everything else have to fend for themselves in the streets.

Oh that was sad. Really, a bad news. I am a Christian as well and I felt the pain.

I thought India is the biggest number of people in terms of democracy. Where there is a freedom to exercise religion or faith; now- it sounds bias.

Hopefully, things are getting better soon. And- to my fellow Christian---'Righteous Prayer scares the devil"

Stand on-- Thanks for posting this article.

Kim

>>>>The New Life Church is a relative newcomer, known to be more hardline than most other churches which distance themselves from them. Shouldn't the Bajrang Dal have at least distinguished that?<<<<<

No it is not the Job of Hindus. It is the job of Christian community to control their fellow Evangelists and Missionaries from insulting and spilling venom against Hindus and pursuing and indulging in institution of "conversion".

Its not just one Evangilist church on conversion mission in India. Kim sounds very familiar name in organized conversion circles in India. Just wondering are you Kimberly Wilson associated with Seventh-day Adventist Church which is working vigorously on conversions (targeting 5-10 villages at one time in one area) to christanity across south of India with South Asian Division HQ in Hosur , India .!!!!

>>>>The Bajrang Dal resorts to violence because of something that is printed that they do not agree with.<<<<

You missed the 3 words very important words in your statement "distributing". "propagating" and "spreading" whats printed (anti-Hinduism)!!!!!

>>>>When the Bajrang Dal says that conversions are illegal, (and all the other things they do with tis as their cause) aren't they infact enforcing that "you cannot worship any God other than a Hindu God"<<<<<<

Nice statement!!!! ... Last anyone knew was that it is the Christian missionaries and evangelists who are dividing families, societies and peace across India. They are coming in with their new GOD and PROPHET. Question is simply "Enforcing your new alien Gods and Prophets" Vs "Protecting your existing prevalent God and faith".

>>>>Even if they did not agree with what was printed by the New Life church in India, couldn't they try having a dialog with them first, before resorting to violence.<<<

You must be kidding!!! Can you please let us all know how can you convince someone from not "spreading" word of their God when they staunchly believe that it is their religious right and mission in life as prescribed by their holy book. By the way the only reason they are in India is to "save" lost souls by bringing them to the fold of "Jesus".

It seems for vested interests you are deviating from facts. These Christian missionaries and evangelists do not "respect" the law of land. If conversions are "banned" than why are they bent on breaking the law and indulge in "converting" people at any cost. And in the process insult Hindu Gods, practices, customs, traditions and faith. Are they really working towards peace and harmony!!!

Isn't it true that just like Islam, Christianity considers Hindus as "Pagans" and "infidels" and its Christian institutions religious duty to spread the word of God among these Hindu Pagans. It is all evident from numerous Churches literature including Vatican. They all come up with these visionary plans and projects and set conversion targets.

Bottom line is that the Christian need to convert the entire world has been their historical obsession. And it is the same obsession that is continuing in India.

>>>>Is this OK, just because it is being done against Catholics/Christians in India who have historically been as non-violent as the Jains and buddhists (other minorities) in India?<<<<

So in other words Hindus are the "violent" group of people and do not let other religious groups live in peace. Last some one checked the history it seemed that Hindus have always on the receiving end for past thousand years both at the hands of Christianity and Islam. Maybe we as Hindus should ignore Goa Inquisition and of course of Christian British atrocities against Hindus.

We as Hindus should ignore the atrocities and ethnic cleansing of Hindus that occurred due to Christian Conversions in east of India especially, Tripura. These are the same Christian Evangelists and other Churches who are now targeting other interior areas of India especially south of India.


>>>> On 29th August over 40,000 Christian Educational Institutions across India stayed closed to register a peaceful protest against the continuing violence against Christians in Orissa which has now spread to 13 out of 30 districts.<<<<

And you call that "LEGAL"!!!!!! Depriving non-Christian kids from education to make a Christian point!!!! This decision was made by Christian institutions despite the fact that all these institutions fall under the Govt. State Education Board. Was it a national holiday sanctioned by Education board????

>>>> Why are these double standards in play?<<<<<

That's exactly what I am saying???

Is there a need for foreign institutions like Evangelism, conversion or missionaries in India????? Are they bringing Social peace and harmony or dividing the society???

"I do not approve of conversion by force or coercion or inducement".

Kim,

When intellectual and smart people like you start being more vocal about the harm that Christian proselytism does, we will start seeing a reduction in violence. People like you turn a blind eye towards the insidious and intellectually & morally bankrupt practice of Christian proselytism, or "tolerate" it instead of openly criticizing it, and then cry uncle when violence happens.

What I'm surprised at is that people like you are so oblivious to the harm that Christian proselytism has done around the world - either that's ignorance or turning a blind eye - shameful either way. Shouldn't we learn from what has happened in other countries and how their social fabric has been torn asunder because of "one true god"? Bush's religious faith mixed in with aid to African countries or promoting abstinence only education as a solution to AIDS? Or does the hatred of "Hindutva" blind you to all that, as you attempt to "right" the "wrongs" of Hindutvadis, or the caste system?

Tolerance of intolerance is not a virtue.

Kerty:

""Nobody gives a rat's ass about your personal philosophy of secularism or secularism practiced in your dreamland - people give a rat's ass only to what is practiced in public domain in India.""

I can see that you don't. However, India at present, is not a Hindu country but a secular one, depite the flaws. So until you can get the cat's ass up there and change the constitution, you have no choice but to deal with it. Get used to it or change it, although pompous rhetoric and khayali pulao will be of no help. Tough luck and good luck!

Kerty:

"Secularists circumvented the open debate when they decided to sneak secularism in the constitution during Indira Emergency,"

Tough luck! Get used to it. Until of course you become the prime minister with the bajrang dals in a majority. Keep dreaming. Dreams do come true sometimes.

Kerty:

"cs

""national securitÿ" and "internal conflict" can be take care of by the existing and perhaps additional laws. "

Really? Can you give examples in india?""

Examples? What examples? In any country the government has the legimitate right to enforce the laws, sometimes through the use of force. Would you rather prefer the Bajrang Dal, the Christian missionaries, the banned SIMI, the Thackerays and the all the other despicable sectarian groups fight it out in pitched battles in order to bolster the security of the country. And if your fiendish dream were to materialized, can we count on you to referee the bloodbath and its aftermath?

Folks, I think CS is saying it is ok to fight wars in the name of religion. As I understand what he is saying is that if some one comes to you to convert you simply tell him to get lost. Fine. When he comes to you with his institutuinal backing do the best you can. Get your institution to back you. So within the existing legal fraem work you could end up having religious rivalries. Fine. And ultimately laws get broken. Fine.

What happens when it comes to international and less developed countries? Anarchy in the name of religion. Too bad.

Is'nt that what happenned in the past and still happening to some extent. Indirectly he is saying all those wars in the name of religions were fine. There was and there is nothing wrong with those religions. A nation unable to scream get lost to invading army did the best they could. They were not able to fight back. Too bad. Surviavl of the fittest. Religion pushed by the most powerful should prevail. How far one should be able to go to push his right god depends upon the laws of the land. Less develope a region or a nation more atrocities it should put up with. According to him there is nothing wrong in pushing your god in others' throats if you can get away with it.

A religious fanaticism repackaged.

I am sure he has an answer. But my last one on this subject.

Kerty:

""On the contrary, spacious secular arguments are given for not enforcing existing laws and rejecting needs for additional laws."'

Spacious or narrow, if existing laws are not enforced by the state, it is an issue that should be addressed to the state authorities and politicians, not taken out on the streets by mass bloodletting and destruction of property, regardless of which community happens to be at the receiving end. Basic commonsense which i do not presume will get thru to you since you should garv sey kaho hum hindu supremacist hain, while heaping hate speech on gays & lesbian and who dare to proclaim garv sey kaho hum gandoo hain.

Heart

"my fellow Christian---'Righteous Prayer scares the devil"

Devil heard that.

Morris:

""Folks, I think CS is saying it is ok to fight wars in the name of religion."'

Folks I don't think, but I'm sure you are under interpretive stress. It happens, even though I write in plain english! Good thing too that this is your last one, although you can extract some more mileage from it.

What I'm saying in plain english is this: it is nobody's business nor one can make it one's business what I or other people believe or not. The fact that I don't have any religion while others do have it is nobody's else's business except mine and theirs, thekedaars of others' business notwithstanding. If you don't want to convert, don't. As simple as that. The fact that some theocracies such as saudi arabia etc. make it their business does not mean shit since time is against such medieval relics from the past. There is no reason to insert "I think CS is saying this or that", since I don't engage in obfuscation nor throw around scary terms like Kerty does (relativism, statism etc. etc.).

Kerty:

"Your arguments rest on mockingly elevating spaghetti-eating and gay-humping to status of religious paths"

Thekedaar Kerty, extremely sorry for not checking with your about how really to define religion before posting my mindless gibberish. Pardon me. This will never happen again. All I can say in my defence, even though it is a weak defence, is that my so-called brains were temporarily hijacked by the usual mao-mullah-muslim-secular gang. I look forward to a weekend of alchol infused decompression at a place called dosti pub in shaumberg. Are you up for a pint of MDG this weekend? Or am i getting out prematurely out of my pajamas by even imagining that I could drink with you. BTW, don't let my getting out of my pajama evoke some subconcsiously suppressed desires about "gay humping" in you. If that happens, another apology to you and your impeccably stringent but necessary high moral standards and your due concern for human rights of all, including of course those who engage in unspeakable sexual debauchery that threatens the very fabric of society.

Chandra:

"Your argument about about current laws being able to deal with national security is incorrect. No law in India says that campaigning against your own country with Govts of other countries is anti-national. If there is one, please show that to me."

My point: the state and government officials deal with national security, not sectarian hoodlums, be they muslims, christians, hindus, thackerays or anti-thakerays who take the law into their own hands.

It depends what you mean by "campaigning against one's country". Would an american protesting the vietnam war, the invasion of iraq etc. be seen as campaigning against his/her country? Is Arundhati Roy campaigning against her country? Are folks who consume foreign products and not indian ones, are campaigning against their country.

Elected officials and state functionaries have of course their own agendas, but only they have the LEGITIMATE right to enforce the laws.

Otherwise, the not so hidden sub-text of this whole discussion boils down to this: India is a Hindu country and should remain as such. Any other religion is naturally "alien" and its spread need to be monitored and indeed curbed, otherwise it would pose national security risks and conflicts that the state authorities cannot deal with. Pretty sad that educated folks think like this, and that too for a modern, secular democracy, not a theocracy.

>>>>India is a Hindu country and should remain as such. Any other religion is naturally "alien" and its spread need to be monitored and indeed curbed<<<<

Finally you got it!!!

The fact is that both Alien religions have this historical obsession to "convert".... and that is the core root of social and religious harmony.

Hindus are simply defending themselves and you wanna take that right away from them as well...

Morris:

"According to him there is nothing wrong in pushing your god in others' throats if you can get away with it."

This is not even stupid or silly. Unclassfiable really! We live not in medieval times when people were tortured for so-called crimes of heresy or believing in the wrong god or not believing at all. Nobody has a right to tell others what they can believe in or not. If people are forced into believing in particular gods, they can always refuse to believe in them. It is not as if someone is forcing them to put on some makeup, clothes or consume some daal. When it is a matter of belief, nobody can force anyone else to believe what they don't want to believe. If people are "forced" to convert in this day and age, how exactly does this happen? The unsuspecting targets of conversion are rendered unconcious, their brains are taken out and transplanted by some "christian brains" such that they now have no choice? Come on, don't insult your intelligence.

Gill,

The best response to you is no response.

Anyway, how come you were away for so long? Fighting dacoits with man singh?

CS

what is there to response???

I agreed with you

Ignore the fact that both Alien religions have this historical obsession to "convert" all people of world....
...of course "conversion" of hindus is the answer for social and religious harmony and peace in India.
...and as such under your pretext of secularism India should be a converted land....
.... both alien religions will be accepted as local religions.

---------------

anyway your wrote

>>>Nobody has a right to tell others what they can believe in or not<<<<<

isn't that's exactly why people are against institution of "conversions", missionaries, evangelists and jihadis..

cs #99

"In any country the government has the legimitate right to enforce the laws, sometimes through the use of force."

You seem to be good at raising unrelated points, and when they too rebutted, ignoring the central point of rebuttals and going off in a tangent or falling back on childish sarcasm.

(in a context of potential threats posed by conversions) first, you made a tall claim that national security problems and internal conflicts can be handled by laws, and when I pointed out that they can not be done in India and I gave reasons why - and I asked you how it can be done by asking you to give few examples, you come out with this gem.

Nobody has questioned or raised the point about government's legitimacy to enforce laws or use force. I merely stated that government lacks the will to do so because of inherent flaws of Indian secularism. Secularists do not want to apply laws or use force against missionaries and jehadis because they consider them their captive votebanks, ideological soul mates and partners in crime. That is why nobody waits for government or its laws but rather help themselves.

1. Is there a law that prohibits any Indian citizen from converting to any religion as many times as he/she wishes, even every week? No.

2. Is there a law against vandalism, desecration of places of worship or non-worship. Yes.

3. Is it ok if hoodlums, be the Muslim, Christian or Hindu take the law into their hands when they feel they have been slighted? NO

4. Is there a law against vandalism and gangsterism? Yes

5. Do politicians pander to religious bigotry of all stripes _Hindu, Muslim_ etc. for their own political ends? Yes.

6. If they do, should they be held responsible and criticized? Yes.

7. Or, should the lives, limbs and property of the co-religionists they pander to, should be destroyed by armed thekedaar vigilantes? NO

8. Should regular citizens who justify such wanton violence by arguing ""the other side" provoked it and therefore it is ok? NO

9. Can the justification for taking the law into one's own hands be a sure formula for continuing violence and mayhem as each side will always blame the other and take revenge and repeat the same cycle? Yes.

10. Would it help if one took an Indian rather than a Hindu, Muslim or Christian perspective on these important issue? Yes

etc. etc. etc. not so difficult for anyone with a modicum of commonsense. The rest is all prejudiced background noise. My last post!!!! Yipeeee, I'm done!!! No more stinky verbal diarrohea from me on this thread!!! Yahooo!!

cs

"If people are "forced" to convert in this day and age, how exactly does this happen? The unsuspecting targets of conversion are rendered unconcious, their brains are taken out and transplanted by some "christian brains" such that they now have no choice? Come on, don't insult your intelligence."

Ok. I will spare your intelligence, if do not mind what I say.

A boy and girl fall in love. Only problem is that the boy must convert or girl's parents would not consent. Girl's parents could lose their status in the church and access to its international gravy train, so they have to make conversion a precondition for having their daughter. Boy's parents are now caught in a dilemma - they have to either renounce their faith or lose their only son that is their only insurance in old age. Most of the time, boy's parents would follow their son and convert. Now, relatives and neighbors get caught in a dilemma - should they boycott this family, or should they ignore it and move on? But new converts would not go away that easiy - they tend to be even more zealous in proslytization to earn their status in their newly acquired community that goads the converts with admiration and vip treatment - so this newly converted family starts proslytizing their relatives and neighbors to give them the good news how good their new relatives are. Coached my missionaries, they start holding prayer meetings and bible study gatherings at their home and they start inviting their relatives and neighbors and also invite church experts - they try to disarm and charm their targets with material help and gain their trust and confidence, and than one day when their target desperately needs it the most, they suddenly withhold these material favors unless they take the next step towards officially joining their church. In absence of any other alternative at hand, they give in - they figure whats a big deal about going to a church or having a prayer meeting at their home once a week. The process of breaking in the target is slow and steady, and missionaries have it nailed down to perfection. Problems begin to escalate when other relatives and neighbors come to know what is going on and start objecting to it. Often property or resources jointly owned or shared by bothers or relatives or neighbors become source of biggest conflicts after conversion of some members - now creating two camps within family and neighborhood that are at each other's throats. Such drama is repeated in family after family, locality after locality, tribe after tribe, village after village - missionaries throw in their money power and power of their national/international network to keep up the good fight. The new converts develop persecution complex and sense of victimization right from the start due to hostility received from all around their old world, and so persecution complex will define their remaining converted life like a self-fulfilling prophesy.

So there you have it. A conversion saga without any unsuspecting victims, nobody had to be made unconscious, without any need for brain transplants, and yet conversion mission accomplished.

Kerty:

""That is why nobody waits for government or its laws but rather help themselves. ""

I do hope that when you encounter some deranged KKK or Nazi Skinhead types while you walk alone down a deserted alley in Chicago, they DO NOT decide to take the law in their own hands, due to their alleged pissed-offness at immigrants who are allegedly destroying the white demographics of their neighbourhood.

Good to know that you support vigilante violence. At least you are upfront and honest about your prejudice and its conversion to bloody violence.

"commonsense" keeps singling out one ethnic group in particular for criticism. I interpret this as a lack of willingness to criticize other ethnic groups, and therefore I can't ascribe much credibility in what "commonsense" is saying.

If "commonsense" were to show a willingness to be evenhanded, rather than purely restricting their criticism to one ethnic group in particular, to the point of always reflexively blaming them for conflict, then I might see more credibility in that.

As an atheist, I have no problem in recognizing that Hindus aren't some politically organized sect like Christians and Muslims are. These faiths were born out of political agendas, whereas Hinduism is just a culture, without any particular founder. The problem emanates from foreign-sponsored sectarian activism attempting to take over and upend the local ethnic groups.

Christian conservatives know they have a good racket going from 3rd world recruitment. They hope to create more Bobby Jindals every day, and that's how they hope to triumph over liberalism.

Kerty:

""The new converts develop persecution complex and sense of victimization right from the start""

nobody can develop a more fully developed fake persecution complex and a sense of pretend victimization than you. A bit like hitler and the nazis faking victimization by the jews and the gays, except, more exaggerated.

CS

Let us run through all the threads and you point out to one pro- Hindu comment you have made till date. I am unable to find one. The facts on the ground have been clearly laid out. I donot think it is correct to stop people from converting- either by laws or by violence. However, exploiting poor people by missionaries needs to be stopped- clearly by law. The Govt is reluctant to do that. Now that the Govt has failed, many of your friends from the right wing have taken that responsibility. When will you 'secular' folks wake up and move your asses to the ground to see whats happening.

"Residents of Mangalore, who are obviously saddened by the fact that the peaceful co-existence between the Hindus and Christians who are 1,64,982 in number has been disrupted, however blame forcible conversion to be the cause"

"The incident at Milagres was politically-motivated. I am sure that some men from the Opposition parties (Congress Party) were part of the protest, only to show our organisation in bad light. Believe me, I was disturbed by that sight too"- Bajrang Dal

"Answering to questions on New Life, Fr Serrao said that it is not part of Catholic church and that the Catholic Bishop is not responsible for any of their actions"

This is a dialogue of the deaf. Basically, some people on this thread are saying, "Boy, those damn Hindus are responsible for every misery in the country! But don't quote me as saying that I don't like Hindus! And you all better learn to be more unbiased like me, or you'll just be trapped in your own sectarianism!"

:P

That pretty much sums up what I'm hearing so far.

By way of analogy, what if I were to go all over India giving people Michael Jackson-style skin-lightening injections to 'improve' them? It's all fair when it's consensual, right? Let's see how long our liberal enlightened friends stay quiet about that.

Chandra:

""Let us run through all the threads and you point out to one pro- Hindu comment you have made till date.""

Pro-Hindu? Pro-Muslim? Pro-Christian? Sorry, but my admittedly weak mind does not work like that. You wasted your time looking for such comments. Pro-secularism, anti-take-into-your-own-hands violence regardless of who engages in it, has been my consistent line ever since i darkened the shores of DC over a year ago. Don't look for pro-sectarian sentiments from me.

Chandra:

""The Govt is reluctant to do that. Now that the Govt has failed, many of your friends from the right wing have taken that responsibility. When will you 'secular' folks wake up and move your asses to the ground to see whats happening.""

Simple point: whenever non-governmental organizations engage in large-scale violence, for whatever grievance, it is the role of the government to try and stop it by any means possible. And it is the role of the concerned citizenry not to encourage it, regardless of the provocation as in the end, it hurts everyone, regardless of religious affiliation or non-affiliation. Why is this simple point so difficult to fathom? Why must one weave a verbal spider's nest to avoid facing up to this simple commonsensical fact?

CS

"Pro-Hindu? Pro-Muslim? Pro-Christian? Sorry, but my admittedly weak mind does not work like that."

Me too. I hate to provide apologetics for any of them. If anybody criticises any of them, I do not get verbal or mental diherria

"Pro-secularism, anti-take-into-your-own-hands violence regardless of who engages in it, has been my consistent line"

Me too.

Whenever Jehadis, missionaries, maoists, naxalites, hindutva engage in violence, I tend to ignore all of them in the spirit of pro-secularism and do not let anybody single out any of them for criticism.

"Simple point: whenever non-governmental organizations engage in large-scale violence, for whatever grievance, it is the role of the government to try and stop it by any means possible."

The pro-secular government believes in non-violence too. It does not see violence or threats anywhere, it only sees love and harmony everywhere. Sure large families have their squabbles, but that is because they love each other and our secular government loves them even more for it - how can it even think about using force against any of them? If not for those few pesky misguided hindutvas, our beloved hindus, jehadis, missionaries and maoists would be hugging each others in the streets and exchanging sweet Golis. So why bother our secular government? It has more pressing things to worry about, like how to create paycheck parity with usa so everything in India can cost as much as in usa.

Kerty:

""The pro-secular government believes in non-violence too. It does not see violence or threats anywhere, it only sees love and harmony everywhere.""

This is not even silly. It is simply plain vanilla kerty served up straight. The government does intervene and sometimes very violently (think Punjab for starters). Yes politicians do pander to special interet groups for vote banks. That is not news. To rectify that situation, the commonsensical, commonsensical and civilized procedure is to use the available channels, be they in the form of formal politics, civil society lobby groups etc. To engage in violence because in order "to teach the other side a lesson" regardless of name one attaches to the "other side" is nothing short of terrorism. If you support it, as you do, (Kerty # 110 ""That is why nobody waits for government or its laws but rather help themselves.") is not at all surprising, but it is depressing. There is nothing one me or anyone can do about it, except to repeat reasonable arguments, although it will not get through to you, committed as you are to a sectarian worldview of "is this pro or anti-Hindu". The good news is that your thekedaaari of all the Hindus will not work. If it did, you would be out of the job of thekedaari. So what you have to say is entirely expected, and not worth my time to argue with you about. However I do it out of the goodness of my heart, just to pump up your ego because nobody else seems to pay much attention to you and your pompous, prejudiced rants. It never hurts to commit random acts of kindness, even towards those, and perhaps especially towards those who are viciously sectarian while donning the cloak of profundity and fair-play.

What is indeed surprising is that Chandra of all the people drops hints of supporting a similar viewpoint. As in Chandra # 116 ""Now that the Govt has failed, many of your friends from the right wing have taken that responsibility. When will you 'secular' folks wake up and move your asses to the ground to see whats happening.""

Anybody who is even half-awake and has a modicum of commonsense and even devoid of brains can see that what Chandra points out is true. Nobody disputes that, so no point waking anyone up. The issue is this: when these things happen, when the Bajrang Dal or SIMI or some New Life Church hoodlums engage in violence, is it to be justified, abetted and further instigated or must one pressure the state, compromised though it is, to set things right? Why must we as Indian citizens take sectarian sides? why must the litmus test be, like an oath of loyalty, on the grounds of pro-anti Hindu, Muslim, Sikh, Christian etc? That there is such a sentiment enough to create non-stop nuisance, is a fact. But at the end of the day, secular democracy also has enough mechanisms and safety-valves to defuse and take care of them. And even if the state cannot and does not, it does not follow that sectarian violence can solve the problem. It always creates deep wounds, divides, bitterness for years to come, if not generations to come. Basic commonsense that other countries have figured out, even though they used to be mired in such situations.

CS

"To rectify that situation, the commonsensical, commonsensical and civilized procedure is to use the available channels, be they in the form of formal politics, civil society lobby groups etc."

What if they too are not adequate or effective? What if they too fall into trap of being pro-this and anti-that and lose their unbiasedness? The way things are, you will need your own militia to negotiate and lobby and bring the other sides to the table to make them deal in a civilized manner - so who are going to recruit as your militia - jehadis, missionaries, maoists, naxalites, separatists? This is nut and bolts of Indian politics, this is what armchair idealism has to translate into. This is how things work in India. And why so? Indian secularists only have themsleves to look in the mirror. They pose as part of the solution, refree of competing interests, post-violence moralists but they are as much part of the problem. Do you think jehadis, missionaries, maoists etc can survive in India whem majority of Indians have nothing to do with them - secularism is their official patron and that is its way of saying thank you, a gist of harmony and love. India's secularism needs them, ideologically and politically and if any of them were missing in action or found lacking, it would import them, appease them.

"...a sectarian worldview of "is this pro or anti-Hindu"."

Issue of being pro or anti comes into play when 'anti' shows up and 'pro' has to take a stand or defend against it. So being pro or anti is a defensive reaction. It can also be an offensive initiative when it is part of an agenda. While nation is bound to have competing interests groups and constant inter play of anti and pro - government and secularism has to remain above the fray - and yet, it can not put on blinkers all the times - it must take stand in favor or against when things get out of hand - the problems get compounded when secularists choose sides, they take stand for votebanks, they put on blinkers even on the face of extremism and violence, they speak out only when one particular side reacts with extremism or violence - in a nut shell, they when they think and act just like 'commonsense' here, that they lose credibility and legitimacy and effectiveness to manage competing interests. And that is where India is at present.

CS

"To rectify that situation, the commonsensical, commonsensical and civilized procedure is to use the available channels, be they in the form of formal politics, civil society lobby groups etc."

What if they too are not adequate or effective? What if they too fall into trap of being pro-this and anti-that and lose their unbiasedness? The way things are, you will need your own militia to negotiate and lobby and bring the other sides to the table to make them deal in a civilized manner - so who are going to recruit as your militia - jehadis, missionaries, maoists, naxalites, separatists? This is nut and bolts of Indian politics, this is what armchair idealism has to translate into. This is how things work in India. And why so? Indian secularists only have themsleves to look in the mirror. They pose as part of the solution, refree of competing interests, post-violence moralists but they are as much part of the problem. Do you think jehadis, missionaries, maoists etc can survive in India whem majority of Indians have nothing to do with them - secularism is their official patron and that is its way of saying thank you, a gist of harmony and love. India's secularism needs them, ideologically and politically and if any of them were missing in action or found lacking, it would import them, appease them.

"...a sectarian worldview of "is this pro or anti-Hindu"."

Issue of being pro or anti comes into play when 'anti' shows up and 'pro' has to take a stand or defend against it. So being pro or anti is a defensive reaction. It can also be an offensive initiative when it is part of an agenda. While nation is bound to have competing interests groups and constant inter play of anti and pro - government and secularism has to remain above the fray - and yet, it can not put on blinkers all the times - it must take stand in favor or against when things get out of hand - the problems get compounded when secularists choose sides, they take stand for votebanks, they put on blinkers even on the face of extremism and violence, they speak out only when one particular side reacts with extremism or violence - in a nut shell, when they think and act just like 'commonsense' do here, that they lose credibility and legitimacy and effectiveness to manage competing interests. And that is where India is at present.

Kerty # 125.

In response to you, all I can say is to repeat once again what I said earlier:

""So what you have to say is entirely expected, and not worth my time to argue with you about. However I do it out of the goodness of my heart, just to pump up your ego because nobody else seems to pay much attention to you and your pompous, prejudiced rants. It never hurts to commit random acts of kindness""

Alas I have run out of the milk of human kindness. Until I visit "mother dairy" (in Delhi)again, you will have to patiently wait.

Kerty:

""Nobody gives a rat's ass about your personal philosophy of secularism or secularism practiced in your dreamland - people give a rat's ass only to what is practiced in public domain in India.""

Good point about the flaws in secular democracy as practised in India. However, the cure to that is a better implementation of its principles and practice, rather than rejecting it. Let me give you an example that you will understand but not accept since you thrive on bloated rhetoric not rationality. Nevertheless, here goes:

Suppose a university is not functioning properly and its faculty members, instead of teaching and engaging in research are doing everything else but teach and do research. The solution to this problem is not to get rid of all universities, but to ensure that the ideals of a university are held up and enforced, even though no university can ever live up to this ideal completely. Perhaps there may be a time when no universities are needed, but until then, nobody will ever mistake a university, however badly run, for a brothel, even though some folks in a brothel might be doing a better job of teaching others about sex. A university is a university regardless of how badly its members perform their duties and a brothel will never be a university, regardless of how much their inmates, men or women, engage in teaching the the practice of sex.

If secular democracy does not always pan out in practice, the concept itself is worth holding on to because the only alternative to it is theocracy or dictatorship, regardless of how they are dressed up and presented to the public.

I suppose Kerty will label Mahant Gyandas of the famous temple in Ayodhya as anti-Hindu too; today he said:

"The way they are indulging in bloodshed, this is not the work of sanatana-dharmees (true believers)," said Mahant Gyandas of the Pancharamanandi Nirvani Akhara at Hanuman Garhi temple.

"It is beastly behaviour and should be stopped just as an animal's action is," the mahant told The Telegraph over the phone from the heartland temple town.

No one cares for the country, they are all fighting for power and fooling people," Gyandas said.

The mahant said these outfits were "separating legs, hands and the head, tearing each part from a whole body.""

Times of India:

THIRUVANANTHAPURAM/BANGALORE: As mob attacks on churches, that started in Davangere, continued in Karnataka, violence crossed the state border and communal tension gripped Kasargode district in Kerala where Hindu mobs protesting conversions attacked a missionary-run kindergarten school that doubled as a church.

CS

Its common knowledge that Mahant Gyandas is a 'socialist saint' and not a hindu saint. His sole allegiance is to socialism and not hinduism. He is known as a SP henchmen. So if you are going to quote somebody from hindu rank, you gotta do better.

Kerty,

I see! So even hindu mahants do not qualify as hindus. you are a very stringent thekedaar (contractor) of hinduism for sure! amen!

kerty,

some friendly advice. before going to sleep, better check under your bed and closets, just in case some secularists, socialists, anti-Hindus, mahants who are not quite hindus, gays etc. etc. are hiding, waiting to pounce on you.

CS-120

And yet you did not say a word when 5 Hindus were first killed in Phulbani (Khandhamal).....hypocrisy ka haad hota hain....

Chandra # 133:

Same lack of sectarian logic: what about when so and so engaged in violence or got killed! All such violence and killing is crap, period. I did not say anything because, there is no thread discussing it. Would I condemn it? If you followed anything I have written, I would condemn any such violence more than you can even imagine. I have personally been in such situations and have personally, with considerable risk to my life, rescued people "from the other side" so to speak. I have lived thru such crap, not just read of them thru news reports and bloated hyperbole. hence my animosity (sometimes frothing and foaming, i admit it) to such painful events. Please continue along you tu tu, main main mode, "what about when Hindus are killed?" The "other side" always has a come-back line to this, and so do all the sides, a perfect recipe for continuing gangsterism and violence. beyond shame.

i doubt that any more light, as opposed to heat, will be generated here by me. if at all any light was every generated by me. apologies for inadvertently upsetting anyone. that was hardly my motive, in all sincerety.

quote, unquote:

U.R. Anantha Murthy, the noted man of letters of Karnataka: the parivar is "destroying Hindu civilisation".

CS

If those are your comments, you should also respect all the crap that people like me have gone through with missionaries around us. The brainwashing, lies and yes, Goondagardi.

"Suppose a university is not functioning properly and its faculty members, instead of teaching and engaging in research are doing everything else but teach and do research. The solution to this problem is not to get rid of all universities, but to ensure that the ideals of a university are held up and enforced, even though no university can ever live up to this ideal completely."

==================

Good, and I agree.

So what exactly have you and other liberals who talk about improving secularism *done* to make secularism better? Were you there to protest the handling of Shah Bano case by Congress? Do you really think Haj subsidy is secular, and if so, why, when other Islamic countries don't have it? How about banning of "The Satanic Verses"? Or do you come out to improve secularism only when James Laine's book causes a ruckus?

If you all kept quiet when secularism was being raped in the first two cases, but stand up and shout in the last case, then maybe you and your liberal friends need to grow a pair and take a stance on secularism that is universal and uniform, and talk about improving secularism in ALL CASES where it is misapplied and misused. Such calls for selective improvement of secularism are a hard sell as well as clearly unfair.

As for thekedaars, can I ask you what exactly have you done to preserve and propagate Hinduism and its values? Do you think of it as something worthwhile (while still being aware of the problems), or hold it in contempt because of those problems?

Should I quote Bhyrappa - another noted man of letters - to your UR? ;) :)

kaffir,

yes. and since when did you need anyone's permission?

Kaffir:

"Were you there to protest the handling of Shah Bano case by Congress? Do you really think Haj subsidy is secular, and if so, why, when other Islamic countries don't have it? How about banning of "The Satanic Verses"?""

No, I have to admit I was too busy taking the L in my own hands when those incidents happened. And I don't mean the law, either, but the L. How about you? What were you upto in those days?

CS

Taking L in Bungholes is not the same as taking L in Hands because the former is definitely L speech, I mean love speech. Same goes for Shah Bano. What are laws after all but jack ass - meant to be bent and banged.

CS,

Next time you criticize Hindutva, all you have to do is look in the mirror to see who played a role in their rise. And so with the inability to accept mistakes, the (finger-pointing) game goes on and on.

As for what I was doing, I was a young one - too young to understand or have a say in the decisions made at that time. But a simple analysis is enough to show that anyone (media, politicians, leaders, intellectuals) who didn't protest the Shah Bano case (or supported it) played a role in "making the university dysfunctional," as you put it. So maybe you should take your case to those people and ask them some questions. That seems like common sense to me.

kaffir,

ok. thanks.

CS

I like your university analogy and rationale you use for overlooking the flaws of secular humanism. I would like to extend similar rationale to Hinduism, caste system, Hindu civilization, Hindu culture and Hindutva - for they are not to be blamed, but people who do not practice them in true spirit and people who oppose them out of malice and agenda.

Kerty:

""I like your university analogy and rationale you use for overlooking the flaws of secular humanism.""

Kerty-jee,

I will take any ego-inflating crumbs you throw i my direction. I'm fully aware that whatever i write makes no dent in your thinking, but at least writing stuff keeps me away from the bottle, so you are unintentionally helping me.

However, the analogy of the university cannot be extended to religion for the following reasons (remember I said "reasons" not prejudice/ideology)

1. Universities are, in theory at least, supposed to be universal (university, get it?). In theory at least, they are supposed to teach people HOW to think, not WHAT to think, at least the liberal arts/humanities curriculum. BHU, AMU, Catholic University, Brigham University etc. notwithstanding, modern universities try to teach folks to think about a particular issue from a variety of perspectives, sometimes contradictory perspectives.

2. All religions by their very definition and goals are NOT universal but sectarian. They cater to particular groups of willing and sometimes unwilling consumers. Not for nothing, the term religion derives from the latin "religios" which translates into "to bind". In addition to binding its followers to a particular doctrine, religions also "blind" their followers into dogmas of all kinds. ALL religions do, this and Hinduism is no exception. By their very nature or constituion if you will, religions create divisions. However, the situation is not as bad as it was in the medieval ages where non-believers were put to death, tortured etc, except for theocracies such as Saudi Arabia etc. That religions encourage delusional thinking is not so bad, as long as religons are not allowed to influence laws since all societies without exception are multi-religious. Besides, to do away with delusions is a thankless task, since we all have them. I am for example, deluded in thinking that I can argue with you or get thru to you. But it does more good than harm since I don't drink and I also pander to your ego. Secular Humanism recognizes that delusions cannot be done away with, but they can be tamed by not allowing them to colonize the sphere of laws etc. Example: a believing catholic may believe that all abortion is simply wrong; he/she need not avail of it, but she/he cannot enforce this view on everyone else, much less fellow catholics. Catholics may believe that gay marriage is the ultimate heresy based on scriptures, but spain has a majority catholic population and it allows gay marriages because it is a secular democracy, not a catholic country.

The good news for me, is that India will never be a country that Hindutva desires. The BJP had a go at it but instead of a real orgasm they so badly wanted, it was a couple of premature ejaculations and now they are in the doghouse as a regional party. A majority of Indians are too smart for them, and hence the strength of democracy, secular democracy.The bad news is that due to political calculations, this will not stop Hindutva, evangelistas, jihadis etc. etc. from creating mayhem. It will not stop ALL political parties, including the Congress and the BJP from indulging in the politics of vote banks, stoking communal conflicts etc. We as citizens who are not professional politicians (you may not be simply a regular citizen) owe it to our country to step back a bit and not be willing utilized as cannon fodder for religious or any other kind of sectarian dispute. Utopian? You bet? But the alternative to it is utopian too, but of a nightmarish sort.

CS

You used the big catch words that Universities are 'supposed to be' universal and teach 'how to think' and not 'what to think'. I doubt such universities exist in India, but that is besides the point. (Universities are more likely to create merit-based and admission-based roadblocks for seekers and carriculum in each discipline will not left to the students but fixed by the faculty leaders. One can also have Islamic, liberal, Conservative, feminist, Marxist, Hindu universities - and they can slant many subjects to their own orientations. But I digress)

In the same vain as you have claimed, one could also claim that Hinduism too is supposed to be universal. That it only seeks to promote science of God realization, leaving the details of who is God, what to worship, how to worship, what to believe, what is the truth and what is God's will up to the people - so what you decry as sectarianism is essentially democratization of spiritualism, that allows people the freedom to worship as they please and choose whatever path and panth they may fancy, and they are left alone as long as they respect the similar freedoms of others, thus diversity is allowed to flourish in the field of religion and spirituality too. Your humanism mistakes such diversity and plurality as divisions and sectarianism and hides behind very religions who are antithesis of pluralism to advance secular humanist arguments.

Your claim that secular humanism would not let laws be colonized by religion is not true either. In India, such claims would sound like used car sales pitch. Even in western and Islamic countries, conservatives derive their legal doctrines from semitic theology and do legislate them.

Anti-religious platform of secular humanism rests on most fundamentalist religions ie xianity and Islam, on most rabid ideologies ie marxism, maoism, naxalism; on most extremist tactics ie separatism, terrorism, state fiats; on atomizing ideologies of transferring and centralizing power ie individualism, feminism, sexual anarchy. Lets face it, that is the anatomy of secular humanism. And most Indians know it too well by now.

kerty:

"Anti-religious platform of secular humanism rests on most fundamentalist religions ie xianity and Islam, on most rabid ideologies ie marxism, maoism, naxalism; on most extremist tactics ie separatism, terrorism, state fiats; on atomizing ideologies of transferring and centralizing power ie individualism, feminism, sexual anarchy. Lets face it, that is the anatomy of secular humanism. And most Indians know it too well by now.""

If most indians know it to well by now, don't waste your breath. hindutva parties will be elected by a majority, year after year; problem solved.

my more modest claim is that most dc readers know of your misogynism, homophobia etc. quite well by now.

CS
>>>my more modest claim is that most dc readers know of your misogynism, homophobia etc. quite well by now.<<<<

I think the more appropiate statement should be

"most dc readers know of "Prophet CS's" misogynism, homophobia etc. quite well by now"

Gill,

My even more modest claim is that nobody except me pays any attention to your drivel. i do it because even fringe elements like you can sometimes make sense of commonsense.

Gill

If you notice how secular humanism seeks to fudge the issues and get by deceptions.

It carefully nurtures fundamentalist, intolerant and pluralism-negating jehadism and missionary brand of xianity, it refuses to distinguish or isolate jehadists from Moslems, Missionaries from xianity, and than whenever jehadists or missionaries are held accountable or receive backlash, suddenly propaganda turn that onto attack on moslems and attack on xians and attack on pluralism, and case of intolerance and fundmentalism by hindus.

Same way, any counter attack on feminism gets classified as hatred of women, any backlash against maoism or naxalism or marxsim, amounts to attack on poors and peasents, any resistance to mainstreaming of sexual anarchy as attack on homosexuality and sexual freedoms.

Only distinction it does not fail to make is hindu and hindutva - it likes to attack everything about hindus while frame the counter reactions as hindutva and seek to isolate it from rest of Hindus - thus attack on neither hindutva nor hindus amounts to attack on hinduism or hindus! This is how secular humanists like to frame issues and debates - only if it fits within such framework, it is considered newsworthy and gets extensive media coverage and gets political space in its political process. This is how secular humanism works in India.

in light of fresh drivel (recycled but fresh) from kerty, let me re-state my modest claim even more modestly:

instead of "even fringe elements" need some commonsense, I should have written: "members of the lunatic fringe are especially in dire need of some commonsense"

kerty-gill combine,

same as before
fresh manure

Here is what the other side is saying about this episode:


1)Conversions are not something new for missionaries but New Life is something really new in its methodology and approach adopted for conversion. It makes the innocent and gullible people to trample upon the photos of Hindu gods and goddesses, insult Hindu gods, use foul language against gods, goddesses and seers and gives new names to those who convert. Many Hindu residents have been complaining but there has been no action by the police, alleges local Hindu residents.

(2) Churches have to be built with the approval of the diocese on the land bought by the trust or donated by the government. But Newlife activists have taken some government buildings or sheds citing some other purpose but later started using for religious propogation. These were not approved either by the government or by the diocese.

(3) A Davanagere district administration cofirmed that that a dilapidated shed belonging to agricultural department in Bada village, was illegally occupied by New Life evangelists and conversion activities were started. On repeated complaints from well-meaning and right-thinking citizens of the Hindu society, the municipal authorities issued notices and asked the evangelists to show proof that the place has been allotted to carry on religious activities. "Even after one month, the Newlife workers could not prove their legitimacy. Finally the government seized the place and took possession of it," an official of the Davanagere district administration said.

(4) When ex-prime minister and JD(S) supremo H.D. Deve Gowda and Mallikarjuna Kharge, a senior Congress leader, tried to take political advantage of the situation by visiting the damaged prayer halls, Hindus stopped them to show their damaged house and other belongings. This clearly shows that large number of Hindus are also affected in the attack by Christians. Rumours are thick in the air that some Muslim fundamentalist outfits have joined the Christians in attacking the Hindus, to fight Bajrang Dal and Sri Rama Sena, an active Hindu outfit in Mangalore.

(5) Newlife, one of the 20 missionary centres, belongs to Karnataka Missions Network and started missionary activities six years ago in coastal areas of Dakshin Kannada District. It is actively propagating Christianity in Karnataka, other states and also in few foreign countries through publications, advertisements and through www.newlifevoice.org website. It started publishing and distributing literature Yesu Suvarthe containing glories of Jesus among Christians in Kannada language. But over the period of years locals felt that Newlife was indulging in conversions by alluring the gullible people by offering money, job, medical aid, vehicle etc. What irked the Hindus is that Newlife started distributing their literatures to Hindus to entice them to convert to Christianity. A local person told this correspondent that Newlife started giving instructions to newly converted people to abandon wearing tilak on forehead, not to visit and offer prayers at the Hindu temples, replacing the photos and idols of Hindu Gods and Goddesses with Cross etc. This was the beginning for creating disturbance in the peace-loving society.

With more and more gullible people falling prey to this organisation, Newlife went one step ahead in deriding the Hindu Gods and Goddesses by disdaining Lord Krishna--married to thousands of women (characterless), Ganapati--rests in water after the puja (useless), Kali--wearing skulls all around the neck (ugly) etc., in their pamphlets, CDs and book Satya Darshini. Bangalore North MP, H.T.Sangliana, who is the guardian of Karnataka Missions Network, said that he will lodge a complaint against Newlife if there is an evidence with Bajrang Dal. The local public mentioned that "the method used by Christian missionaries in converting is like a network or multilevel marketing technique used by MNCs. In the first place they appoint young people by giving them a salary of Rs 4000 to 4500. They will go around meeting the gullible people in market areas, in buses etc., become friends and take them to church to introduce to the father there. Upon introduction they will be paid Rs 2500 per person. Pursuing with them and taking them to Velankanni Church, in Tamil Nadu, they get Rs. 3000. Further follow-up with them and finally conversion to Christianity by changing the name, they get an incentive of Rs 10000 onwards. The more they convert the more bonus points are added. The whole Hindu community is upset because of this."

More and more Hindus belonging to dominant castes like Brahmins and Vokkaligas have already converted to Christianity in Mangalore and hence their friends and relatives are naturally angry with churches. Mangalore bandh was called by Sri Rama Sena, protesting the stabbing of their leader on Monday by masked men.

same script: "our" side and the "other" side. no side, not even as an aside, of the regular indian citizen. the essences of a hardcore sectarian DNA, be it christian, muslim, hindu, martian.

same as before
fresh manure

CS

However I may like to imitate secular humanists, I can't bring myself to embrace missionaries and talibanis and Maoists as 'our own'. I like to isolate them and put them on the 'other side'. It will always be us vs them.

Kerty:

""However I may like to imitate secular humanists, I can't bring myself to embrace missionaries and talibanis and Maoists as 'our own'. I like to isolate them and put them on the 'other side'. It will always be us vs them.""

To your obviously incomplete list that I don't disagree with, I would also add the hardcore Hindutva types -the Bajrang Dal and their ilk. I have no problem with the soft-core Hindutva types since to have pride in one's community, religion, values whatever is not only not a problem, but very much an essential component of real societies, as long as it is in the context of functioning democracies, not theocracies.

Kerty:

""Maoists as 'our own'. I like to isolate them and put them on the 'other side'.""

Most of the maoists are indeed on the other side of the border, running the government in nepal.

CS

Hindutva is a counter reaction due to failure of secularism in India. We didn't hear about BD or VHP 30 or 40 years ago. May be they were there but they were of no consequences until recent decades. Even BJP/JS had presence of no consequence until 90s. Their rise to prominence is a testimony of growing uneasiness being felt by Hindu society - so issues championed by hindutva now resonate with more people. If secularism can get its act together, the hardcore hindutva will soften and it would recede as background noise. But secularism has run out of ideas - gandhian secularism, nehruvian secularism, secular humanism no longer work their magic in India.

Kerty:

""Hindutva is a counter reaction due to failure of secularism in India. We didn't hear about BD or VHP 30 or 40 years ago. May be they were there but they were of no consequences until recent decades""

Fringe groups always justify their existence as a counter-reaction to something or the other. Sometimes such lunatic fringe groups get mainstreamed, even if for a while. Hitler and the Nazis alleged they were threatened by the Jews, the gays and the gypsies. However absurd it may sound now, a majority in Germany bought the line. The Taliban will also justify its existence, alleging that "Islam is in danger" due to the alleged evils of secularism, westernization. The rabid evangelical missionaries will always justify their preying on others with the aim of converting them as a response to the fact that secularism is dominant in most western societies. There is no shortage of justifications if one is really set on apologizing for crap, gangsterism of one kind or another. Hindutva, Bajrang Dal etc. are following the same lack of logic, but one that has a lot of emotional appeal. The real challenge is to apply logic and to reject all of these deadend ideologies.

CS

"The real challenge is to apply logic and to reject all of these deadend ideologies."

I agree. I do not see secular humanism rejecting them, at least not in India. That gives legitimacy to Hindutva that it otherwise would not have. That is why I said. The secularism has run out of ideas - it does not know how to deal with extremism springing from all directions, mostly its own votebanks.

the solution to the dilution of secularism is to shore it up further, not to abandon it for non-existent alernatives such that promise pies-in-the-sky-before-you-die. or samosas if you will.

CS

"the solution to the dilution of secularism is to shore it up further, not to abandon it for non-existent alternatives such that promise pies-in-the-sky-before-you-die"

Right now, it is the secularism that is in that boat of promising pies-in-the-sky-while-hindus-die.

The challenge for the proponent of secularism is how to shore it up, how to restore people's faith in it. Wishful thinking and theoretical rhetorics and crafty deceptions will not work. Because secularism is no longer a novelty it once was. It has a terrible track record in India. I have raised many points about secular humanism in this and other thread and you may ignore them if you wish, but these points will not go away simply by wishing. Out there in the macrocosm, secular humanism will have to deal with them, and they might prove to be the nemesis of secular humanism, fondly known as pseudo secularism.

CS

>>>>the solution to the dilution of secularism is to shore it up further<<<<

Another "ism"!!!!! similar to all other fanatical "ism" cults.

There is no difference between you CS and Mullah's and Evanglists all you three advocating and propagating their "isms" as the final and "only" resort and solution.....

CS
>>>>Fringe groups always justify their existence as a counter-reaction to something or the other. Sometimes such lunatic fringe groups get mainstreamed, even if for a while<<<<

WOW finally you saw the mirror!!! CS and your devlish cult!!!! Who under the pretext of
"secular humanism" is against everything and all established systems..... except ofcourse their own "ISM"!!!!

CS has traits of "Hitler" in his convictions, rejections and ideological fanatism........Hitler had his Nazism and CS has his own "ISM".......

Hey Gill,

More good news for you. The word for a goose and swan in Latin is "anser" as in. Obviously stolen and from the Sanskrit _hansa_ for goose and "raj-hansa" for a swan. The eurocentric bastards are getting all the credit for this and they cannot even get the distinction between a goose and a swan right. Hope you will organize a protest against this. More information for you below, to help fuel your indignation at how our culture was stolen by the west (btw, feel free to claim credit for this discovery)

"anser
Typical geese.

anseriform
Web-footed, long-necked, typically gregarious migratory aquatic birds usually larger and less aquatic than ducks."

Hey Gill,

More good news for you. The word for a goose and swan in Latin is "anser" as in. Obviously stolen and from the Sanskrit _hansa_ for goose and "raj-hansa" for a swan. The eurocentric bastards are getting all the credit for this and they cannot even get the distinction between a goose and a swan right. Hope you will organize a protest against this. More information for you below, to help fuel your indignation at how our culture was stolen by the west (btw, feel free to claim credit for this discovery)

"anser
Typical geese.

anseriform
Web-footed, long-necked, typically gregarious migratory aquatic birds usually larger and less aquatic than ducks."

CS

Fanatic"ism" is turning to lunatic"ism"

Typical "traits" of individuals like Hitler, Stalin, Mao............

There is more to it than meets the eye as facts start to trickle out.

http://www.telegraphindia.com/1080923/jsp/nation/story_9873685.jsp

Kerty ,read and be enlightened -http://www.galva108.org/index.html

Homosexuality has been part and parcel of Hinduism.

kela,

kindly cease and desist from propagating the lies of colonialists, eurocentrists, secularists, democrats etc. etc. whose only one point agenda is to defame hinduism and hurt our sentiments. (tongue firmly in my own cheek)

And here I say - Vote No On Proposition 8!!

proposition 8

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Proposition_8_(2008)