A Moratorium on Conversions: Who Decides?

nice article...

"The AICC is determined to protect and serve the Dalits. We have stated long ago that we will love and serve them unconditionally with Christ's love whether they are Christians or not."

Since when missionaries became the protectors of Dalits and non-xians? If AICC is not willing to recognize Hindu organizations RSS/VHP) as a valid party in inter-religious dialogue, than why should missionaries be recognized as a legitimate party in the dialogue, and why should xians or missionaries be allowed to speak for non-xians?

The central issue is missionaries and conversions, not dalits or xians or hindus or RSS. Missionaries are trying to adding them in the mix in order to justify what they have been doing.

Please. We have had enough of xian love. What would it take to get it thru missionary skull?

I think there can be no curtailment of fundamental right to convert, it is against fundamental rights. However, we can surely do this

a. Prevent foreign funds from being transferred to India
b. Donot provide visas to foreign missionaries
c. Actively prevent missionaries from spreading hatred and lies against other religions
d. Change rules on educational institutions to secularise educational institutes in India

All of these rules donot violate any aspect of the constitution and yet cap religious conversions significantly.

We will fight you Mr. Madhu Chandra. We will fight you until you stop your hocus pocus. We will fight you in the villages of Orissa and in the bulletin boards of blogs. We will do this until you are reasonable and accept that all religions are equal.

Mr Chandra,

Good try...the filthy games of pseudo secular people like you are long over. Dare to convert now?

Yes, the Indian government will decide about the conversions and so be it. That includes the present government-Congress, oppositions and the state government as well. People have to follow the law and if you don't like it, then leave. This is a free world but freedom is a right and comes with some responsibilities.

If you don't like it please pay a visit to the neighboring countries and take up their citizenship. You will missed.

Keep trying and write even longer articles, big words, spew hatred against non-christians....at the end of the day the government of India through its people has shown the missionaries their right place. They are welcome to stay here but no more converts.

In anycase, the sexual escapades between priest and nuns in the west are well known facts too. Not to forget the children those are molested. What is your say on that?? That is a serious problem than the Indian government's silence on this matter , RSS, or BJP.

YOU CANNOT divide India and its people.

Mr Ambedkar was a hindu and died a hindu. He chose Buddhism as his religion which is nothing but an off shoot of Hinduism.

You know what even Sonia Gandhi does not support you on this one...booo :). It speaks volumes that all this chaos is happening during her rule in the center. Congress and the state government are very much against conversions themselves. Foreign rule disguised in form of missionaries is OVER.

As a matter of fact, this website is one such ideal example as it has people of Pakistan, India and all over the world who come together and share. And when dimwits like you who are a threat to society come and disclose your vicious ideas it is very easy for the rest of us to figure out who the real culprits are.

Mr Ambedkar did not encourage conversions. If a citizen chooses to convert he/she can do it anywhere on his/her own. Get your facts right and don't use a learned man's name to put your point across. Speak for yourself.

If Christians open their shops and pitch in their fake nuns to market their products and sell it free with arsine illusions to poor people for some quick money( charity that comes from the west that fathers and nuns get for each conversion), then the outcome is very very clear. Their shops will have to close down now and they too will have to work to earn their livelihood. Shutters down...

The so called lower caste people is a thing of the past.....and Mr Ambedkar who wrote the constitution is one such winning example. So do not divide India in the name of lower caste and upper caste and create division in India. These games are over.

The dalits, OBC etc are also hindus and will always be Hindus. They are not at the mercy of anyone to give them any recognition or rewards. Hinduism is their religion. So how can you say they have a right to choose their faith? Who authorized you and on what basis do you say that? Kindly do not even think of taking their rights away from them.
( though when you say this, it clearly shows how desperate you have got and are loosing)


The lower caste people ( if any) are not at the mercy of upper caste ( if any) and vice versa. Each group has ample quotas in education and work institutes to rise in life on merit. We are secular and we will be. So stop you pseudo secular propaganda and don't use Mr Ambedkar's false quotes that you pulled from no where.

With this article you are clearly exposed. It is very clear that you harbor immense hatred against Hindus , Muslims, Sikhs and everyone who is a non-Christian.

Each religion has their own good points and not so good points. The missionaries do not have the right to show poor illiterate people a fake mirror and lure them to convert.

Missionaries are not the messiahs of this world. And balls to AICC. AICC will also have to follow the law of the land. Or else they can take their practice to Afganisthan where many women and children need their genuine services.

Can someone explain this phenomenon to me please?

1. Caste system in Hinduism is used as a reason for conversion to Xtianity - both by the Xtians as well as guilt-ridden Hindus.
2. So it follows that Xtianity is egalitarian and doesn't have the caste system.
3. Yet, the caste system (hierarchy and privileges) exists among the converts to Xtianity.

So how is Xtianity egalitarian? Are the missionaries so weak-willed that they can't even implement "no caste system" among Indian Xtians?

And what do they have to say about their priests having a hankering to fondle young ones, as well as the church covering up the scandal? How about all the Xtian-related craziness in the US? Why are we allowing all that stupidity to be imported to India and spread here? Makes no sense to me.

You said "If our country does not give the Dalits, tribals and the OBCs (Other Backward Castes) the right to choose their faith"

You've bald-facedly attempted to derecognize the Dalits and their people by questioning their faith and beliefs in Modern India thereby spreading false alarm that they are not Hindus and are oppressed. You are insinuating thoughts that they are born with no religion. How can you and on what grounds? I've reported you to stopfundinghate.org.

Pseudo seculars and fanatic Christians will need to work harder since charity from foreign countries is going to stop.

Dr. Ambedkar showed India and Indians a way ( not the dalits only)...i.e. secularism and freedom. Remember this, get this and stay put.

Kaffir,

Major population in the West has dumped and flushed Christianity down their pots in the toilet for many of it's choking, bizarre and absurd beliefs that restricts freedom. Its in-the-face and down-the-throat -Jesus- unconditional-love is considered very very forceful, restrictive, conservative and obstructive. Some Christian fanatics some years ago saw this coming and took it on themselves to go to underdeveloped countries ( like India) and revive Christianity. Much to their dismay, Christian missionaries and it's fanatic beliefs has met with the same fate and predicable outcome out here India.... i.e. shown the door.

The likes of Madhu Chandra also have not received any minuscule support on his articles. In fact, there have been many who have pointed out the loopholes in his articles that are not supported with any facts, and his very evidently un-secular attitude and abhorrence towards non-Christians.

It's either the 10 commandments or nothing else. His respect to other religions is very non-existent.

Madhu Chandra and his ilk try to adhere to the eleventh commandment, "thou shall not be caught". Unfortunately they are caught on the wrong foot, time and again.

>>Mr Ambedkar was a hindu and died a hindu. He chose Buddhism as his religion which is nothing but an off shoot of Hinduism.

Just wondering, so the followers of buddha is Sri Lanka, Bhutan, China, Japan, Korea and South east asia are followers of hinduism? Though RSS/VHP seem very eager to claim buddhism and sikhism are offshoots of hinduism, the same has not been reciprocated by the followers of these two religions.

>>People have to follow the law and if you don't like it, then leave.

Say that to BD for they are the ones who are breaking the laws.

Dark Lord

"Just wondering, so the followers of buddha is Sri Lanka, Bhutan, China, Japan, Korea and South east asia are followers of hinduism?"

That is because conversion to Budhism is not really religious, but merely symbolic and political. It is not borne out of spiritual convictions or faith, but rather mundane compulsions that have nothing to do with way of life associated with a religion. That is why Indian convert Buddhism does not resemble that of China or Japan or anywhere. Life of converts remain mired in hatred, hostility, acrimony, vendetta and all the things that are anti-thesis of Buddhist teachings. That is why majority of them do not seem to make religious progress nor social or material progress. They remain trapped in politics of reservations, hate, vendetta and reform - not reform of their own lives as offered by their new-found religion, but reforming the lives of Hindus, and when hindus pay no heed to their prescriptions about how hindus should live, they get trapped in even more bitterness and hatred - such vicious cycle has kept them trapped. It has not served the converts nor hindus. But missionaries and bankrupt ideologies seem to thrive on such divide.

Dark Loard,

I am not keen to take you from darkness to lightness.

Buddhist and Sikhs dont have to reciprocate because there is a tacit understanding and love.

Yes, all those people in South asia know where Lord Buddha came from and what he preached. Pick up a book written by Lord Buddha and you will find his teachings very identical to the Bhagwad Geeta in simplified form.

Sorry to break this news on you. Try better next time.

Dear Mr. D'Souza- why the "Hindu sounding" Madhu Chandra? What is the rationale behind this "conversion" to a Sanskrit name?

Why do you so care about the "religious" "needs" of the Dalits- I think their needs are more economic than religious. Why demand "conversion" as the price to give them access to economic development?

Honesty, at least in Tamil Nadu, since the 70's when I was in school, I never knew who was "dalit" or who was not! Everyone went on the same bus, went to the same school, went to the same market to buy vegetables (of course, being a vegetarian, I never went to the fish market or where the butchers had their shops).

Blokesablogin, I think I should clarify that this article is posted by Madhu Chandra on behalf of Dr. D'Souza, who is the author credited.

"He or she has the freedom to believe and practice the faith he or she chooses."

This freedom can be exercised by all concerned if we leave each other alone to practice his/her faith. This is why it is imperative that in a civilized secular society we have to learn to respect each other's faith. Religious practices involve not just the individual concerned but his family and society at large. Issues related to such practice can arouse all kind of emotions and you can easily tresspass on his freedom to practice his religion. I suggest to you that it is extremely difficult to preach your religion to a level of reaching conversion without you tresspassing on his freedom of practicing his religion knowingly or unknowingly. So in exercising your right to free speech you are taking away his right to practice his religion. And so long as you insist on doing this religious conflicts will continue.

Similarly your concern about Dalits is not genuine. Your objective to begin with is to go after his right to practice his religion. You are like an adoption agency that shows concern about poor children.

If VHP wants Sati system back and consider cow
is more valuable than Dalit's life then I agree that they are worse than you folks. But that does not justify your activities. If Dalits' cannot get out of the unbeareable conditions imposed by hindu society then you should help them change to Budhism that is if they seek your help. That way they will be able to maintain some resemblance to their own culture. That is less traumatic for all concerned. It will not be a totally alien religion and culture. I know that is too much to expect from you. I think it is a better alternative. Ambedkar chose that path.

"This freedom can be exercised by all concerned if [..] conflicts will continue."

Morris, I couldn't have said it better and I agree.

Looks like our neighbors to the south are also experiencing this infestation of aggressive evangelical Christian bug:

www.lankaweb.com/news/items08/070708-3.html

Why can't they listen to wise and sane folks like PN Benjamin?

"They neither need the State nor upper caste religious leaders to tell them how to make their choices." . . . and neither their neighbors, because they have christian missionaries, the ultimate saviors, to harvest their souls and alienate them from their 'devil' worshiping heathen forefathers and neighbors. AMEN !

First let me tell you, the Bajrang Dal and the Sangh Parivar will ultimately win out. It is unfortunate, but that is what exactly is going to happen sooner or later.

First keep the Constitution, which is created by some dubious characters which needed some 80 amendments aside.

Let us talk about "Freedom of Choice":
======================================

Everyone must have a right to choose.

But, Choose what?

Everyone has a right to Choose "Something that at least retains their right to Choose again".

Does "Religions" give their own followers the "Right to Choose Freely"?

=======================
I do not think Religions give their own Adherents the Freedom to Choose.

So, how the hell the same religions demand the very freedom from the State which they themselves deny to their own adherents.
=======================

Religions should first change their own doctrines and declare that their own followers have freedom to choose "fully or partially" another other religion.

Once they do that, only then they can claim similar right from the state.


The religions themselves are highly dictatorial throughout their history and even today. These dictatorial organisations exploit and push democracies to the limits.

The religious leaders swear by autocracy and deny freedom and yet they will demand freedom and swear by democracy so far as their own self interest is concerned.

Some religions even go to the extent of "Denying Freedom" to alternate paths to God and claim that only they have got the right to sell tickets to God.

So, often Religions and Freedom are mutually exclusive. So, people must not wear religion on their sleeves, claim miracles and try to mislead people in the street.

The history of any religion in the world is quite dark. Such dark creatures must be kept in control and if necessary subdued with force.

Religions and politics often when hand in hand in the world. Most of the serious conflicts in the world today are due to religions.

So, Conversions and "counter-conversions" will only make the matters worse.

Morris,

You talked about so called Sati system (real or imaginary). You also talked about condition of Dalits.

For what? To prove a point.
This is disgusting.

Should I start talking about "Witch Burning" that happened in Europe and 40 Million Gypsies living even today in inhospitable conditions in Europe and some people turning to cannibalism in Germany?

When you point one finger at others, 4 more will point at you.

"I think there can be no curtailment of fundamental right".

Chandra,

Where were the fundamental rights of Galileo?

Where were the fundamental rights of "Witches Burnt"?

Chandra

"I think there can be no curtailment of fundamental right to convert, it is against fundamental rights."

Although Indian state has recognized religious freedoms, it has not recognized 'right to convert' as part of religious freedom or fundamental right. There is no such thing as 'right to convert' and Indian courts have upheld that.

There is something fundamentally wrong with a religion if right to convert others is its fundamental tenant and central to its religious freedom. Such religion has to be de-legitimized by state in the larger interest of harmony and freedom of other religions.

Sumanth #19

I did not raise sati issue. I am simply responding to author,s comment this issue.

My point is very simple. Any attempt by missionaries to convert any one violates his freedom to practice his religion whatewver that may be.

Kerty:

""My point is very simple. Any attempt by missionaries to convert any one violates his freedom to practice his religion whatewver that may be.""

simplistic would be a better word than "simple". much as i keep a respectful distance from all religions and particularly self-righteous, insufferable, intolerant and intolerable christian missionaries (for Chandra's benefit!!), if someone tries to convert you, you can just tell them to piss off. no freedom to practice one's religion is violated, even though some idiots are hell-bent on showing the way to heaven to other people.

Hi All,
Whew!!! Interesting! Let me add a few of my own feelings, thoughts etc.
First of all let us face the facts! Sati is not sanctioned anywhere in Hinduism. It was probably, introduced as a pollutant (aka: Kalti-berti), somewhere during the times of the Mohammedan invasions some 12 centuries back, when Md. Ghazni and his friends started invading India and killing our forefather's and were trying to marry all Padmini's and Ragini's on whom they could set their eyes on. This custom is peculiar to Rajasthan and surrounding areas, particularly the Thakurs and Rajputs. As south India was never completely either under the Muslim rulers nor the Brits' this custom never really took root. (OK! OK! atleast the south was ruled by them for barely a few decades compared to the Norths' subjugation for a few centuries)
If Sati was ordained in Hinduism, we would not have Kunti taking care of the Pandava's as she should have burned herself on Pandu's pyre, we must remember she was from the Royal family. This one incident itself clearly shows that Sati was never a part of our religion, but just a defence mechanism which came into being by the women themselves or by some chieftains, who did not want their women to be remarried after their death to their enemies.
Coming to Mr. Madhu Chandra and the AICC
Christian activities in India have always been thru deceit and cunning and now when they are facing their own cunning and deceit being matched by the ones whom they tried to best they are crying foul. Come to think of it! if they talk of violence, don't you think it is violence against the Dalits and other Hindu's when they are dying for food, clothing and shelter, you are doing violence against them by offering money and other incentives to improve their living conditions only and only if they convert? During floods, and natural calamities, the RSS atleast does not ask yr religion and ask you to convert to Hinduism before offering you help and medicines. How come in America, UK and Australia, my English friends tell me that not even 10% of their population believes in Christ and hardly 5-10% of them have ever visited a church for mass or prayers? why don't you try to sell your religion to your own people who are converting of their own choice to other religions even in their own countries? Why oh! why? why don't u just help the poor and the dalits with just an intention to help without any ulterior motives to convert them and earn some type of spiritual credits from yr foreign masters? Why don't the converted Christians change their names to a proper christian name? why carry on with Madhu Chandra and who says that he is not the author. Have you not seen the credits? does it not say that he is the author?
Why always this cheating, lies, and false prestige, guile and cunning?
It looks like the seeds they have sown since many decades has come back to haunt them in their own backyards. I don't think that what is happening is correct. But I do know that what has been happening since many decades also was not correct. As they have been slandering and whipping up violent feelings against the Hindu Gods, it is now harvest time.
Only time will tell whether all this is going to lead to some good. Yes, it sure is going to. When the oceans are churned their will be a lot of friction and loss of lives, but ultimately good will come out of it.
Who has given the right to these politicians and false salesmen of Jesus Christ the right and the power to denigrate, disparage and malign Gods of other religions?
Do you think these are all true Christians? No sir they are just the salesmen who are working for a pay. Of course, they are also getting carried away and due to their emotions they claim that they are ready to die for Jesus etc. but they should learn to live and let live for Jesus. Because Jesus does not want them to create disharmony and discord in society. He only wanted to spread the good word. He never said give fish to a hungry man only after he converts etc. If they are true christians they should stop being myopic and start living the words of Jesus. In word and deed. The Govt should immediately, bring in legislation which prohibits conversion by allurements, inducements and bribe. The dictionary meaning of inducement is nothing but bribe, it not only corrupts the giver but also the taker. Additionally, where a person is converting of his own free choice special and rigorous rules must be framed just like it is done in the case of Registered marriages where one month notice is given in the newspapers or on the registrars notice board calling for objections from members of the family and their relatives, and an opportunity should be provided to the person who wants to convert to think it over for a month or two more before he finally decides to say Yes! I want to really, really convert.
More importantly, even after a person converts, it does not mean that he has the right to sell away the religious rights of all his progeny permanently to some other religion. They should be brought up in their original religion's ways and rituals till the age of 18 and then they should be allowed to decide for themselves whether they also want to follow their mom's and dad's footsteps and convert into the new religion. The right of the parents to decide on converting their under age children should be immediately withdrawn. Every person should decide what religion he wants to follow after fully understanding not only his present religion but also the new religion which he is planning to convert into. Is it a one way street or is he allowed to come back to his original religion? Their should be proper rules laid down for all these points and more thought should be given to all aspects of this problem to make sure that our country is rid of this scourge atleast in the next few centuries if not decades.

..if someone tries to convert you, you can just tell them to piss off.

CS, but are we discussing urban, educated people; or those who may not have the luxury - or the power or the knowledge that is a pre-requisite to telling those charlatans and pimps-of-god, who pass of cheap tricks as miracles from Jesus, to piss off? It helps to know which sub-set of the population a certain argument applies to. ;)

CS #23

Your comment should have been addressed to Morris as you responded to his comment in #22.

correction: "..who pass off cheap tricks.."

CS #23

"if someone tries to convert you, you can just tell them to piss off. no freedom to practice one's religion is violated, even though some idiots are hell-bent on showing the way to heaven to other people."

That is exactly what they get told if they try to convert rich and powerful people. These folks are poor, low caste and vulnerable. That is why missionaries propagate their religion there.

Kaffir:

""CS, but are we discussing urban, educated people; or those who may not have the luxury - or the power or the knowledge that is a pre-requisite to telling those charlatans and pimps-of-god, who pass of cheap tricks as miracles from Jesus, to piss off? It helps to know which sub-set of the population a certain argument applies to. ;)""

Morris:

""That is exactly what they get told if they try to convert rich and powerful people. These folks are poor, low caste and vulnerable. That is why missionaries propagate their religion there."

Propogation of the same colonial, myth: that low caste people, tribals etc. cannot think for themselves and need to be protected by presumably smarter, urban, colonials, missionaries etc. Those who think that low-caste people or tribals are stupid, need to rethink their own so-called intelligence.

sab sey baada
naadan wohi hai
jo samjhey naadan unhey

kaun kaun kitney paani me hai
sabh ki hai pahchaan unhen

yes indeed! presumably the low castes and tribals need either the bajrang dal idiots or missionary idiots to enlighten them about their best interests, because they cannot think for themselves. back to colonial crap with a vengeance.

Forced conversion to Christianity began with Emperor Constantine. He hijacked Christianity and became the self-anointed messenger of God. This was the birth of Catholicism.

The Bible does not support forced conversion. The true disciples of Christ shared the Good News with others in love. In John 13:34, Christ said, "Love one another. As I have loved you, so you must love one another. By this all men will know that you are my disciples, if you love one another." Again in John 15:12, Christ said, "My command is this: Love each other as I have loved you. Greater love has no one than this, that he lay down his life for his friends." Christ repeated this message many times before His crucifixion.

Jesus told his disciples to go to all ends of the earth and spread the Good News. Whether people accept or not accept the message, our heavenly Parent has given us the choice to choose. Choices have consequences.

Christ came to us in human form to save us, not condemn us. This is the reason He offered Himself as a sacrifice for our sins so we do not end up in the lake of fire. God's desire is to spend eternity with us and nothing else.

The Bible is a love letter from our Creator to His children. It is an amazing book. Read it for yourself.

CS #29

"That is exactly what they get told if they try to convert rich and powerful people. These folks are poor, low caste and vulnerable."

Let us read this again. Does this mean or even imply that rich people are smart and intellegent; and poor and low caste people are stupid? That is your interpretation. It never occurred to me that poor people are any less intellegent than rich. You seem to have brought that out from your own mind.

I am sure you have heard a word "vulnerable". A patient is vulnerable in relationship with a doctor. There are all sort of other situation where one party is vulnerable. This clearly is one where poor people are vulnerable and if you have difficulty understanding I will say no less smart than you are. For many a dealings law has recognized this and has provided protection to the vulnerable party.

If you do not think that these people are vulnerable then argue that but don't try to read something that has not been written there.
"Those who think that low-caste people or tribals are stupid, need to rethink their own so-called intelligence."
I rethought my intellegence and am not quite willing to change my mind as yet.

Morris, CS was being sarcastic.

CS, Morris has addressed your ignorant comment (willful I hope) aptly, so I won't repeat it.

----

I find this obsession to keep defending directly or indirectly, the Christian evangelists - who quite clearly focus on the poor and illiterate for obvious reasons - very puzzling and unhealthy.

I'd assume that the people writing and commenting here on this blog are educated, well-read and intelligent. Independent of one's ideological leanings, there are indisputable facts on the cultural genocide caused by Christian evangelicals proselytizing native populations, be it Aborigines in Australia, Native Americans in the US, Pacific Islanders (specifically Papua New Guinea) and other populations around the globe. The cultures and traditions of these people were disrupted and destroyed, their families torn asunder and their languages forcibly abandoned, considered as "uncivilized" by these ignorant idiots drunk on their "true love of one lord, the savior JC" delusion. These people had no idea about the native traditions, nor a desire to learn the importance of these traditions in the lives of native populations. Instead, their goal was to replace these "heathen" practices with their more "civilized" ones. I believe the UN now has an article safeguarding the rights of indigenous people and protecting them from cultural genocide. This problem has also manifested in different Christian denominations trying to convert each other. Talk about stupidity.

Most of you who either defend these Christian evangelists, or feel reluctant to speak out against their nefarious practices, would not hesitate to criticize these same Christian evangelists in the US when they meddle in science and politics. You would criticize these Christians who refuse to provide condoms to people in AIDS-infected Africa simply because of their faith. You would find abstinence-only sex education policies in US schools laughable. (Actually, Indians in the US are quite conservative wrt sex, so I'm not so sure about that last one.) You would also not hesitate to criticize the cultural genocide happening in other countries as a direct result of Christian evangelism, and if you saw the movie "Rabbit-Proof Fence" I'd bet your sympathies clearly lie with the Aborigines.

So why this reluctance to criticize these actions by same Christian evangelists in India? Is it because of political partisanship and ideology? A hatred of Hindutva? An enemy of my enemy is my friend? Shame over caste system? Lack of moral courage? Some kind of colonial hangover? Afraid to admit that the Hindutva is right? Fear of being labeled as Hindutva fundamentalist? A crush on your high-school Catholic teacher?

If one's intellect holds one a slave to an ideology or political history and stops one from doing the right thing, then what use is that intellect?

Is there no third option to criticize the physical violence caused by Hindutva groups as well as openly criticize and condemn the murder of cultural identity by Christian evangelists?

Has anyone here read Hitchens' "The Missionary Position"? Here's an article from Slate:
www.slate.com/id/2090083/

Even in Thailand, Christian evangelicals threaten the indigenous population and their culture.

www.atimes.com/atimes/Southeast_Asia/EH29Ae01.html

The tragedy is -

The Indian Central and State Governments are too lazy and callous; and the Hindu upper castes WAN'T the dalits and tribals to remain backward and downtrodden. Caste is deep-rooted, and the upper castes don't want to get rid of the power position and so called social 'superiority'.

Neither the governments nor Hindu upper caste organizations and individuals make any SERIOUS effort for the upliftment and education of these backward classes.
They don't want them to progress, otherwise within 60 years, most of the poor Indian tribals and Dalits would have prospered..

Why should poor Dalits and tribals have pride in Hinduism if they are treated like shit, not allowed in temples and discriminated against left, right and centre? Why should they not convert into any system which they think provides a better soci-economic position?

So taking advantage of the utter poverty, caste situation and the social equations w.r.t. Dalits and tribals and the upper castes, the Christian Missionaries come in with greedy eyes to these tribal poor areas, with so many souls which can be easily bribed into 'salvation', lying scattered around them.
Who can blame them? They are just taking advantage of the situation!

Think about it - If people were well fed, happy, educated and had pride in their religion and social status, there would be no motive for conversion!!!

Thus, I think the root cause for this conversion problem (and many other problems like Naxalism) lies in the DESPICABLE HINDU CASTE SYSTEM and total GOVERNMENT FAILURE in eradicating and removing poverty.

Hinduism and Hindus, to surive and prosper, MUST GET RID OF THE CASTE SYSTEM - all the bullshit JATI, GOTRA, LINGAM must be eradicated. There has to be unity and brotherhood, which sadly does not exist amongst Hindus.

Secondly, the Indian central government and state governments must spend money and go out with all guns blazing to implement and spread widespread education, healthcare, land reforms and labour refoms for the poorest of poor..

Finally, looking at all the problems afflicting the world, I think that religion is one of the biggest evils. Instead of teaching and providing compassion and spirituality and providing solace, (which is its so-called intended aim)- religion ends up dividing people, making people blind to reason and logic, making people bigoted, dogmatic and ignorant, making them intolerant to differences and subsequently inhumane, vicious and violent..

Love and peace to all,
Ayan

Ayan

"Hindu upper castes WAN'T the dalits and tribals to remain backward and downtrodden."

This conflict is not about caste hindus vs Dalits, or caste Hindus vs Tribals or hindus vs xians. It is about Tribals vs tribal converts, dalit vs dalit converts. It is when their conflict take violent turn that Hindu organizations step in to oppose missionaries.

"Hinduism and Hindus, to surive and prosper, MUST GET RID OF THE CASTE SYSTEM - all the bullshit JATI, GOTRA, LINGAM must be eradicated. There has to be unity and brotherhood, which sadly does not exist amongst Hindus."

It is for individual Hindu families and their like-minded communities to decide how they want to live and how they want to exercise their religious and social freedoms. Hinduism is not monolithic and one of reason it has so many social, cultural and philosophical manifestations is because those who disagree have enjoyed the freedom to form their own, and their diversity has been nourished and cherished as long as they have not sought to take away the similar freedoms of others. That is why countless hindu panths, jains, budhists, sikhs , parsis, jews, pre-colonial xians have lived side by side

In modern India, Dalits, Harijans, Tribals etc have been granted special constitutional protections and preferential treatments that allows them to come out of shackles and live as the please. They have been the king-maker votebanks in politics for decades. Political parties they have voted have ruled India. Political ideologies they have patronized have dominated government policies and media. Only those who champion their causes have won power in India. At some point, they have to stop blaming others for their fate, if they keep choosing wrong set of ideologies, politics and politicians to solve their problems. They have to realize that missionaries and leftists are using them as captive votebanks in order to harvest even more destitutes upon whom they can prey and consolidate their power.

morris,

i was being sarcastic, un-intellgently so!

my comment about the presumption that non-rich people can tell the difference between tricks/charltans and the real thing was addressed to kaffir's comment:

""CS, but are we discussing urban, educated people; or those who may not have the luxury - or the power or the knowledge that is a pre-requisite to telling those charlatans and pimps-of-god, who pass of cheap tricks as miracles from Jesus, to piss off?""

which clearly implies that non-urban and non-educated people do not have any "knowledge" about the world.

Gowri:

""The Bible is a love letter from our Creator to His children.""

Say what? Besides, I hate love letters, particularly from people who I haven't met. I don't take kindly to stalkers.

Gowri:

""Christ came to us in human form to save us""

Save me from what? whom? besides, it might be best if you speak for yourself and not "us"

Ayan,

Thanks for the response.

I agree that the ills of caste system need to be tackled, but a social problem like this takes sustained efforts across a few generations. The fact that even upper-caste groups are clamoring to be classified as lower-caste (as happened in Rajasthan) tells me that there has been a perceptible shift in power.

"Finally, looking at all the problems afflicting the world, I think that religion is one of the biggest evils."

The same can be said of political partisanship and adherence to ideologies, and I can give you examples that show non-religious ideologies "dividing people, making people blind to reason and logic, making people bigoted, dogmatic and ignorant, making them intolerant to differences and subsequently inhumane, vicious and violent."
Hitler and Bush both came to power under a democratic system, yet not many talk about the evils of democracy.

So is the problem religion itself, or how people interpret it and act, or how they abuse a system? And why target only religion? As far as I can tell, religious people do not have a monopoly on bigotry, dogma and ignorance - you are as likely to find people acting in such manner among religious folks as well as non-religious folks and intellectuals. Religion played a big, positive role in the Civil Rights Movement in the US, and paradoxically enough, the same religion also engenders anti-gay bias among African-American communities.

Also, if you say religion is one of the biggest evils, then why not speak out against Christian evangelism which has a proven track record of causing harm, even to this day? Or, in your opinion, is evangelical Christianity not a religion?

I agree with you that caste system's ills are a blot on Hinduism (though it's debatable whether religious texts explicitly approved of caste-based discrimination, nevertheless we can agree that those in power misused it and used religion as justification). But how do evils of caste system compare to evils of colonialism, slavery, "witch" burnings, inquisition, racism, persecution of those who disagreed (like Galileo) and cultural genocide - all done and approved by Christianity, and the last one still continuing today? How does, in your evaluation, Christianity somehow come up better than Hinduism? People pour scorn when there's a news of milk-drinking Ganesha statue, yet oddly enough, offer praise when someone is canonized by the Church as a saint. Why not criticize both?

I hope you are aware that the caste system persists among Christian converts, with "lower caste" converts holding lower positions in the Church hierarchy. So much for egalitarianism and getting rid of caste after conversion. Look up Ashraf and Ajlaf in Islam - another religion that claims to be egalitarian.

You might want to do some research into work being done by Hindu organizations to level the playing field and educate/help those on the margins of society. And no, I'm not talking about VHP/RSS here.

I'll also ask you a personal question. Are you a Christian? If not, have you thought about converting? Because with that one act, you personally can leave behind the caste system and be totally free of all other evils of Hinduism - if it's good for tribal people, it must be good for you too. After all, Gandhiji did say that "you must be the change you want to see in the world." (-:

Think about it - If people were well fed, happy, educated and had pride in their religion and social status, there would be no motive for conversion!!!


Ayan, you are correct. I don't know, but perhaps a century of British colonialism and transfer of wealth from India had something to do with India's poverty? What do you think?

Kaffir #43

"perhaps a century of British colonialism and transfer of wealth from India had something to do with India's poverty?"

I think following factors produced massive poverty and destitution in post-independent India.

- New generation, armed with education and glamor of urban lifestyles, moved away from caste based economics and farming that had provided economic security to their forefathers for generations. This uprooted generation found itself at the mercy of colonial economic model that was still in its formative years, and not mature or robust enough to provide economic opportunities to great many people. Thus, sizable population went thru economic dislocation from their traditional safety-net while nothing else was in place to replace that safety-net or to take care of these people - they lost not only economic security but also social support systems that caste-based communities and villages had provided to their forefathers. Result. Massive poverty. Massive number of uprooted people in search of economic well-being.

- India was not decisive about what should replace caste-based economics. I never planned about what to do with all those people uprooted from traditional economics. India did not trust capitalist economic model to provide welfare to people. It also did not trust private sector as it feared it to be mere extension of caste order or colonial economics. India had to come up something very fast to absorb crores of aspiring youth, and all it could think of was expanding government to absorb as many people as it could. Government became the only source of employment, but not big enough to absorb whole country on its payroll.

- Villages of India were emptied into few urban centers that became promise land for people looking for economic salvation. The sheer size of migration turned urban centers into giant slums without any basic facilities.

- Advances in pro-farming green revolution, anti-farming land reforms pushed out vast % of population away from farming. It unleashed vast army of dislocated rural and farming population looking for alternative ways to make a living, but there was no help from economic planners - politicians and missionaries exploited them

- While India's was facing urgent need to create robust economic engine to absorb the new generation of Indians in productive enterprise, socialist were more interested in exploiting poverty for consolidating their political stranglehold over India. They went after private sector using repressive taxation, stifling license-quota raj, mob rule of unions, while scapegoating the rich and upper-castes for the ills and hardships. Socialists and missionaries exploited culture of poverty, scarcity, unemployment, hardship to consolidate their power in India. They both scapegoated and demonized caste system, caste and class divide, Hinduism and its culture in order to pose as saviors rather than being outed as victimizers

-British colonialists were first to introduce an economic system that was totally opposite to traditional economic system based on farming and caste order. It was transition from Indian system to colonial system that introduced lack of economic security among Indian masses, leaving them at the mercy of colonial masters for their well-being, leaving them at mercy of caste Hindus for re-integrating them in their economic fold, leaving them suffer in poverty, leaving them at the mercy of missionaries to be saved. Colonialists and missionaries created a nexus to harvest poverty and harvest converts. Similar nexus exists in post-colonial India between leftists and missionaries to harvest poverty and harvest converts.

Until now, I have never understood - WHY convert?

What does it offer? Have the existing Christians in the world been Christ-incarnate? Are they responsible for any peace?

Conversion is a tribal mindset - that if my tribe has more people... it will be stronger and so "better" than you!

I have nothing but utmost condolences for Mr. Christ. He wasted his time teaching and giving out whatever he did. :-)

Mr. D'Souza may win the legal battle but it would be great if he truthfully say that - guys, I don't give a feck about spiritual issues.. its just that I want more power.. and what better way than to have a bigger tribe! Because THAT is the truth!

If one is SOOO worried about spreading the "Love" of Jesus.. how about trying it on some of the existing ones in Europe? Why look for more in other lands!

Its amazing how shallow and how idiotic this entire mindset is! But for a land where the tribes wanted oneupmanship, the only way to beat the Jews was to create a separate ideology.... and to create a "Business model" for its success!

Conversion is that "market share" strategy!

In fact this religion of conversion - if you CLOSELY look - was the original MLM... the world's FIRST AMWAY!! The new guy ensures the prosperity of the older "convert".... even is the new guy currently comes from the poorest strata - there is some truth in CK Prahlad's assertion of profit-making from the "Bottom of the Pyramid"!

Bravo!

-desh

Desh:

""Until now, I have never understood - WHY convert?""

Until forever, I doubt that you ever will, since you apparently don't think that individuals should think for themselves and make their own choices. You may have never understood, but please respect others who may or may not have understood or overstood.

Desh:

""Until now, I have never understood - WHY convert?""

A+++ though, for trying to convert us all to YOUR way of thinking. WHY?????

Desh:

""Until now, I have never understood - WHY convert?""

Perhaps you need to switch your perspective. Instead of understanding, which you admit you are incapable of, perhaps you might try overstanding. On second thoughts though, please stay the way you are, and don't convert from undserstaning to overstanding, since you will never quite undertand, hence never quite overstand either.

CS:

The number of times you have answered the question - I wonder who is trying to "overstand" ;-)

And in all seriousness.. if one was moving to Spiritual freedom ... and freedom from religion.. one could still get it.. but from WHOM does one convert to WHOM??? How does changing the label make the difference in understanding something that CANNOT be understood?

And if you have understood how does CONVERSION help one GET to God OR even to equality.. please do explain to me as well! The last I checked on Blacks and the poor in the Western world... or the various denominations of Islam... it didnt seem as if conversion EVER helped them live "Happily ever After"!!

.... or maybe once converted... so be damned - is the kind of mentality.

I am saying move away from all religions. If you don't want to be a Hindu anymore.. than so be it. But live on your own.... take your own god-damn responsibility... .be accountable for your own deeds..

.... at the very least don't use a surrogate's tragedy as the payment for your "sins".... or wait for a totally prejudiced God to save those who forcibly believe in Him!

Go out of religion .... and remain free. Jumping from one box to another does not make one any better!!

Ok.... now you can go again with more posts to "overstand" what I have said... after all these days it probably DOES takes a fanatically deterministic Quantum Physicist to COMPLETELY understand religion these days.. same difference!? ;-)

-d.

Desh:

""And in all seriousness.. if one was moving to Spiritual freedom ... and freedom from religion.. one could still get it.. but from WHOM does one convert to WHOM??? How does changing the label make the difference in understanding something that CANNOT be understood?""

In all seriousness?!! I was being entirely serious, not jesting as usual. You assume that everybody like you is seeking spiritual freedom or what you understand as spiritual freedom. And then appear baffled (really or faking it) when others don't agree entirely with your take on it. I am struggling to understand why you would put shackles on people's mind who do want to convert or uncovert, either covertly or overtly. have you suddenly been appointed the thekedaar for retailing spiritual freedom, much like the self-righteous missionaries who claim to be saving souls and whose ancestors in the middle ages were selling indulgences as tickets to so-called heaven? You cannot understand or overstand the process since you are doing the same while pretending to sell a different product - perhaps even snake-oil.

Desh:

""Go out of religion .... and remain free. Jumping from one box to another does not make one any better!!""

and how would you know, having i can safely assume, never tried it? jumping from one box into another might be good exercise. or are you sore nobody is jumping in your box or was it a band-wagon you had there last week?

desh:

"".... at the very least don't use a surrogate's tragedy as the payment for your "sins".... or wait for a totally prejudiced God to save those who forcibly believe in Him!""

hey, good try! trying to tell people what they should not or should believe!! i suggest you acquire some cutting-edge marketing and advertizing techniques, because guess what? most people happen to have brains - usually their own!

Desh:

""How does changing the label make the difference in understanding something that CANNOT be understood?""

And there you are trying hard to understand what you claim cannot be understood!! This one surely takes the jalebi with or without the milk!! Thanks for the laughs and a good start to my day!

CS:

If you are indeed "serious" about stuff and not buffooning around - which is what you appear to be doing - then as much as YOU have the right to criticize other's beliefs and convictions - others HAVE TOO!

[Refrain from personal attacks]

Desh:

""[deleted""

empathy is all you need, not logic sir! if you want to understand WHY people convert or unconvert, just talk to them, listen to what they say ie. exhibit some empathy.

""deleted""

The recent comments in this post are not only becoming personal, but nauseating too. It's disgusting.

[Conjectural and personal attack deleted]

CS

"..been appointed the thekedaar for retailing spiritual freedom, much like the self-righteous missionaries who claim to be saving souls and whose ancestors in the middle ages were selling indulgences as tickets to so-called heaven?"

Should there be any response to missionaries posing as thekedars of dalits, retailers of spirituality and ticket agents for salvation?
That those who oppose all that are guilty of the same? Does it mean it can not be opposed without being treated at par with missionaries and branded equally guilty? Isn't such studied neutrality and inaction meant as apologetics for missionaries - main reason why effected communities are left to to find their own means to fend against it, drawing hindus to take a stand. First, Psecularists abrogate their secular principles and secular responsibility towards harmony and religious aggressons, forcing hindus to respond to religious aggressions and than they blame and demonize hindus for responding to them - this is called hindu baiting.

It should be the secular government that should have proper policy positions and responses on missionaries and conversions - but instead, thekedars of Psecularism are reduced to providing apologetics and appeasements to missionaries, and seem to have strong positions only against opposition to missionary thekedars.

Why is that only missionaries, converts, Psecularists and anti-hindus have mind of their own, and freedom to act and impose, and freedom to convert and recruit others, and desire not to be shackled? So does Bajarang Dal and Ram sena and Shiv sena and Krishna Sena and many more to come.

Desh (and Kerty too), you can pretend all you can that you are selling no religion nor even God. Maybe. But what you are selling is this even though you will deny it as such.

""Hindu dharma is rooted in the eternal, holistic or non-mechanistic laws of nature discovered "in a flash" of insight by the "Vedic Aryans." These laws have been affirmed by modern science and therefore, Hinduism is uniquely scientific. Because the Hindus live in accord with a scientifically proven order of nature which unifies matter with higher levels of spirit, they are more rational and ecological as compared to those of Abrahamic faiths who derive their moral laws from an imaginary supernatural being, and who treat nature as mere matter, devoid of spiritual meaning. Because Hinduism is so scientific, there is no need for an Enlightenment style confrontation between faith and reason in India. To become truly and deeply scientific, Indians -- indeed, the entire world -- must embrace the teachings of the Vedas and Vedanta.""


Quote used from Amardeep Singh's blog:

http://www.lehigh.edu/~amsp/2004/05/meera-nanda-and-partha-chatterjee-on.html

And I will readily admit to selling secular humanism.

Suresh:

""The recent comments in this post are not only becoming personal, but nauseating too. It's disgusting.""

i agree! what do do? aadat sey majboor

Buddha exists anywhere and anytime

Dear Commonsense,

Christ came to save us from our sins. Have you ever lied, cheated, or looked at someone with lust? I am sure you have. We are all sinners, my friend. Not one of us is perfect or holy like God, our Creator. Would you rather be a slave to sin OR slave to righteousness? You have that choice.

The Bible says, "For the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord."--Romans 6:23

God does not want us to die.

Therefore, "For what the law was powerless to do in that it was weakened by the sinful nature, God did by sending his own Son in the likeness of sinful man to be a sin offering. And so He condemned sin in sinful man, in order that the righteous requirements of the law might be fully met in us, who do not live according to the sinful nature but according to the Spirit."--Romans 8:3-4

Christ sacrificed for you because He loves you. God made you unique and different. You will not find another human designed like you, because you are special in God's eyes. If you feel you do not know God, then look at the creation around you. He has provided you with a body and environment designed for you. There is no other planet like ours.

I pray you will find the Truth.

Blessings.

Gowri:

""Christ came to save us from our sins. Have you ever lied, cheated, or looked at someone with lust?""

Gowri, I am sure Christ came to save you from your sin, if you choose to believe that. As for me, I am beyond redemption and surely all those who are supposedly know everything, must know this too.

CS:

If presenting one's convictions and views is "selling" then EVERY writer.. every blogger.. every orator... every singer.... every poet... and every Prophet, Son of God, Incarnation, Saint, Mystic.. every Professor (prophesed and real)... EVERYONE is guilty of selling ... nothing better than snake oils!

[deleted]

Desh:

""Until now, I have never understood - WHY convert?"'

As in, when you have been eating aloo gobhi for so long, WHY do you want to switch to aloo matar? A quick, commonsensical answer would be, "none of your business sir!".

Gowri:

""Would you rather be a slave to sin OR slave to righteousness? You have that choice.""

sin for sure! besides being sinful, it's simply more fun!!! everybody knows that, except you. how about you? considering you are already self-righteous, consider that a rhetorical question.

Commonsense,

It is tragic that you would rather be a slave to sin. I don't think you understand the gravity of your bold statement.

In 1Corinthians 6:9, the Bible says, "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived: Neither the sexually immoral nor idolaters nor adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

It is not too late for you. You can still repent and be free of your sins. I do not wish for you to spend eternity in the lake of fire with Satan. My desire is that you spend eternity with our Creator. Think about it, my friend.

gowri... oooooh. preaching over the internet to people who really do not want you to shove religion down their throats is not not not going to bring anyone to God. That, and it is really, really tacky.

Think about this. More people are led to a true relationship with God by watching other peoples' lives and thinking they might need a change than they are by someone quoting from the (insert name of any "holy" book here). Proselytizing in the name of any religion is just stupid and offensive.

plus who can take anyone seriously when they spout a bunch of pre-canned stuff like "lake of fire?" you did not think of that. you were spoon-fed that line.

faith is much more meaningful when you question it and make it yours. Anyone can be a parrot.

gowri:

please have mercy on cs! it is past 10 pm est, now that cs has returned from praying at guadi's (alberto) cathedral... and is well on his way to earn the sobriquet cs12 pac +- 2!

he is desicritic's resident cs 12pac (don't tell sarah or she will blast him later tonight - 1130 est - snl!)

btw am intrigued with words and quotes

what is your informed take on "Let one who has not sinned cast the first stone"? did (y)our savior really say it?

if we folks really take this to heart - it would mean there would be no comments - no interactions on any thread - and will contribute to "deafening silence"...which will kill the entire purpose behind an interactive journal

yours in bewilderment

t

hey t...

point, game and match.

thank you! :)

Gowri:

...adulterers nor male prostitutes nor homosexual offenders nor thieves nor the greedy nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

ss:

why, thank you;)

now tell me if (comment) # 71 will drive (commentator) #67 to drink?

also

is "drinking" an original sin or a modified p-c sin?

also

please note am skipping over 69

#69 said,"what is your informed take on "Let one who has not sinned cast the first stone"? did (y)our savior really say it?"

In John 8:1-11, the Jewish Pharisees bring in a woman caught in adultery. They made her stand before everyone including Jesus and said, "Teacher, this woman was caught in the act of adultery. In the Law Moses commanded us to stone such women. Now what do you say?" When the Pharisees kept on questioning him, Jesus said to them, "If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." When the people in the temple heard this, they began to go away one at a time, until only Jesus and the woman remained. Then Jesus looked up and asked the woman, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" "No one, sir." she said. "Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin."

Jesus spoke again to the people and said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life."

You can twist my words into something it is not. No one has cast a stone. It is a figment of your imagination.

SS,

"Lake of fire" is mentioned in Revelation 19:19-21. You can read the book for yourself. I read the entire Bible without listening to any preacher. Do not be afraid of reading the Bible. You will know the Truth, and the Truth will set you free.

You can attempt to discourage or say hurtful things to me. That is ok, but you cannot stop me from praying for you and pray for abundant God's blessings upon you and your families.

After your bodies die, my sincere hope is that your souls will be with God forever. That is my only desire.

gowri:

am not twisting!

these are your words:

In John 8:1-11, the Jewish Pharisees bring in a woman caught in adultery....If any one of you is without sin, let him be the first to throw a stone at her." When the people in the temple heard this, they began to go away one at a time, until only Jesus and the woman remained......Then Jesus looked up and asked the woman, "Woman, where are they? Has no one condemned you?" "No one, sir." she said. "Then neither do I condemn you," Jesus declared. "Go now and leave your life of sin." this means jesus "bought" the charge caught in adultery?...Jesus spoke again to the people and said, "I am the light of the world. Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life." how can we speak to the "people" when only the two of them were left?

Read Gowri....

It is people like him/her who are a problem. We need to ban such nonsense

Chandra, come now. Why would you want to ban such entertaining stuff? :)

t... some people need a drink, whether they know it or not. wow, taking one's self too seriously has all kinds of consequences, some of which can be seen here.

seems like most people lost track that God has a sense of humor and all that.

gowri... am not trying to say hurtful things to you. I am being honest and serious. very few people were ever brought to a TRUE relationship with God thru proselytizing. they were brought to religion maybe, but that is a very different thing, and you have confused them terribly. I have read the bible, dear... I do not need your interpretations. I have also read the Koran and the other holy books of basically all other religions. I suggest you do the same.

Gowri:

"Do you not know that....the wicked nor drunkards nor slanderers nor swindlers will inherit the kingdom of God."

It is not too late for you.""

Perhaps not since drink is one way to heaven on earth. The famous lines "beer is God's own way of telling us he loves us" come to mind.

However, it might be a bit late for you, unless you lay off the swindling all too evident here!

CHANDRA: as Kaffir says, why on earth would you rush to ban such free entertainment??

Gowri:

""In 1Corinthians 6:9, the Bible says, "Do you not know that the wicked will not inherit the kingdom of God? Do not be deceived""

But this was addressed to the residents of Corinth, just a short bus ride from Athens, Greece. What does this have to do with desis or anybody outside the Sparta region? Not to worry, I won't be deceived by this text since it is addressed to the Corinthians and I ain't one.

Like I said, Desh #71, and Gowri (all over!) are not just two sides of the same coin, but are the same coin. Chandra don't ban either of them, both are equally fun. If some bizarre fireworks are not permitted, DC will become too dull and earnest...as in not sinful enough for me.


Temporal, Yes indeed I did pray at Gaudi's La Sagrada Familia. What a treat!! Still work in progress. The whole city of Barcelona is such a visual treat! So I think I'm half saved.

Gowri by the way: have you thought about preaching in Barcelona? A catholic country that permits gay marriage? Are you practising for that project here? If so, make that "sea of fire" instead of "lake of fire".

Yes, this thread has been quite amusing, and also enlightening. :-)

Convinces me again of this - Freedom to practise and propagate any religion is wise - and what has ahppened at DC can be replicated anywhere, in larger context, In India. Let everyone talk, if they want, about religion. Let everyone, if so inclined, (and brave enough!) try to convince others of their viewpoints being THE true viewpoint, whether it is of following Ram or Krishna, of being atheist, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, or whatever. Let them talk - none of us are going to get forced into any kind of change of heart. All of us are quite capable of listening, judging and making up our own minds. And thats the freedom the Constitution gives us.


If its important enough for some to talk about, fine, let them. They may be passionate enough about it, or reasonable enough to convince some. If they want to convert, fine. Or those talking may be silly, bizarre, sexist or regressive, and get laughed at, or ignored. Either way we should grant each other both the freedom to talk, and the freedom to react positively or negataively....

As seen here ;-)Thank you, desicritics....

Yes, this thread has been quite amusing, and also enlightening. :-)

Convinces me again of this - Granting freedom to practise and propagate any religion is wise - and what happened on this thread can be replicated anywhere, in a larger context. Let everyone talk, if they want, about religion. Let everyone, if so inclined, (and brave enough!) try to convince others of their viewpoints being the true viewpoint, whether it is of respecting all relgions equally, of of following Ram or Krishna, or of being atheist, Christian, Muslim, Buddhist, or whatever. Let them talk - none of us are going to get forced into any kind of change of heart. All of us are quite capable of listening, judging and making up our own minds. And thats the freedom the indian Constitution also gives us.


If its important enough for some to talk about, fine, let them. They may be passionate enough about it, or reasonable enough to convince some. If those want to convert, fine. Or those talking may be silly, bizarre, sexist or regressive, and get laughed at, or ignored. Either way we should grant each other both the freedom to talk, and the freedom to react positively or negatively....

As seen here ;-)Thank you, desicritics....

CS

"Desh #71, and Gowri (all over!) are not just two sides of the same coin, but are the same coin."

Where does CS fit in that coin?

It is really Desh vs CS, and Gowri is merely a political sideshow. CS and Gowri are not just two sides of the same coin, but are the same coin!

CS, as ever, at the service of DC and non-DC folks, producing the secular humanist glue, sometimes non-mean bile too, but always welcoming all kinds of religious and non-religious types, while keeping an eye out for and lashing out at folks (that's where the bile and vitriol comes in handy) for those who pretend they are not in the business of selling religion but are in fact doing exactly that. if you have something to sell, don't be shy. i sell secular humanism and dispense commonsense (admittedly contaminated by more than just traces of vitriol and venom)

Blokes:

""Honesty, at least in Tamil Nadu, since the 70's when I was in school, I never knew who was "dalit" or who was not!""

it is indeed possible to exist in a bubble; but in Tamil Nadu, in the 1970's, you were not aware of caste distinctions? Had no idea that gated communities were in existence in india that long ago!

CS #84

"and lashing out at folks (that's where the bile and vitriol comes in handy) for those who pretend they are not in the business of selling religion but are in fact doing exactly that."

My observation only. Perhaps I am wrong. You and only you know the right answer.
You are not being fair in rejecting those who sell these religions. You seem to be treating some with kid glove, some you don't comment at all and others you lash out vigorously. And you are not consistent. I am afraid it reveals your bias. For instance you are a reluctant denouncer of missionaries. And they are not just writing in the DC. They are actually selling. Selling on the DCs are pailed compared to their kind of selling. And yet you did not lash out. Just follow the line of arguments you have taken with me and perhpas with others too on this thread. I would have a lot more respect for your secular humanism whatever that is if I felt that you were sincere. It looks to me like a religion of convinience.

Not-sure-who-wrote-this:

""Mr Ambedkar was a hindu and died a hindu. He chose Buddhism as his religion which is nothing but an off shoot of Hinduism.""

Neat! Talk about having one's gulab-jamun and eating it too...

a bit like: christians are jews and they die as jews because christianity is nothing but an offshoot of judaism.

bin laden is jewish and christian, since islam is nothing but an off-shoot of both.

brilliant!!!

Hey CS #87

You are not responding to my #86, Are you?
I don't think that qoute is mine. I would not say that. None of the rest is mine too.

morris,

nothing to say to you, since we don't really disagree (a diversionary tactic to defuse disagreement!!)

morris,

or maybe there aren't enough "gowris" to deal with, as opposed to the zillions of folks singing praise of "hinduism" or attacking "semitic" religions as the sole fountain of all of the world's problems, including leaky condoms.

CS #87

comment #87 lacks rudimentary knowledge and commonsense. Perhaps need to be thekedar of every strand of anti-hindu crusaders would not permit use of commonsense.

Monotheism and non-monotheistic religions represent two opposite spectrum and antithesis, therefore what is true of monotheism is not necessarily true for its antithesis. Lumping them is like comparing democracy and dictatorship, apples and oranges. But it as a useful tactic to fudge and confuse.

While Judaism is not supremacist, rest of the monotheistic offshoots definitely are, as they must profess to have the only word of god and last word on religion in order to represent the highest and purest form of monotheism. They refuse to co-exist theologically and associate with each other politically. So the issue of Bin Laden being a jewish or xian is never relevant - in fact, well-being of a person would be in danger if somebody raises such a claim. Jews do not claim xians or moslems to be jews. Xians do not claim moslems or jews to be xians. So the issue of Bin Laden being a jewish or xian is never relevant - in fact, person is likely to lose his/her wellbeing if he/she were to raise such a claim in media.

Hindus regard Buddhism as reform-Hinduism, one more sect of Hinduism and Buddha as one of their many incarnations - not only lay Hindus do so, but also Hindu organizations that are labeled as the most fundamentalist and intolerant - ie VHP, BD. That is why when people en masse convert to Buddhism, it rarely raises any eye brows among Hindus. Because Hindus do not consider it a conversion at all. One may argue that converts do not regard themselves as Hindus or part of Hinduism. However, it is how Hindus view Buddhism that is relevant - because that is what determines the Hindu response to conversions to Buddhism.

Kerty:

""comment #87 lacks rudimentary knowledge and commonsense.""

I'm not at all surprised. most people lack basic commonsense, especially those who adopt it as a nick/id. are you surprised? the adage "commonsense is not at all common" applies to me too. I never claimed otherwise.

Kerty:

""Monotheism and non-monotheistic religions represent two opposite spectrum and antithesis, therefore what is true of monotheism is not necessarily true for its antithesis. Lumping them is like comparing democracy and dictatorship""

since you are struggling hard to be dialectical (no, nothing to do with dialects!), you might not be aware of the fact that all democracies have elements of dictaorship and all dictatorships have elements of democracy. not that your superficial flaunting of "anti-thesis" would grasp this elmentary point about dialectics, especially since you hate old man marx so much.

kerty:

""However, it is how Hindus view Buddhism that is relevant - because that is what determines the Hindu response to conversions to Buddhism."'

thanks for defining cultural imperialism for all of us!! as in, what is mine is mine, but what is yours is mine too. chew on that!

kerty:

""Hindus regard Buddhism as reform-Hinduism, one more sect of Hinduism and Buddha as one of their many incarnations""

sure! that's why they are fighting over control of temples in bodh-gaya and other places in bihar. family squabble right?

kerty:

"Hindus regard Buddhism as reform-Hinduism, one more sect of Hinduism and Buddha as one of their many incarnations"

no doubt why the sinhales and tamils in sri lanka are getting along so famously. and no doubt a majority of the chinese, japanese, koreans etc. consider themselves to be "reform hindus". but then again, if hinduism is so perfect from time-immemorial, wonder where the urge to reform it came from? apologizing for a particular religion while claiming to be neutral?? aka "hypocrisy"

kerty:

"Hindus regard Buddhism as reform-Hinduism, one more sect of Hinduism and Buddha as one of their many incarnations"

no doubt why the sinhales and tamils in sri lanka are getting along so famously. and no doubt a majority of the chinese, japanese, koreans etc. consider themselves to be "reform hindus". but then again, if hinduism is so perfect from time-immemorial, wonder where the urge to reform it came from? apologizing for a particular religion while claiming to be neutral?? aka "hypocrisy"

CS #85

"It is indeed possible to exist in a bubble; but in Tamil Nadu, in the 1970's, you were not aware of caste distinctions? Had no idea that gated communities were in existence in india that long ago!"

Dalitism has came very late on the political scene. Other than people in the media and politics, I have not come across any person whose last name is Dalit or or any caste that is called Dalit. People who call themselves dalit have created a virtual bubble, a political identity to pitch their political tents.

Earlier, politics was waged on the platform of untouchability and backward castes/tribes. At least, Untouchables were a social reality, found across India, therefore the movement for their empowerment had a moral imperative and popular support. However, its leap into Dalitism has overstretched its moral imperative. Dalitism remains strictly a political construction rather than a social truth - it seeks to create a political coalition of all the non-Brahmin castes in order to create an alternative political reality. Having reduced Brahmins also be like all other backward castes, Mayawati has sought to include even Brahmins in her Dalit coalition. Missionaries have always rode on dalit platform. It pays to keep hindu names - the dual identity gives them legitimacy and help keep Dalit politics shrill and anti-hindu. Dalitism has created a gated community in political sphere, where only untouchable is Hindusim.

Hello CS,

For your information Hindus in Sri Lanka go to Buddhist temples, and likewise Buddhists go to Hindu temples. Also it is not uncommon at all to see Buddhist temples in Sri Lanka have Hindu deities in them. Common folk Sinhalese routinely worship Hindu deities. The struggle in Sri Lanka is based on Language and not on religion. So please do not write without knowing. I am a Tamil, and I write from first-hand experience.

KALYAN

Hello CS,

Again I must tell you that Lord Buddha is one of the ten AVATARS of Vishnu.

KALYAN

Kalyan:

""The struggle in Sri Lanka is based on Language and not on religion. So please do not write without knowing.""

all these conflicts are neither about religion nor language. these are conflicts about resources and power. language or religion or ethnicity etc. are just "markers" to define so-called communities. the question then naturally arises, if all the buddhists and hindus (or sinahalese and tamils if you prefer) are such bosom buddies, as no doubt some of them are, why this conflict? colonial legacy? sure part of it since the british suppressed one group and promoted the other. but why a separate nation if they are thick as thieves? all sectarian conflicts have little to do with religion or language per se. not even the hindu-muslim conflict nor the sikh insurgency in the past. think about it and then chew on it some.

""I am a Tamil, and I write from first-hand experience.""

Right! The argument to end all arguments!! non-Tamils keep quiet please! You forgot the other gambit "I was there, I saw everything, so shut the fish up!"

Kerty:

""Dalitism has came very late on the political scene. Other than people in the media and politics,""

Yes Phule was born in Maharashtra (what is now) just yesterday. And the "self-respect" movement in Tamil Nadu never existed because Dalits were always accorded respect. And yes I agree, Dalitism is nothing but a conspiracy instigated by the pseculars, mullahs, mao, jihadis etc. etc. No debate about that, since as a secular, I know all about it.

Hi CS,

Would you then say Catholic Christianity was responsible for the Jewish Genocide of the last century?

KALYAN

CS 101

Why not show humility when your bluff is called about points you yourself have raised?

Hello CS,

For the Tamils in Sri Lanka Language is the primary marker of identity. This is somewhat like the Bangladeshis for whom their Bengali identity was more important than their Islamic identity.

KALYAN

Kalyan:

""Would you then say Catholic Christianity was responsible for the Jewish Genocide of the last century?""

good question kalyan. actually better than good, since i have already answered it in my comment #101, but I will cut/past it for you to read again:

"all sectarian conflicts have little to do with religion or language per se. not even the hindu-muslim conflict nor the sikh insurgency in the past."

if this is the case, i cannot see how how catholicism per se can be blamed for the jewish genocide, even though hitler did try to make it an issue at the outset. Religion, language, ethnicity, region where come from etc. etc. are all markers of identity and all "communal" and sectarian conflicts are about how to deploy those identities to get a bigger portion of the economic, social, power pie. To focus on religion or language or region per se, is to miss the point. If one langugage is marginalized (Tamil let's say) it translates into less jobs, power, status etc. not to mention the trouble of having to learn a new language. Language is but a tool for communication and nobody would fight over it for its own sake; but over what a particular language allows us to have and not to have. You illustrate this point well by talking of Bangladesh: precisely, my point: the partitition had little to do with religion per se, but all about trying to create a community identified by a religious marker which was further fractured by the Bangladeshis because they had other sources of identity too.

kerty, in good time, i will display my humility. but only after eating crow together with the humble pie. please don't rub it in at this delicate moment, even though i do precisely this when it suits me. don't take me up as a role model, unless you are courting nonsense.

CS #89

"nothing to say to you, since we don't really disagree"

I take it that you agree with my assessment of your views as stated in #86. Is it so? If that is so, I salute you. That means you are aware of your own bias. It is very hard for us to disassociate ourselves from our past even if we ralize that we had been wrong. Awareness is the first step although I descern the continuation of the same bias in the discussion that followed. Nonetheless, I wish you well.

Morris:

""That means you are aware of your own bias.""

Bias is like bad breath. Most of us are usually award of other's bias but pretend we are speaking the unadulterated truth.

come to think of it: baaas = bad breath (as in stinky)

the reason i was not lashing out at the gowri types in the past was simply because there were no gowry types on dc; neither were there any folks selling islam; i lashed out at Ruvy perhaps too often, for trying to sell jewish fundamentalism; however there are many examples of those who sell the line of "hinduism" is the ultimate, perfect religion etc. etc. and they also seem to detect an anti-hindu bias everywhere - from the media, to the universities, to secularism, and of course DC itself. There is a reason why my lashing out was selective: and the reason quite simply is that that supporters of Hindutva, who of course pretend to be anything but are quite evident on DC - until Gowri. Of course anything anyone says has been interpreted by them as anti-Hindu.

CS #109

That is what I expected you to do in response to my # 86. But you surprised me by saying that you have no disagreemet with what I said. Indeed You had. Your #89 was a lie. And that is showing up now. All these explanation as to who is available for bashing and who is not does not hide your bad breath. You were defending missionaries my friend. Any way continue and live with your bias. But your commonsense get often lost and you do not even know it.

Morris,

quite obviously i was pulling your leg when i said i agreed with you in # 86. I am terrified now that i have been caught telling a lie. will i end up in eternal hell (ie. a year without alcohol? :) There will be no alcohol laden breath at least - to some that is bad breath enough!

tell me, are you also a supporter of hindutva, while pretending to be supporting the right of all religions?

Dear CC,

According to Kerty #83, we are the same coin. What do you think?

I do not attend any church, because the pastors do not preach from the Bible. They preach canned meaningless sermons.

Initially, I began reading the Bible as a piece of literature like I read the Quran, Rig Veda, and others. The Bible affected me differently than the others. I fought hard against these strange feelings for years. Sometimes I would be in a half trance and God would say to me, "I am here. Do not fear. Everything will be ok." I found myself gravitating towards our God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. It has been an amazing journey for me. I feel this great burden has been lifted off my shoulders. My only intention is that everyone experience this wonderful Holy Spirit.

Jesus or Yeshua did not coin the term "Christian" or "Christianity". It is a man-made word, because the Bible says so. I never label myself as a Christian. I would like to be simply a child of God and "follower of the Way."

You can label me as a right-wing religious fanatic or whatever. Strangely, it does not seem to bother me.

Morris:

""If that is so, I salute you.""

what can i do to earn your salute?? without it, my life would be utterly worthless and meaningless. what should i do? what should i do? I feel like a stray dog now; worse, a dog that has been caught lying (no, not lying down). maybe i will team up with gowri and be saved by christ? since god, she claims, loves me, even if i lie? or should i team up with ruvy and become part of the chosen people? or will it be the followers of the last and perfect prophet? or will it be the perfect religion since time immemorial, sold to us by desh, kerty and perhaps even you I presume. it's all very confusiing. I can blame you now for getting me off the wagon! Thanks, I salute you for that! One salute deserves another!!

CS

I am trying to read some commonsense in what you said. Is there any? But that is your usual style. As you said ...Diversion.

Exhibit #1:

Morris:

""Your #89 was a lie. And that is showing up now.""

Exhibit #2:

CS #89:

""morris,

nothing to say to you, since we don't really disagree (a diversionary tactic to defuse disagreement!!)""

So Morris, can I reasonably conclude that you don't even get obvious sarcasm even it is served to you for breakfast? (Hint: it's crunchy!!). What I put in brackets should be enough to wake up a dead person. I assume you are better than that, so you did get it, but pretend not to? there's another term for such a person, but if i use it the policy "against personal attack" might be thrown at me; so I refrain! let us know your agenda, mine being secular humanism or my personal bad breath. what is yours??

Dear Gowri,

I suppose you meant CS, instead of "CC", but that's ok since I am usually called by worse names (eg. see morris above).

I will have to admit that I too am a soldier of Christ, dressed up in secular humanist clothing. Alas, my cover has been blown due to the hard work by kerty, morris and chandra. there used to man singh, but I guess he is currently preoccupied fighting dacoits in his village. But I digress.

I have no choice but to join forces with you, to spread the truth of the gospel, but after I indulge in all imaginable and unimanigable sins. Where can we meet up, such that you can directly deliver the good news to me? I am particularly impressed by the fact that god talks to you directly. Do you call him or her or does she call you? Either way, perhaps I can have her/his number so i can confirm this for myself. Hope to hear from you soon.

Morris:

""CS

I am trying to read some commonsense in what you said. Is there any? But that is your usual style. As you said ...Diversion.""

I suppose you are right in a way. I don't think we really disagree though. it's just a matter of expressing the same views in different words. first you said that if the roots are strong, the tree will stand up firm. why would i disagree with that. after all the squirrels (not small squirrel!) must collect all the sees and acorns before winter sets in. frankly i don't see where we disagree. ýou are just being naughty, you naughty morris!! trying to confuse this old man. and trust me, you are succeeding, but you will regret doing this when you are as old as me and when other young turks (or even egyptians for that matter) mess with your brains.

Gowri:

""I feel this great burden has been lifted off my shoulders. My only intention is that everyone experience this wonderful Holy Spirit."'

can you provide us a link to this experience. or perhaps download it on youtube so all of us can share it?? mighty curious to experience the holy spirit.

Dearest Commensense,

You are such a gas!

You don't need to use a phone to call our Creator. He is omnipresent. Without mocking our Creator, if you are serious about your fellowship with Him, then He will talk to you like you talk to your earthly father. If you are interested in reading the Bible, I recommend McArthur Study Bible. It is same as the original except the "thee" and "thou" have been replaced with regular English. McArthur provides archeological, scientific, and theological evidence of the events in the Bible. You can cross-reference with other sources as well.

Gowry

"I feel this great burden has been lifted off my shoulders. My only intention is that everyone experience this wonderful Holy Spirit."

That is a very honorable intention. I hope Bajarang Dal welcomes your generosity.

"I do not attend any church, because the pastors do not preach from the Bible. They preach canned meaningless sermons."

Original thinking. That is very refreshing in religious field. Go to the source and cut the middlemen out. I wish moslems did the same, as they are so trapped in religious hierarchy and canned interpretations propagated by mullahs. Going to the original source is always good religion. Who needs intermediaries and prophets?

"You can label me as a right-wing religious fanatic or whatever. Strangely, it does not seem to bother me."

That is indeed a mark of a good fanatic. Not be swayed by logic, reason, argument or reality. What a believer has gotta do with any of that? What is faith if it wavers with every doubt? Godspeed to you. And peace, as long as fanatics of other faiths do not find you in their way.

gowri:

""If you are interested in reading the Bible, I recommend McArthur Study Bible. It is same as the original except the "thee" and "thou" have been replaced with regular English.""

i'll have to pass on this offer as i find "thee" and "thou" quite elegant; doth thee not?

gowri:

""You are such a gas!""

nothing compared to when i was the original joe-12pack!

so how come god does not have a cell-phone? omnipresent?

Kerty to Gowri:

""That is indeed a mark of a good fanatic. Not be swayed by logic, reason, argument or reality.""

Indeed! It takes one fanatic to understand, appreciate and complement another!

CS

"Indeed! It takes one fanatic to understand, appreciate and complement another!"

Thanks for understanding a fanatic.

Who else can understand and complement it better?

It must be crowning achievement of p-secularism to have every franchise(as long it is anti-hindu) of fanaticism fanaticize under one banner.

Where else can one find Xian crusaders and Islamic jehadis, Marxists and Monotheists, Secularists and Theocrats stand side by side, see eye to eye, compliment each other's agenda under one ideological banner, and still get to be labeled secular humanism?

kerty,

thanks for the complement. unfortunately as you can see for yourself, my internet connection is not working, so i cannot respond in detail at the moment. that however should and will not i hope, discourage you from labeling this non-response too as an ""anti-Hindu"" diatribe.

I will respond at length when my internet connection is restored.

CS, you could always write a post/comment about what you find positive (if anything) in Hinduism/sanatan dharm (not referring to organized religion), or whether in your opinion, it's all crap and why. :)

Kerty 124,

Nice comments. Brief yet powerful. Keep commenting.

kaffir,

all religions - organized, disorganized, yet to be born, quite deat etc. - have simply passed me by and i see nothing good in them. I would say that I am neutral to all religions, mature or wannabee, except for the fact that they arouse so much negative passions, blooshed etc. The time has come to put all religions in their pyjamas, so to speak, by simply not allowing them any say whatsoever when it comes to laws that apply to everyone of any religious persuasion or no persuasion. This process may not work properly and surely is challenged in many societies by those who claim they receive direct messages from either God or some spiritual beings or from some ancient irrelevant text or practice. But just because the theory of secular humanism does not always pan out in practice, it is not reason enough to give into religious fanatics of any type, be they Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Martian. And one has to be particularly wary of folks who claim that they are not promoting any religion at all, but are indeed promoting "santan dharma", "vedanta", whatever. The kasuti is not whether i can say anything good or bad about hinduism, but whether i have ever said anything good about any religion.

My interenet is not connected any more, yet again, so I will have to stop here. This is particularly sad since I wanted to send you ten bucks by paypal - but some other day!

Yes, yes CS. I totally agree. Blind faith and belief in the face of overwhelming evidence needs to be criticized only in case of religions. Other vague concepts like secular humanism are above such scrutiny. ;)
Our dear god Marx said so about the human condition, ergo, it has to be true. :)

CS

"all religions - organized, disorganized, yet to be born, quite deat etc. - have simply passed me by and i see nothing good in them. I would say that I am neutral to all religions"

Actions speak louder than words. You have turned every thread and every post that has debated religious zealotry of xianity and islam into attacks on hinduism, and against posters who present the arguments. Please be whatever you are, but there is no need to deceive what you are not. It fools no one.

"just because the theory of secular humanism does not always pan out in practice, it is not reason enough to give into religious fanatics of any type, be they Christian, Hindu, Muslim, Martian."

To cling to a theory even when it does not pan out, is a mark of a fundamentalist. To cling to something even when presented with logic, arguments, reason and reality to the contrary is a mark of a fanatic. To cling to a theory simply on faith and belief makes it no better than all other fanatics, but rather birds of the same feather. Because they all claim that failings of their creed are due to lack of purity, lack of power, failings of humans, and those pesky non-believers and heathens.

"one has to be particularly wary of folks who claim that they are not promoting any religion at all"



Why is it that one can promote your fundamentalist humanism but nobody else can promote whatever they believe in? Why? You think other than you, nobody else should have freedom to believe, that freedom to believe should be banned for everybody else?

Why is it that missionaries and jehadis can promote their fundamentalist creeds and humanists come out to attack only after hindus react and make hindu reaction the sole focus of their attacks, ignoring everything that led to hindu backlash?

Kerty:

""You have turned every thread and every post that has debated religious zealotry of xianity and islam into attacks on hinduism, and against posters who present the arguments.""

he he he! entirely predictable and predicted. and they say that studying human behaviour is not exact science!!

Kaffir:

""Blind faith and belief in the face of overwhelming evidence needs to be criticized only in case of religions. Other vague concepts like secular humanism are above such scrutiny. ;)""

great job in elegantly arguing against youself!! amazing feat, quite unintentional I'm sure.

as you eloquently point out, religion is indeed based on "blind faith", while "secular humanism" is not driven by any faith, except of course the faith in human rationality in dealing with whatever crap society happens to throw at humanity. No easy task for sure, and may set-backs all the time, but there is bowing down before so-called divine principles, revelations, nor eternal principles.

agreed that you do a much better job at refuting your own argument than I could ever have managed :)

CS, meet sarcasm. Sarcasm, say hello to CS.

At least you were correct: you can't really manage much in arguments. Getting old? Quoting only part of my comment instead of reading and understanding the entire comment? That's what happens when you work with winner/loser paradigm which seems to drive your arguments here.

CS

"religion is indeed based on "blind faith", while "secular humanism" is not driven by any faith, except of course the faith in human rationality"

"Blind faith" is a self-serving characterization of religions of others - those who follow a religion do not share such characterization of their religion, nor do they believe there is anything blind about their convictions, but rather their convections have solid metaphysical and philosophical foundation born of higher truths.

Similarly, your 'Blind faith' in secular humanism is not shared by all people, nor your characterization of it as scientific or rational. In fact, it is just one more cult of fanatics, equally bind in its beliefs and assumptions, equally fundamentalist and fanatic, willing to use force and militancy to advance its hegemony, using state to create its own neo-theocracy, creating its own bible of dogmas that people must accept on blind faith, and shares its contempt for all other faiths that a typical monotheism is known for. That what has preceded it is age of Jahalia - age of ignorance and darkness, that age of enlightenment, paradise on earth, and kingdom of the righteous awaits when rest of the world is conquered and converted to its creed and all the believers of 'false and blind' creeds are vanquished. That is why secular humanism is the ideological twin of its theological counterpart(monotheism) - another side of the same coin. And we can see them in same bed in India.

Dear Kaffir and Kerty,

Quite predictably, this so-called argument has ended up in idiotic chutiapa. I take full responsibility for precipitating this decline of commonsense and wasting the time of our esteemed DC community.

To put an end to this pointless non-debate, I hereby declare:

Kerty: the undisputed winner of this argument
Kaffir: a very close runner-up
Gowri and Suresh also ran, at some distance from each other

Congratulations!!!

CS, I wish I were interested in this winner/runner-up business or intellectual smack-downs, but I'm not.

I'm more interested in knowing and discussing what I mentioned in comment # 42 (and an earlier one - #34) in this thread - some intellectual Indians/Hindus being highly critical of superstitions/miracles/actions pertaining to Hinduism, yet applauding/defending those related to Christianity (sainthood, beatification, proselytism - not conversion), in spite of the horrendous history of Christianity (which to some extent still continues today), instead of being critical of *both* actions.

Kaffir,

too bad, you have the prize whether you like it or not.

as for someone applauding sainthood, beatification etc. i think you have the wrong dog if you are trying to pin it on me! not sure where you got that idea; but then again, there you go!

anyways, the prize is in the mail and there's no turning back.

chandra and morris are also in the "also ran" category, except nobody is quite sure where they ran

very well articulated article.I am really proud and impressed by the way christians have conducted themselves .
as regards Chandra's foolish demand of a ban on entry of foreign missionaries ,what if the the USA imposed a similar ban on the VHP's activities in their country ?considering the USA is becoming a major support base both in terms of dollar funding as well as pseudo-intellectuals .Chandra ,i'd expect such non-sense from [EDITED] drinking desis not a smart Coke/Pepsi drinking NRI like you

CS, I'm reminded of the story (and I'd be surprised if you don't know it already) by Siddharth G. where he posed a question to an abusive, old person about gifts brought to him that he (SG) didn't accept. :)

Not saying that you are sending gifts of abuse to me, but the same principle applies.

No, I wasn't pinning it (beatification etc.) on you, but that is the general observable trend among MSM and a certain section of Indian population - to look up in awe at Christianity while disparaging Hinduism. Different standards instead of having one.

Kaffir,

Good story :). Unfortunately you still get the runners's up prize. it cannot be upraded retroactively. but, it's almost the same as the main prize...unnneees beees ka difference hai bus.

You guys are still at it. I got tempted reading about these awards.

If there is a prize for running off the course here, there and any where as soon as a challager shows up that prize should go to CS. It should be named CS Diversion prize. He is the undisputed champion.

hey morris thanks. very generous of you! but the all the prizes for this thread have already been awarded. so, next time! i deserve no prize anyways, just the brickbats will do just fine!

Is gau-mutra an obscenity that it had to be deleted ? lol what a fucking joke

Where is the good news if it is no longer news or good?

Evangelists have nothing new to say
By MSN Menon

Are the Christian missionaries selling a new religion in India? No. They are not. They are selling what went out of this country more than two thousand years ago.

Religions have borrowed copiously from each other. It is amazing how one sacred model has influenced so many others.

Thus, the lives of all the great men of India--Rama, Krishna, Buddha--were modelled on Indra, the chief of the gods. And the Indra model itself had the authority of no less a scripture than the Rig Veda. The Rig Veda gives two full hymns to the birth of Indra.

To the extent religions have borrowed from each other, they cannot be called original, thought today it is the claim of the Christian missionaries that Christianity is an original creed.

Herbert J. Mueller, an authority on Christianity, has a different story. He says, many of the ideas and practices of Christianity came from other countries. Thus, the idea of God came from Babylon, dualism from Persia (of God and Satan) the drama of resurrection from the Syrian story of Adonis, Last Judgement from Egypt, worship of the Great Mother from Phrygia, the idea of Universal Law from Greece and Rome. Interestingly, the idea of Baptism came from India (Manu says that holy water should be poured over the child before cutting its umbilical cord.) And the idea of communion came from Persia. As for the concept of non-violence, it came from Buddhism. Then what is it that is original in Christianity?

The Middle East (from the Nile to the Indus) was a major highway of ideas. Even the names of the law-givers sound similar. Thus, we have Manu in India, Minos in Egypt and Moses among the Jews. Even Maya (mother of Buddha) and Mary (mother of Jesus) sound similar.

There was no sense of shame in imitating in those days. The idea was to bask in reflected glory. Sometimes to excel.

Thus, as soon as Indra was born, he set in motion the Wheel of the Sun. And the Buddha turned the Wheel of the Law. The story of Indra's struggle against Vritra appears in Buddha's life as the struggle of Buddha against Mara. And the attributes of the Mahapurush were common to all gods and heroes.

Agni was one of the great Vedic gods. Naturally, Buddha is compared to Agni. Artists depicted child Siddhartha going to school in a ram cart. Ram was the vehicle of Agni. The Sakhyas were worshippers of Agni. Thus there was much that was common between Agni and Buddha. Indra is also shown paying respect to an ascetic Buddha (Ascetics are supposed to be higher than the gods.)

The Krishna story was familiar to Central Asia by the 2nd century BC, which explains the remarkable similarity in the stories of Krishna and Christ. Krishna belonged to the Yadava tribe. Christ belonged to the Yahuda race. Krishna was preceded by Balarama. Christ was preceded by John the Baptist. One of the missions of Krishna's birth was to kill his uncle Kansa, king of the Yadavas. Naturally, Kansa called for the murder of Krishna and all children below the age of two. This explains why Vasudeva took the Krishna child across the flooded Yamuna to the safety of Ambadi in Mathura.

Similarly, Herod, the king of the Yahudis. Did not like the "wise men" hailing Jesus as "king of the Jews". He ordered the murder of Jesus. Which is why Joseph and Mary took baby Jesus and fled to Maturea (Mathura?) in Egypt. And, finally, look at the similarity of their names--Christ and Krishna!

In their book "the Original Jesus" Elmer R.Guber, an eminent psychologist and Helger Kersten, a specialist on religious history, and author of the best-selling "Jesus lived in India" offer compelling evidence of extensive Buddhist influence on the life and teachings of Jesus. They argue that the Church had concealed the history of Jesus. We know little of the life of Jesus from his age of 12 to the days of his death. Today we know that Jesus was living among the Essene, a colony of Buddhist monks, who were perhaps sent to Egypt by Ashoka.

The Vicar of Stuttgart (Germany) writes (1831): "The Christian church evolved from the community of the Essene."

Dear Reader, I am not saying that Jesus did not exist. My point is: a religion made up of bits and pieces of other peoples' thoughts and practices has no right to call itself original. Certainly it has no right to abuse other religions.

kerty #144:

I enjoyed your comments, for its substance. I am not sure whether God created man, but I am 100% sure, Man created God, originally to inculcate discipline.

Now God and religion have lost its purpose and became counter productive, in spreading anarchy and indiscipline among people.

Excerpts from Sandhya Jain:

"To borrow Marxist terminology, there can be no doubt that the Christian leadership perceives itself as a vanguard for the en masse conversion of Hindu India, and feels emboldened by the political ascent of the Italian-born Congress president. Smt Sonia Gandhi has done much for her co-religionists under the UPA regime, putting the Christian cross on coins and sending an official delegation when the Vatican elevated a little known Kerala nun to sainthood.

Sainthood is, of course, purely political, intended to spur more conversions, so that either a portion like the north-east can be partitioned a la East Timor (2002), or the Christian population upgraded into a decisive vote bank like the Muslim vote bank, so that it can have a decisive say in the polity. It is necessitated because charities run by the Albanian nun, Mother Teresa, who was given the Nobel Peace Prize to promote the Christian agenda, have come under a cloud in the West itself.

It is pertinent that the widespread Hindu angst against evangelists owes much to a popular perception that the Christian population is much larger than admitted to census authorities, perhaps as high as seven per cent. Should evangelists succeed in raising numbers by another five-seven per cent, the combined minority vote bank would render Hindu vote ineffective and completely alter the political demography of the Indian Parliament and assemblies in several states. This is not a small threat, and the spreading confrontation with locally ignited Hindu populations suggests that the danger is real."

Excerpts from MV Kamath:

"But where do the missionaries get their money from and how much do they get? Available information lends credence to public apprehensions. Thus it is noted that in the year 2005-2006, these metropolitan cities, Chennai, Bengaluru and Mumbai received Rs 753.08 crore, Rs 464.09 crore and Rs 440.04 core respectively--all from foreign sources. Ananthpur district received Rs 288.01 crore and Hyderabad-Secunderabad Rs 236.08 crore.

Apparently, Andhra Pradesh which has a Christian Chief Minister has consistently been one of the three states to receive such mind-boggling foreign aid. Christian leaders smilingly point that under the Constitution, propagation of religion is legally permissible. But what the Vatican and the various protestant organisations are seeking is not so much the spread of Christian faith as much as extension of the power of the church to undermine the cultural unity of India and break up the nation--a trick that must be exposed by all patriotic Indians.

May it be remembered that when Pope John Paul II visited India (he had been barred from China) he made the point in a public statement that in the first millennium it was Europe that was converted, in the second it was Africa and henceforth it is Asia's turn. It was a slap in the face of India, a predominantly Hindu country, but quiet was maintained because Hindus with a greater culture believed in the ancient dictum: atithi devo bhava--guest should be treated as God. Pope John could not care less, if he hurt Indian sentiments by his indiscreet comments.

The issue today is not conversion to another faith. Rather it is the deliberate move to break up India. Conversion inevitably destroys a local culture and is fundamentally subversive in content. Conversion, especially in tribal areas, leads to demographic disturbances which in turn lead to resentment. Resentment leads to violence. We condemn violence without trying to seek the reason behind it because it does not serve the interests of our secularists. Kandhamal is an excellent example of this submersion. In 1961, the Christian population there was just under 2 per cent. In 1971 this rose three times to 6 per cent. Thirty three years later, in 2001, the Christian population has risen to 27 per cent. The cleavage between Christian and non-Christian tribes has widened to such an extent that it has been the cause of social antagonism and killings.

Christianity came to India even before it spread to Europe and it was accepted ungrudgingly. If today Christian efforts at conversion are strongly opposed it is because the loyalty of converts is turned towards Rome or to Protestant evangelical centres. There is clear evidence which confirms that Christian organisations are backing terrorism and separatist movements in India's North-East.

The National Liberation Front of Tripura (NLFT) was founded in 1989 and since its inception the NLFT has been engaged in an armed struggle to carve out a separate Christian nation--Tripura. The Baptist Church is known to back it. Christians entered Nagaland and Mizoram in the last quarter of the 19th century and this has led to the transformation of an entire culture which could lead to the isolation of an entire state from mainstream India with dire consequences. The protestant church is working havoc in India while the Union Government wilfully turns its head away. In a short time we are going to have another Kashmir in the North-East thanks to the indifference of Sonia Gandhi- dominated Congress. The first step to prevent further deterioration of the situation is not banning the Bajrang Dal but deporting all foreign missionaries and confiscating funds sent from abroad to undermine the essential unity of India. The sinister plan of the evangelists has to be exposed. The issue is not religion; it is foreign dominance through not -too-subtle means. Under the protection of the Constitution, foreign sources are determined to undermine the basic cultural structure of India which is impermissible. They should be summarily thrown out. The vanvasis of Orissa did not invite the evangelists; it is the evangelist who is imposing himself on the vanvasis under the protection of the Constitution. We are hung by our own petard. Australia's Prime Minister John Howard has asked Australian Muslims who want to live under Islamic sharia to leave the country. Pakistan does not permit conversion. Nor do so many other nations. There is no reason why India should suffer evangelists. The only way to stop the predatory ways of missionaries is to throw them out, bag and baggage. What is at stake in India is not Christianity as a faith but Christianity as a political weapon to take over India by means foul. "

Gowri:
""Christ came to us in human form to save us""
CS: Save me from what? whom? besides, it might be best if you speak for yourself and not "us"
Dear Gowri,
Read -I Corintians 1:18; it says " For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God"

So no point in arguing, some one has to fill the Hell also, or devil will be very disappointed!!!!

CS:
"Dear Kaffir and Kerty,
Quite predictably, this so-called argument has ended up in idiotic chutiapa. I take full responsibility for precipitating this decline of commonsense and wasting the time of our esteemed DC community"
BRILLIANT CS, YOU PROVE YOUR NAME !

GB

"For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing"

Who perished on Cross?

Thanks to messenger of cross for reserving hell for us - for making us perish, like they have done to so many natives everywhere. National integrity, anyone?

Kerty, what's the basis for saying that "Conversion inevitably destroys a local culture and is fundamentally subversive in content." Look at south America and the Philippines. Both places had practically 100% conversion by Spanish and Portuguese missionaries. That did not prevent them from throwing out their colonial masters. The Filipinos fought not only the Spanish, but also the Americans.

Also, on what basis are you saying that Christianity is responsible for the troubles in the north-east? Organisations like the ULFA in Assam and the UNLF (Manipur) are not Christian in character. Maybe ethinic differences and a failure to understand or address local issues is the reason why there is so much trouble in the north-east .

Vinod

Latin America and Philippines are good examples of failure of conversions to create a promised land and save their people. Even after conversion, they are trapped in poverty, exploitation, despotic rule, endless coups and insurgencies, patronage of imperialists. Reason they have not been wiped out like many other native cultures have been is due to their innate size, strength and scope(Philippines is surrounded by Asiatic nations) that forced the missionaries to adopt an incremental tract and pursue tactics of localizing xianity and blending it within local cultures. Such strategy helps create the gridlocks within local cultures and subverts them from within so their potency and vitality are neutralized - why these cultures can not stand on their own without church and western patronage. They have not thrown away their colonial masters - they are hopelessly dependent on ideas, traditions and institutions brought over by colonial masters. Those colonial masters need not live there or administer them any longer, as locals do it much better with lot more zeal.

North-east ethnic troubles are associated with conversions. Conversions are at the heart of ethnic differences and local issues. Having achieved demographic strength thru conversions, converts seek to deny non-converts and wage insurgencies for separatism.

Kerty: "Thanks to messenger of cross for reserving hell for us - for making us perish, like they have done to so many natives everywhere. National integrity, anyone?

BRILLIANT Kerty, I appreciate your arguement skills, by the way just curious what is your real name? Kerty sounds like some missionary name to me??????

GB:

"...by the way just curious what is your real name? Kerty sounds like some missionary name to me??????"

it sounds like an anglicised version of Keerty to me.

CS: " it sounds like an anglicised version of Keerty to me."
Keerthana is even sexier!!! loving it keerthu???