Pope asks India not to ban religious conversions

Hindustan Times ^ | May 20, 2006

[Cronos]

So the Pope has State powers? A Super Church-State? No wonder a Temple is so unimaginable on Vatican's soil.

Again, you talk through ignorance -- the Pope wears two hats -- the religious leader of the worlds 1.2 billion Catholics and the secular head of teh 0.3 sq km country called the Vatian. Is he the secular head of Indian Catholics? No. Indian Catholics are Indians, follow Indian lawa snd to a large extent Indian culture and customs. India has no gripe with the Vatican as communist China has

[Cronos]

Furthermore, teh Church also comments on activities in Italy -- but it has NO RIGHT to influence the government. It talks to the people of Italy -- they alone control Italy's government, not the Church

[Cronos]

It means conversion is always about intolerance. If you can tolerate the religious ethos of Hindus then there is no reason why you would want to covert them into Christianity's straight-jacket.

No, you're wrong. Conversion is about telling people about what/who you worship and convincing him/her about the truth of your ways. It does not mean that the person needs to turn away from Indian ethos and culture, but it does mean some strict injunctions -- like the person acknowledging that there is only one God. If a Hindu can't do that, but still wishes to worship Christ (and many DO), then he/she is free to do that.

[AmishDude]

Certainly the Maple Grove incident is to be condemned. The suspects are in custody and will find themselves in jail for quite some time.

Regarding Ashland (it's MA, BTW), I found this: Ashland Teen Faces Decade in Prison for Defacing Hindu Temple

On November 27, 2003 Metro West reported that "an Ashland teen faces more than a decade in jail if he is convicted of spray painting hate messages on a Hindu temple in Ashland on Halloween. Anthony Picciolo, 17, of 15 Roberts Road was released without bail by Judge Paul Healy at his arraignment yesterday in Framingham District Court.

I hope he got all 10. I am not optimistic. I can't find an update on this. None of the advocacy sites ever talk about sentencing.

About the Matawan incident, I can find that "Vandals threw a Molotov cocktail at a Hindu temple in Matawan" shortly after 9/11. "Firebombed" might not be strictly correct as it is not clear that the attack actually caused any fire. It may have been lit, I don't know.

In fact, other than lists of reported post-9/11 hate crimes, I can find no details other than that sentence. (Well, some reports used "firebombed" but no other details.) I was hoping to find something on whether anyone was charged, you would think it would have made some of the papers and some details would have found their way to the net.

[Gengis Khan]

"and this was exacerbated by the FACT that the central government ignored the N-E for a long, loong time, causing them to think they WERE different."

Oh now its the fault of Delhi that they "alienated" the NE eh? You sound so much like the Pakis talking about Kashmir.

You dont condemn the Christian terrorist activities backed by the Church and killings of innocent Hindus in NE and you hold Delhi responsilble for what is going there. Thats rich!

[Cronos]

Coversions through fradulent means may be a more "peaceable activity" compared to forced conversions but is by no means more acceptable.

Examples of these? And proof that these conversions actually worked (i.e. the persons didn't turn around the next day and become Hidnu again?). Let's give one example -- the Satya Sai Baba (the guy with the wild afro, not Sai Baba) -- I think he's a con man, who insults the name of Sai Baba, but do I consider it necessary to ban him? Not really, because he sticks within the law. If he crossed it and robbed people, then book him, but there are true holy men in India who would be affected if you made a blanket ban

[AmishDude]

the Dalai Lama can do so too

Good point and good comparison as he has some official diplomatic recognition. The Dalai Lama often comments on governments' policies and makes social commentary. Of course, he's not too keen on homosexuality, so he doesn't get covered as much as he used to be.

[SauronOfMordor]

I will ping you the article when I find it but from my knowledge I know Italy does not recognize Hinduism as a religion. Its a subtle way to prevent conversions to Hinduism. If Hinduism itself is not recognized then all conversions to Hinduism can invalidated. So much for religious freedom rhetoric.

In the US, you can convert to Hinduism, Islam, Christianity, Satanism, or worshiping your pet goat, and the government will not care. Christians do not generally convert to Hinduism (although you did get a few people to convert to Hare Krishna a while back -- don't know how those guys are looked upon in mainstream Hinduism). I don't know if it's from a lack of outreach, or from a lack of appeal

[Cronos]

by zealous missionaries who try to force/coax/alure poor people to convert to other religions by offering money, threatening force or making false promises

i strongly condemn those acts, but I repeat how would you prove it in most cases? There may be some black-and-white cases, but the point can be strecthed to ban every conversion, personal or not. If a person reads a Bible and decides ON HIS OWN to become Christian, if he receives a medal as a gift on converting, then he will run afoul of thie law. it's too difficult to give a call.

[AmishDude]

It's despicable, disgusting and against all provisions of charitable Christianity.

I'd very much like to know the name of this NGO.

[Cronos]

I think that's outrageous -- but I have one doubt -- where is the comments fromt eh other side? We don't know much beyond what one newspaper seems to purport.l

[Unam Sanctam]

The Vatican City is a few square acres and a few hundred residents. As far as I know, if one were to convert to Hinduism, I doubt it would be illegal, although if they work in a Church position, they would probably lose their job. Moreover, I imagine they could easily exit to Italian soil and find a Hindu temple in Rome. Contrast that with the huge nation that is India, where there are laws preventing the fundamental human right of freedom of religion. Don't talk to me about coerced conversion, which of course the Church does conduct, since the Hindu extremists interpret the mere provision of charitable social services as "coercion".

[Cronos]

And that is just one example, there are thousands of such example that go unreported.

firstly -- there is one media article. I can post something from the Dawn on Kashmir and state that as a fact (and I'd be wrong), let's hear fromthe other side because we make a decision. And the second is that your statemetn about "thousands" reeks of the same exaggeration / illusion.

[Unam Sanctam]

The laws are meant to stop organized proselytization activity.

There you go, denial of another fundamental human right -- freedom of speech.

[Cronos]

You do have Italian hindus and Buddhists and religious buildings there -- go and visit Rome sometime and you'll find temples and a gurudwara.

[Cronos]

Would you call it fraud, force, blackmail or is it perfectly ok with you?

If it DID happen, I'd call it fraud perhaps force AND I'd condemn it and write strong words to whichever group was involved. But that's the key question -- you've only got the media talking about things but not telling us -- WHICH Charity group, some hard proof. Nothing.

[Cronos]

Do you have any evidence of this actually happening? Catholic Relief Services, which is one of the biggest and most effective relief and development agencies globally, specifically prohibits its staff and cooperating agencies from using humanitarian aid as a vehicle for recruitment to the Catholic faith.

Good enough Gengis?

[Cronos]

The Pope's clear agenda is to Evangelize India by whatever means possible and dont act like the Christians are all so very innocent.

By Whatever means? When did a Christian hold a sword to your throat to force you to convert? The Pope wishes to evanglize (and btw, read that up in the dictionary, evangelize means to spread the word of God, to talk, tell people about the Bible -- so I can evanglise to you, i.e. talk to you, if you want and you can ignore me, or listen and continue or listen and put in some more Christian thoughts into your personal life but still remain Hindu or become Christian), not forcibly convert.

[Gengis Khan]

"The US has the first amendment. This allows you to say whatever you want and allows the target to expose the speaker's ignorance.
It's a difficult concept, but permitting free speech is not a demonstration of national intolerance.
Of course, if you'd rather have dissenters killed..."


Tell me how much abuse of free speech tolerable for you? Dont you believe that men of faith have a greater social responsibility as regarding what they should or shouldn't say at least in public? And if such responsibility is regularly abused then what do you think should be the role of society? Should thay allow this kind of hate speech in the name of free speech? The temple vandalization is not just one stray incident but the perpetrators were 19 years old kids who probably have no idea what Hinduism is except for what they probably hear from the Pastors. Who do you think is responsible for the temple vandalization ? The Pastors who spew hatred? The society that allowed the calumny in the name of free speech or the 19 years old kids?

Sadly here the Hindus and Sikhs have to not only bear the brunt of physical attacks also have to hear the hate spew against their religion and they dont even have a voice.

[SauronOfMordor]

It means conversion is always about intolerance. If you can tolerate the religious ethos of Hindus then there is no reason why you would want to covert them into Christianity's straight-jacket.

If you had a good friend, and you thought that giving him a better understanding of the laws of karma would improve his position on the next cycle of rebirth, would you seek to improve his understanding of karma, or would you keep your mouth shut and allow him to proceed on a path that you think will lead him in a bad direction?

To a Christian, it's not a question of tolerance/intolerance. The Christian sincerely believes that a friend improves his prospects in life and after life, by becoming Christian