Posted on 05/19/2006 6:12:50 PM PDT by nickcarraway
India has responded with diplomatic equanimity to Pope Benedict XVI's seemingly provocative remarks condemning attempts to ban religious conversion in certain states.
The pope had told India’s new ambassador to the Vatican, Amitava Tripathi, on Thursday that the country should "firmly reject" attempts "to legislate clearly discriminatory restrictions on the fundamental right to religious freedom". He had also taken note of the "disturbing signs of religious intolerance which had troubled some regions of the nation".
New Delhi responded on Friday with a statement, reiterating the constitutional "freedom of conscience" and the right to freely profess, practise and propagate religion. "It is acknowledged universally that India is a secular and democratic country where adherents of all faiths enjoy equal rights," said a foreign ministry spokesperson.
It was the pope's second declaration this week in defence of religious freedom in countries where Christians are a minority. In India, the statement comes in the backdrop of Rajasthan planning to become the sixth state to enact the anti-conversion law the pope was referring to. Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh, Arunachal Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, and Orissa already have laws that bar conversions but allow re-conversions to Hinduism. Jharkhand has declared its intention to enact a similar law.
The BJP-ruled Rajasthan, however, has not been able to convince Governor Pratibha Patil to give her assent to the Religious Conversion Bill. She returned the bill making a point similar to the one made by the pope -- that its provisions would affect the right to freedom of religion.
The BJP has often attributed attacks on Christian missionaries, including the murder of Graham Staines in Orissa, as reactions to their proselytising. During his recent Bharat Suraksha Yatra, BJP president Rajnath Singh had described proselytising "dangerous" and asked all BJP-ruled states to enact a similar law.
'Next time there is an election , in 2-3 years - I guarantee that the BJP will come back to power and the current ruling party will be voted out.'
It seems unlikely, Congress is a big party and has more reach in many states than the BJP. And both these parties rely on Left partoes, other smaller parties and regional parties who dominate their respective states and most of them are secular or not religion based, a nationalistic party is unlikely to win elections in its own without alliances from such smaller parties.
' dont know about this 'aryan' stuff. '
A friend of mine who is a Brahmin Hindu said their origins are Aryan etc and that is the reason they think they are superior. . Infact do a simple search on google and tons of information turns up, of course I am not stereotyping all of them as such.
' am myself a product of a mixed inter-caste marriage - which was a rarity when my parents got married , but is no big deal today'
Ok..but is it that common? from what i hear it does not that seem so. Of course there is caste sytem among some sections of Christian community there too, but that would not seem to be commonly enforced or such a big deal.
That's good to know. Thanks.
That sounds... dogmatic.
Huh?? I never said a word about hate literature.
You got that right.
"THAT is the sort of thing this law is aimed against."
I think the law must be ambiguous. It's been quoted as prohibiting "conversion," not merely prohibiting bribery, coercion, terroristic threats, fraud, incitement to riot, and other clearly criminal offenses.
Several people --- apparently with first-hand experience --- have asserted this, but I don't understand it.
From what I have read on this thread, India is troubled by both Islamic groups and Christian groups who are organizing, agitating or arming and fighting for some kind of regional/national "liberation" --- to set up their own regimes-- in other words they are subversives and rebels and/or terrorists.
IF this is the case, then why would the govt. of India favor the Muslims and Christians, and disfavor/offend the Hindus, who are the vast majority of the population?
What kind of sense does this make?
I complained to the Moderator, trwice, about Brian Allen's offensive posts; I also sent Brian a Personal Message telling him to stop the insults.
You don't have to accept personal abuse. Complain to the Moderators and they will suppress the offensive messages.
Cordially,
Mrs. Don-o
Where are you?
And where did these Pentacostals come from? What is their nationality? Who is sponsoring them? (They evidently have strong financing but not strong morals...)
Nationalism is narrow minded??
Or is it just the "Hindu" part to which you object?
No, the point isn't moot. It isn't a question of whether the law will be passed, but should it be passed.
Double check me if you want, but I have read the CPI-M in India recently dropped their fight against religion in India.
Why is that?
I have read enough now, and am convinced totally, that Christian Missionaries in India agitating the Dalits don't have the first clue who they really are helping. (It's class warfare.)
Also, it really isn't hip to be considered a "demon-worshipping" pagan. Especially if one is a young Indian educated in everything except his own religion.
Well i am from the south indian state of kerala,our state has got the largest christian pop in the country and most of them are syrian catholics.Theses pentacosts are mostly indians but are funded from abroad which is obvious from the fact none of the pentacostal missionaries are engaged in econmically productive work,however the pentacostal chains are spread across the country,south india is the worst affected.
These people have brought shame on christianity and christians of this country and is provoking the generaly tolerant hindu pop.The catholic church strictly asks its believers not to entertain the pentacosts in their homes.
That article is about Christian fundamentalism which has zip to do with Catholicism, so why are you bashing the Pope?
Mainstream Hindus from any caste Higher/lower never convert to Chrtianity...Christ and the proselytizers have been around a few hundred years. The british ruled the country for 150 years and the christian pop. never exceeded 2-3%..The lower castes in India are as much proud or their heritage as the higher castes. The lower castes have political/ecomomic clout. There was a time when they were disadvanged because of their castes...not in todays world any longer...Anyone who works hard gets some opputunity in today's India irrespective of caste/religion...
..So the chritianity is at a dead end in India...Even if they do convert all the tribals...The primary chracter of India would remain Hindu.....I am not concerned about the church trying to convert main stream Hindus any more..they abondoned their attempts long ago...The tribals are not part of the Hindu mainstream and I am glad that the tribals are now a matter of attention...At least there would be attempts to improve their lot..
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.