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.
Isn't that interesting? Seems some things never change. So be it.
Try using that line with African Americans. /sarcasm China's only hope of recovering and of building a sustainable economy, lies in the fact of its 200 million plus and growing Christians. And upon the Rock of the Rule of Law those Good Men and their descendents will build after they eventually create and establish China's first ever in its much-vaunted 55-years-old "history," Government of and by and for its People.
Really?? What happened in Africa then??
Ah, but there's the difference. The Imam wants to make India an Islamic republic. His religion obliges him to do this, because it has been from the beginning, and is now, a political movement. He wants Muslims to rule all nations of the world under Shari'a law. However, the Pope has no territorial ambitions. If he did, he'd be sitting in his tiny (0.44 sq km) Vatican principality plotting the takeover of, say, the city of Rome: or, my God! Everything from St. Peter's to Castel Gandalfo!
You wrote: "He may believe its his divine right or whatever but for a sovereign nation like India his comments as a head of a Nation State is directly hostile and must be construed as such."
This is nonsense. The pope is alluding to a human right which is found in the Indian Constitution. If it is a casus belli for the pope to advocate freedom of speech, of religion, of press, of association which are already in the Indian Constitution, then India would be war war with its own stated principles. But it is not a casus belli. It is a reminder that Indian citizens have the right to adopt, practice, advance, propagate, retain or change their religious beliefs and affiliations.
This is no territorial claim on the part of the poppe and poses no threat to the Indian state.
If I were you, though, I'd keep my eye on that Imam Syed Bukhari.
Very untrue. Many educated and well to do americans are converting to hinduism and buddhism. Hinduism allows you to think and question. This isnt a benefit that christianity gives you.
This is no territorial claim on the part of the poppe and poses no threat to the Indian state."
Very well said.
There is little difference between the Imam and the radical missionaries. Two sides of the same coin.
Evidence, please. I very much doubt this. I was at a Hindu festival in San Francisco a couple of years ago and there were friendly, smiling Hindus all over the place offering me delicious samosas and sweet, milky tea and inviting me to learn about and join in their religious practices.
OK. But the point as made repeatedly that India is a "secular, democratic" country in which all people have "equal" religious rights. So is it a secular democracy or a closed Hindu society? You can't have it both ways.
What evidence do you need?? Try it and see how long the consul officer takes to throw you out.
Those smiling hindus you saw in San Francsisco are probably indians who came here as IT professionals or doctors.
Hinduism has a good following among educated americans. They purused hinduism and/or buddhism out of their own interest. There were no Gita thumpers knocking on peoples doors.
Yes they do have EQUAL rights. Practice your own faith while I practice mine. Conversion through allurement is prohibited for ALL people. I wonder why this law is effecting christians the most??
Your freedom ends where my nose begins.
That is ridiculous. Look at the enormous wealth of Christian thought and scholarship down the centuries. The Catholic Church has been home to some of the greatest minds in history. You'll have to try harder than simply casting baseless aspersions.
Now that's just dumb. Nobody's advocating shootings beatings and lynchings; such things are against the law everywhere. The last lynching in the USA was in San Jose, CA in 1933 (you can read about it in the book "Swift Justice" by Harry Farrell.) Your slander of the Bible Belt just shows ignorance about my people and my region. (I live in East Tennessee.)
The enormous wealth of christian thought and scholarship arrives at the same conclusion. Let us see christian thought that says that you need not believe in god or his son, just do good deeds and still be a good christian. Checkmate.
Hindu philosophy is much more open and much more intellectual. That is why thinking people always turn to hinduism and or buddhism.
As opposed to overt racism in the christian western world?? /sarcasm. Quit the propaganda. You will find that it becomes a slug fest pretty fast.
Less than a dozen would be my guess. Personally, based on the extremist anti-Christian attitudes displayed by you and a couple of your co-religionist on this thread, I'm beginning to sympathize with that bias.
The feeling mutual. :-))
Truth sometimes is bitter. Wasnt racial segregation a way of life in large parts of the bible belt till the 70s. Many incidents like this are just shoved under the carpet and not reported. Your slander of the Bible Belt just shows ignorance about my people and my region. (I live in East Tennessee.)
I could say that you do the same thing against indian people and their religion.
It isnt "my" beloved India. Anyways, sure, once india attains material prosperity, the missionaries are welcome to go there. None is against Christians intellectually spreading their message. The law and people like me are against conversion through allurement. As one poster here pointed out there are 15k missionaries in china. The churches are pumping in cloes to $350 million an year to entice hindus with money to convert. That is plain plain wrong.
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.