Let me put it again, the ones whom you refer to as "public" leaders, aren't elected politicians. They go about re-converting people to Hinduism. The ones who proposed the bill, are elected officials. And as such, no bill can discriminate between religions. It would violate the constitution.
As per the bill, the activities of the VHP in "reconverting" tribals would be illegal.
That aside, I've mentioned Israel enacted similar anti-conversion laws way back in 1977. What's your view on that?
as a former citizen of India and a practicing non-brahmin Hindu, these are my observations. First off, the average Indian middle-class citizen has many many things on his mind more important to him than religion, not very unlike the average American's stance in the evolution/creationism debate. A Hindu employee will kiss his boss's Muslim/Christian ass with extreme secularism as long as it helps him pay the bills and put his kids through school.
Having said that, the Americans on this thread fail to take into account is the amount of emotional baggage most Indians still carry consciously or subconsciously. History books still remind people how emperor Auranzeb and other Islamic raiders from the west, destroyed temples and killed uncountable hindus. Most Indian neighborhoods have an old grandpa around who regales children with tales of the independence struggle against the "white-man" barely 60 years ago. To draw a parallel, what do you think would happen to a white dude who goes into any inner-city in American and hurls slavery-era slurs at the residents there?
That is the net effect on the average Indian psyche, when a political party like the BJP( and its supporters like the RSS, VHP) uses Hinduism as an electoral platform. But also to be remembered, is that the BJP was booted out after just one term because this platform is not sustainable in Indian. All religion and no development is not acceptable by the Indian people, and they demonstrated that by electing a party led by an Italian Roman Catholic Woman.
The anti-conversion proposal in its present form is stupid and unimplementable in India and is merely political posturing in my opinions. Like Cronos mentioned, if Mother Teresa preached to one of her patients and he/she wanted to convert to Christianity, there should be no State or Individual preventing him from doing so. Such a proposal should involve the state in this issue, but merely as an observer. A line should be drawn using which the judiciary (NOT THE STATE) can decide whether a particular conversion does indeed improve the socio-economic condition of an individual or is just a purchase of a person's soul for Rs.500. Akin to how the INS makes random calls to verify whether a particular marriage is genuine or has just been done for a green-card.