Posted on 04/07/2006 10:02:17 AM PDT by NYer
New Delhi (AsiaNews) – In a letter to Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, John Dayal, president of the All India Catholic Union, warns in not so many words that Hindu nationalists are no longer limiting themselves to random attacks against Christians but have prepared a well-thought-out plan that combines terror and intimidation against minorities and that they are currently implementing across the country.
For Mr Dayal, state political and administrative leaders as well as the justice and law enforcement systems are prejudiced against minorities, instilling fear and insecurity amongst ethnic and religious minorities who are forced to live in terrible conditions.
He writes: “You [i.e. Prime Minister] are of course aware of the single-minded pursuit of a communal agenda by the Government of the State of Rajasthan, both in the case of the Emmanuel Mission as also in bringing the so-called Freedom of Religion Bill [sic].”
To illustrate his point, Mr Dayal brought to the prime minister’s attention two grave episodes. First, the “naked display of armed might by the RSS [Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh, a Hindu paramilitary group] in Jhansi in Uttar Pradesh” during state elections in defiance of “civil authorities and [. . .] the Arms Act”, an act that did not elicit any response by the same authorities despite the fact that Uttar Pradesh is not even governed by India’s largest party, the Bharatiya Janata Party (BJP) who are the RSS’s political masters. What would happen, he asks, if the BJP actually ran the state?
Although different in nature, the second episode is even more disquieting and violent. It concerns the confiscation by the state of Gujarat of a leprosarium in Ahmadabad and the sacking of six Catholic nuns in charge of the institution and their eviction from the Ave Maria Convent which was their home for the past 60 years.
The nuns’ link to the place dates back to 1949 shortly after independence when Bombay authorities invited a Jesuit clergyman, Father Villalonga, to help stop leprosy in the city of Ahmadabad. With the help of Franciscan sisters from Kumbakonam, led by Sister Naemi, he set out building the facility. The authorities and the local bishop signed a five-year, renewable agreement, setting up a government-funded leprosy hospital.
After 60 years, the nuns’ work has become legendary and in all of this time the agreement was always renewed without problems . . . until last month that is.
Dayal explains that whilst the sisters had no reason to suspect anything untoward when the local Health Commission requested a review of the permit, they knew something was really wrong when the government sent them a letter informing them that a lay doctor would take over the management of the facility giving them two days to vacate the convent. In a letter formally announcing that the permit was not being renewed, the Health Commission said that the decision had come from a higher authority.
Even though the “victims are not the nuns, but the hapless patients,” writes Dayal, “it is clear why they were sacked, dispossessed of their home and thrown out of the hospital. For their religion! [. . .] A leprosarium is hardly the place for evangelization.”
In concluding his appeal, Dayal writes: “Dear Prime Minister, the time has come for a serious look at this pattern of hate against Christians. This is not the average communal riot or victimization which sporadically bursts out, and then dies out. This is a sustained terror campaign against our community, even if each incident is separated from the next in space and time. May I request [. . .] that the Union Government [. . .] consider comprehensive political and administrative measures that send out the correct signals to the guilty, and extend assurances to the victims.”
Yes, the US is a developed country. Action must be taken fast. India isn't. The resources at her disposal are far too limited to take action against each and every incident. Besides, India is not too bad, considering the 50-odd years since her existence as a free nation.
I'll make this brief. Just 5 minutes to go for 'Rome'. Its on HBO. Hope you have seen it. Pompey got killed in the last episode.....
Anyway...you are right about the religious mobility thing. Its just that its not happening the way you want it. Today in the morn I read in the papers about how 10,000 christians re-converted back to hinduism in some remote part of India. Obviously only the poorest Indians convert to x'tianity after getting say 50$ from the soul harvesting missionary and their faith is rather fickle. When the hindu missionaries , the RSS guys come visiting , and pay them an equal amount or give them a pair of shirt or saris , they reconvert back to their original faith.
Christianity has been in India since the 16th century. Rabid fanatic x'tian fanatics have been active for 5 centuries now. They had a free run during th 200 years of British rule. And as you say majority of Indians are desperately poor and want to escase hinduism and its rigid laws.
And yet , x'tians only constitute 2% of India's population. Same as they did 50 years ago and 100 years ago. Why is that ? Jesus where are thou !! Now I am off.This episode ol'Julius Caesar's off to Egypt to mate with Cleapatra. Ta-Ta.
I'm not sure you understand my point.
Threepwood: If Christian missionaries are ineffective, why do you want to restrict them? Why do you care?
Rajk3008: CHRISTIAN MISSIONARIES ARE SO INEFFECTIVE THAT RECONVERSIONS ARE HAPPENING I AM GOING TO WATCH TV. ALSO YOU MADE A LOT SWEEPING GENERALIZATIONS ABOUT INDIAN CULTURE WHICH ARE NOW INVISIBLE!
Threepwood: ?!
The sad fact is that most people who commit these kinds of acts get away with tehm.
According to which investigation? Which investigative body? Can you post links?
Of course not. He doesn't have them and he doesn't think he has to anyway. This is disinformation, a specialty that the Indian regime learned well from their Soviet allies.
But when a religious organisation sells a book that denigrates another, the intention is but malicious. This violates the basic tenet of secularism that demands that religions respect one another. Punitive action is certainly warranted in this case.
As long as books are printed that are complimentary of Hinduism, that's okay then. Not very tolerant at all.
And not very democratic. Even if, as he argues, "the intent is malkicious," so what? Then your job is to expose that, not suppress it.
And isn't it interesting that he somehow doesn't condemn the militant Hindu RSS (founded in support of the Fascists, BTW) for publishing a booklet on how to implicate Christians (and by implication otehr religious minorities) in false criminal cases? I wonmder why that is.
Unfortunately, for tehse guys, the Indian state is their God.
You're lumping two different things to gether here. If you were to distribute flyers in support of discrimination, you probably wouldn't get many people to take your flyer, but you would not be arrested. That is legal, if offensive, speech.
OTOH, if you were to distribute flyers in support of jihad, the answer is maybe. There have been college professors who have preached this in their classes and they just go on teaching. If, however, the authoirities deemed that you were actively trying to stir up an imminent threat, then yes, you'd probably be arreseted.
Persuading people to change their religion may offend somebody, but it's not a threat to anyone.
Despite the difficulty of applying a standard of this kind, something like the offense principle operates widely in liberal democracies where citizens are penalized for a variety of activities, including speech, that would escape prosecution under the harm principle. Wandering around the local shopping mall naked, or engaging in sexual acts in public places are two obvious examples.
Hello? These are conduct, not speech. And they do more than merely offend. They tear at the moral fabric of society.
Feinberg suggests that a variety of factors need to be taken into account when deciding whether speech can be limited by the offense principle and these include the extent, duration and social value of the speech, the ease with which it can be avoided, the motives of the speaker, the number of people offended, the intensity of the offense, and the general interest of the community at large.
Some of this is genuinely totalitarian. Who is to determine the "social value"? Liberals would say that conservative speech has no "social value." Should they be able to shut down FR?
Similarly, "the motives of the speaker" is a very nebulous test. Who decides that? Again, liberals really believe that we conservatives have evil motives. Some on our side believe that liberals do. Thus, we could justify shutting down each other's speech by this principle.
The number of people offended? Another back-door invitation to repress speech. There are massive numbers of people offended every time President Bush oipens his mouth. Should we shut the President up because of that?
These tests, if applied, must be applied in the most narrow way possible.
GAME OVER
Yes, it certainly is!
More than you know about Christianity -- or any other worldview but your own, for that matter.
The only thing more glaring than yoru intolernat narrow-mindedness is your utter ignorance.
More than you know about Christianity -- or any other worldview but your own, for that matter.
The only thing more glaring than your intolerant narrow-mindedness is your utter ignorance.
They said the same thign about Japan 15-20 years ago. Then the creeping socialism blew up on them. The same thing is going to happen to India and Chinia unless they change their system dramatically.
The fact is that half the population of India lives below the international poverty line and about 40 percent lives on less than $2 per day. If that is a growing economy, I would hate to see where they came from.
That is just a plain ridiculous statement, and who are you to determine that anyway? You would substitute your narrow judgment for other people's freedom of conscience.
I was wonmdering how long it would take one of you to stoop to that. It just shows that you have no argument.
That is a false and dishonest justification for repressing people's freedom to worship as they like, not as you like.
The clashes that occur are carried out with impunity because they are carried out mostly by the government itself or by protected agencies such as the RSS. I have posted incidents of this earlier in the thread. Suffice it to say that it was not missionaries who shot up a peaceful Christian religioous festival with the theme "Jesus is the Answer." It was not Christains who burned Graham Staines and hsi two little boys to death, chanting "Victory to Hannuman." And except for one scapegoat, nobody has been prosecuted for any of tehse incidents.
That is exactly Gengis's position. And it is tyrannical. He's really shown his true colors in this thread, hasn't he?
You are a vile, hateful, ignoratn totalitarian. Take that crap to DU. Tehy might actually believe you. But not here at FR. We know better. We understand human dignity and human rights. You're on the wrong board.
What you cited was wrong. It does not justify your equally totalitarian and bizarre idea that you and the state get to determine what religion a person may or may not join.
But it theoretically protects freedom of religion. And that includes the freedom to share your religion with anyone else and also the freedom to tell the person who is trying to persuade you to get lost. But if you really believe in freedom of religion and not just freedom of Hinduism, then you must protect the right of people to try to talk to others about their religion, even if the objective is to convert them. That you cannot understand this tells me a LOT about you.
The Sikhs are also picking up numbers.
Last I saw, Islam is growing in America. No one is demanding laws to stop it.
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.