Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gwinnett says no to Hindu Temple
Atlanta Journal-Constitution ^

Posted on 06/30/2006 9:36:32 AM PDT by The Lion Roars

The Atlanta Journal-Constitution

Published on: 06/27/06

Gwinnett County commissioners struck down plans Tuesday for a Hindu group to build a temple down the street from a second, larger temple in Lilburn.

Commissioners made the unanimous decision because a temple of its size would be out of character with the area and the neighbors, said commissioner Bert Nasuti.

"I've never seen a church or a religious organization that didn't desire to grow," Nasuti said. "This is too much structure for this property."

Ramesh Suhagia, speaking for the Hindu group, proposed scaling down the size, but to no avail.

The 13,000-square foot temple for the Swaminarayan Satsang Mandir of Atlanta would have been on on four acres on Lawrenceville Highway. The property is behind a Walgreens in a largely residential negihborhood about a mile from a second temple more than twice as large already under construction by another Swaminarayan Hindu congregation. Because the larger temple is in Lilburn's city limits, its builders did not need permission from county government.

Leaders of the group denied construction permission Tuesday said they would meet together and sort out their options. Mansukh Dhanani [cq], president of Swaminarayan Satsang Mandir of Atlanta, said his group would look for land elsewhere in Gwinnett County, and expressed optimism.

"I've lived for 10 years in Gwinnett. My business is here," he said. "Man will let you down. God will not."


TOPICS: Culture/Society; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: discrimination; hindu; india; news; persecution; temple; violence; youngearthcultonfr
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last
To: Concho
I dont know about Hindu religion. What do they believe? Are they violent like Musklims?

They fairly regularly murder Christians in India. It just doesn't get much press.

41 posted on 06/30/2006 10:40:04 AM PDT by PAR35
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ABN 505

Ganesh. Theres a holiday where he is celebrated.

Forget the name.


42 posted on 06/30/2006 10:57:19 AM PDT by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: PAR35
They fairly regularly murder Christians in India.

Right, that's why several Indian states are now majority Christian. It's bad enough when people like you have to lie, but to do it so badly is just sad.
43 posted on 06/30/2006 10:57:29 AM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 41 | View Replies]

To: rahbert
Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting
44 posted on 06/30/2006 10:59:53 AM PDT by rahbert
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Jack Black
...I speak only Spanish...

You're English writing is pretty good.

45 posted on 06/30/2006 11:00:55 AM PDT by Petronski (I just love that woman.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

Yes. Debate should have been used instead of argument (because of connotation); however, such a debate would probably have lead to vehement attacks (mainly from the atheists toward the Christians, but there could be an occasional counterattack). Still, as many Hindus (at least in India) have the view that Christians force Hindus to become Christian, and some have a low opinion of Christianity as an effect of the British Raj, explaining Christianity on a thread which could attract Hindus could be useful in getting out the message that Christians aren't into forced conversions and that the belief in the one way to God and salvation through Christ is not based on arrogance.


46 posted on 06/30/2006 11:47:18 AM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu ( http://www.answersingenesis.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: DaveLoneRanger

Yes. Debate should have been used instead of argument (because of connotation); however, such a debate would probably have lead to vehement attacks (mainly from the atheists toward the Christians, but there could be an occasional counterattack). Still, as many Hindus (at least in India) have the view that Christians force Hindus to become Christian, and some have a low opinion of Christianity as an effect of the British Raj, explaining Christianity on a thread which could attract Hindus could be useful in getting out the message that Christians aren't into forced conversions and that the belief in the one way to God and salvation through Christ is not based on arrogance.


47 posted on 06/30/2006 11:48:20 AM PDT by Jedi Master Pikachu ( http://www.answersingenesis.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: TexasRepublic
I would prefer a Hindoo temple over a mosque anytime. All the Hindoos I have met are friendly, polite and integrate into our society well.

I second that. I live in the Detroit area and have 2 Hindu temples less than a mile from my house. I find most Hindus to be very polite and peaceful neighbors. At least I don't have to listen to their amplified calls to prayer several times a day like from the Mosques.

48 posted on 06/30/2006 11:53:27 AM PDT by Tokra (I think I'll retire to Bedlam.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Jedi Master Pikachu

You are seeking a flame war where none exists. Have you ever been to India?


49 posted on 06/30/2006 12:01:46 PM PDT by The Lion Roars
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: AnotherUnixGeek

How do they respond to the "No one can come throguh the Father except through me"? They can't say that he was both divine and in the same breath say he was wrong in saying this.


50 posted on 06/30/2006 1:11:43 PM PDT by DarkSavant (Grease me up woman!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: DarkSavant
throguh = to...

sheesh
51 posted on 06/30/2006 1:12:50 PM PDT by DarkSavant (Grease me up woman!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: DarkSavant
They can't say that he was both divine and in the same breath say he was wrong in saying this.

Who says "divine" means "infallible"?

52 posted on 06/30/2006 1:18:41 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls

When you say you're one with God, you do the will of God. It kind of removes the question of being fallible. Is God capable of making a mistake?


53 posted on 06/30/2006 1:20:43 PM PDT by DarkSavant (Grease me up woman!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]

To: DarkSavant
How do they respond to the "No one can come throguh the Father except through me"? They can't say that he was both divine and in the same breath say he was wrong in saying this.

Without pretending to be an expert on Hinduism, Christianity, or religion in general, this is my understanding: modern Hinduism accepts many gods, all of whom are considered to be different aspects of a single, supreme being. Each god is viewed as the way in which a certain group of people in some area of the world has perceived the supreme being. In this way, Hinduism has absorbed or attempted to absorb every deity in the various religions it has encountered - with the notable exception of Islam, which violently insisted on the separateness of Allah. Even Siddhartha Guatama, the Buddha, whose entire religious philosophy was a rebellion against ancient Hinduism, has been incorporated into the Hindu pantheon.

Therefore, many Hindus have no problem accepting Christ as a mortal incarnation of God, who came to enlighten a group of people. When Christ says that "No one can come throguh the Father except through me", there is no conflict in Hindu minds - Christ is an aspect of the supreme being and, of course, no one can come to God except through him - but Hindus might say they'll do it through another aspect with many arms and an elephant's trunk.
54 posted on 06/30/2006 1:52:04 PM PDT by AnotherUnixGeek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: DarkSavant
How do they respond to the "No one can come throguh the Father except through me"?

For hindus the "me" is really "me". Hinduism believes that there are separate ways to reach the supreme being. In other words - spirituality or worship of an idol or a tree or christ is really a worship of the supreme being. Hence your mode of worship doesnt matter since you are really worshipping the infinite force - the parmatma - or the supreme being.

Within Hinduism you can even worship yourself. Since hinduism believes that a part of the supreme being - the atma - resides in every thing living. The whole idea of karma is to grow this atma till it becomes infinite and hence one with the parmatma.

55 posted on 06/30/2006 2:07:08 PM PDT by The Lion Roars
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: Concho

Please refer to my post above for a quick summary of hinduism.


56 posted on 06/30/2006 2:08:33 PM PDT by The Lion Roars
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DarkSavant
It kind of removes the question of being fallible. Is God capable of making a mistake?

He must be able to. How did Satan arise? If there was a "war" in heaven, then heaven isn't perfect especially if previously infallible angels on the right-hand of God later became the agents of all that is evil. Either that or St. Peter was on a coffee break and someone else let those guys in the gate originally.

57 posted on 06/30/2006 2:22:49 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 53 | View Replies]

To: The Lion Roars
Within Hinduism you can even worship yourself.

That explains Hollywood.

58 posted on 06/30/2006 2:23:39 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Maneesh
Hindusim has never said that their god is the right one and is by far the most accepting and tolerant religion in the world.

The problem I see with Hinduism is the belief in reincarnation to a certain caste as a consequence of your previous life. If you strive to live a good life now, in the next life you will be reincarnated to a higher station in life -- perhaps as a very rich person. If you live a life where you do bad or evil things then in the next life you might be reincarnated a poor beggar man with a disease. This leads to loss of compassion, as there is no reason to feel sorry for the poor diseased beggar man as he is just getting payback for his previous bad life. And one should show respect and praise for the rich and indolent as they are receiving their reward for a previous great life. One should never question the rich and not help the poor.

Christianity is just the opposite. It is to redeem the bad, change their lives, forget the past and get them to move on in a better life doing good in the here and now. Each person starts their life anew and is responsible for what they do in this life.

59 posted on 06/30/2006 2:34:08 PM PDT by FreedomCalls (It's the "Statue of Liberty," not the "Statue of Security.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: FreedomCalls

Most people in hollywood arent hindu. You have to search for a better explanation. Maybe Tom Cruise can help. /sarcasm


60 posted on 06/30/2006 2:43:07 PM PDT by The Lion Roars
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson