This topic of casteism, got me thinking about religious tolerance (or intolerance).
All religions (written or handed down centuries ago) were probably written to suit their times. Some of them adapted (rewrote) to what we can say term as 'politically correct'.
But the problem is usually with the practitioners of these religions and way they have interpreted their religious books (usually to serve their own needs).
Lets take this case going on in Afganistan - where this Muslim Afgani converted to Christianity. By the tenets in Islam (written long ago), the Govt. of Afganistan has condemned him to death.
In fact, the Constitutions of both Afganistan and Iraq have written laws that carry the death penalty for Muslims converting to a different faith. The Bush Administration's in their eagerness to spread democracy, capitulated on this thing. They probably never dreamed that a Muslim would convert, and that too to Christiantity. Has the US Administration removed the Taliban and replaced it with another one?
A cursory glance at the different world religions, Islam is probably the strictest in this sense and the threat of punishment by death, keeps the faithful in line and not convert. Other religions, like Hinduism will probably ban the opostate from its temples.
But there is always a big hue and cry when Hindus complain of mass conversions to other religions. Is it being questioned more because its more tolerant and people expect more from it?
--Ram
_______________________________________________ assam mailing list [email protected] http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
