Hi Syamanta:
Santanu yesterday responded to your previous post better than I could have.
I meant to add a few things as well, but since you seem to understand the
points raised by Santanu, I would not attempt to revisit those issues.
Even before we mull issues of enforcement, the more important issues of
propriety of enacting such laws as against 'conversion', which are blatant
intrusions into fundamental human liberties, must be evaluated. More so if
there IS a commitment to building a western style democratic society with
guarantees of fundamental rights including minority rights; like every
national leader of any credibility has affirmed since independence.
It would be different however, if this 'democracy' would be a Hinducentric
one, for preserving the country for Hindus where the majority's rights are
to rule, in the mold of Saudi Arabia for example. If that is the case I
could not complain.
But India cannot have it both ways.
The article by Dr Justice P. Venugopal (Retd) conveniently ignores
examining how conversion could take root in India to begin with.
1: Like Saurav pointed out, vast numbers of Indians, although
labeled Hindus, have for centuries been mistreated, marginalized
and oppressed by traditional Hindu society.
They still do.
And these are the people, mostly, who get converted. You don't see
caste Hindus being converted en-masse, do you? Should we forget
to ask why?
2: FICA is a red-herring. Forced conversion is a fabrication. People
are not so stupid that they would submit themselve to 'conversion'
under duress. Even IF they do--they can go back home and renounce
it. It is not like being fitted with a restraining device that is
controlled by the evangelizing church remotely. People in remote
or highly unmnderprivileged societies, such FORCE is probly far more
prevalent from the dominant majority groups , read Hindus, which
drive these people to 'conversion'.
Inducement: What inducement? Are healthcare, shelter, food, medicine,
education inducements for sins against a Hindu identity? For those
who don't have access to these basic and essential requirements of
life,
IF conversion makes these available, HOW can a good Hindu complain
about it? Is such meanness something Hinduism sanctions?
I would like to think such attitudes are an affront to the essence
of Hinduism? But the good justice Venugopal must think otherwise.
3: Coercion exists in every society and in numerous forms. India
has a great share of this beautiful human quality . Its remedy is
effective law-enforcement. Existing secular laws are plenty good
for deterring cercion.
But Indian government has not yet been able to develop yet to
provide protection to its citizenry from any form of coercion.
Just think of Nerobhai Modi's invoking of Newtonian Physics instead
of providing protectiuon for the protection Gujarat citizens in
the Muslim carnage after Godhra.
And these are the people whoi have the unmitigated gall of complining
against coercion as a mesans of conversion.
4: Allurement: The Hindu whose faith revolves around bribing the gods
for a good life on this earth, not to mention paving the road to
the hereafter has little room to complain about Christians or Muslims
holding up allurements of heaven as a means for conversion.
It is an insult to Indian intellectual traditions going back
into millenia of human civilization.
Finally, to stoop to the levels of countries like Saudi Arabia, enacting
laws against a free flow of ideas and choices on matters of individual
freedoms such as religion and faith, reflects very poorly on the claims of
Hindu/Indian civilization.
I am glad you are attempting to analyze and understyand these issues
Syamanta. My apologies for coming on strong here. But it is not meant just
for you , who seems to be searching, but for all those who have found and
have settled down over it as well :-).
Good writing however. Well expressed. Keep it up.
c-da
At 10:15 AM -0500 9/9/03, S Saikia wrote:
>>Following up on your recommendation, I tried to read the zealot's
>>conclusion. I found it to be equally >problematic and lousy as the main
>>body of the article. And its not just that the author has little sense of
> >history - lumping together the spread of christianity in Europe with that
>in the Americas or making the >absurd claim "The ancient Rome and Greek
>Civilisations have gone into the archives after the advent of >Christianity"
>(that alone is enough to show how blinded by zeal the author has even
>forgotten to revise
>>his facts - to distinguish between chronology and causality). Its more than
>>that.
>
>Yes. On second thoughts, it wasnot a very good piece at all: a whimpering at
>its best and fundamentalist at its worst. But that doesnot detract from the
>fact that conversions by means of FICA (force, inducement etc) should be
>discouraged.
>
>Quite a few individuals decide to convert of their own accord and I see
>nothing bad in that: even my own family has converted Buddhists. Such things
>happen all the time and it is not only restricted to India or the people who
>have been "indoctrinated" by followers of another religion. But it is the
>duty of the law to prevent it from being an instrument in the hands of
>unscrupulous zealots. Every coin has a head-side and a tail-side and it is
>the tail-side of conversions that we should guard against.
>
>Chandan-da, in his posts, excellently examins the problems that creep up in
>the implementation of such a law; it is indeed very insightful. However,
>every law worth its salt has problems of implementation.
>
>For example, in India we have anti-corruption or anti-bribery laws: then the
>question is when does the law decide when a certain gift is to be considered
>a bribe and when is it to be considered a gift of appreciation??
>
>Aren't we in a similar medley??
>
>In certain cases I guess the law doesnot really know: the decision is to be
>left to the judiciary's "superior sense" :-) But even then, the law opined
>that bribery is INHERENTLY evil and should be curbed and the anti-bribery
>law is being implemented.
>
>Especially in cases like individual conversions we can never be sure where
>to draw the line between "propagation" and "conversion". But there are
>certain cases in which the presence of a cunning element can be safely
>deduced. The law, I guess, should act against these obvious cases, while
>giving the benefit of doubt to the convertee and his peers.
>
>Syamanta
>
>_________________________________________________________________
>Send and receive larger attachments with Hotmail Extra Storage.
>http://join.msn.com/?PAGE=features/es
_______________________________________________
Assam mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam
