My dear Santoshbab, It is worth noting that Courts rule on the 'issues' before them. All the SC has stated, in this case, is that there is NO "fundamental right to convert". I doubt such a "fundamental right" exists in any country.
This does not make conversions illegal. The Orissa Act (in question),IMHO, impinges on freedom guaranteed by the Indian Constitution - but the case could have been argued better in court than it was. The way the opponents of the Orissa Act argued the case, I submit, would have given the "Christians" special privileges which would would violate the principle of equality. BTW: The provisions in the Orissa Act are draconian and are similar in intent and application as those found in many authoritarian countries. Sometimes, it depends on the way a case is argued. This case, I submit, was argued poorly by the petitioners' lawyers. juss my view jc. 2008/12/21 Santosh Helekar <[email protected]> I was hoping that the Supreme court would rule that conversion was legal in all circumstances except when physical or psychological coercion or threat was used. But it seems it has essentially banned all conversion activity now. I fear that this would lead to more strife in areas where conversions and re-conversions were going on because there is a huge enforcement problem for this kind of a law. Moreover, one of the principal motivations for any religious charity to do good in the toughest environments and against great odds has been removed. What a pity!
