oct 12th, 2008
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Swami
Dr. Hilda Raja was a professor at Queen Mary's College, Chennai. She is a Roman Catholic by religion and has held an advisory position in the Catholic Bishops Conference in India. This letter is worth reading in full.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:Hilda Raja
Date: Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 5:29 PM
Subject: My response to 'Don't target converts'--Don't convert.
To:
'Don't target Converts '(8th OctTOI) by Michael Pinto poses many
questions than it answers. No amount of provocation can justify
violence is easily said but humanly not easy to follow. All are not
Gandhians or Jesus to show the left cheek when slapped on the right.
Some countries follow a justice system which is based on 'eye for an
eye'.
Aggressive policy of conversion followed by some fundamentalist
churches and fundamental Christians cannot justify taking law into
one's hand and no amount of provocation can justify violence is
correct theoretically and logically. But if such logic rules the
hearts and minds of men/women why is there so much of violence in the
world? Why do countries violate the rights of other countries? Why do
law makers turn into law breakers? Why do those in the Khaki who have
to operate the law on the streets become violators of human rights? In
the midst of such oppression, exploitation can we expect the people to
meekly be submissive and subservient? Or is the author's theory held
good only in the provocation rising in the business of conversion?
When Indira Gandhi was assassinated why thousands of Sikhs were
butchered in the capital? Was it not justified by the Congress party?
When the Brahmin pundits were killed and chased away from their homes
in the Valley and forced to become refugees in their own country under
ethnic cleansing no voices were raised against such an abuse and
violation? When a holy man held in great reverence was brutally
murdered with his three disciples in his own ashram will the author's
theory be strong enough to hold back the emotional, social, and
religious upheaval of the hurt psyche? Every action has a reaction.
When a nun is raped then all hell breaks loose-Daily children are
sexually violated and raped and murdered, no protest voice is heard
-no church rallies are held, no Archbishop/bishop rebukes Chief
Ministers and express
pain and anguish. And no EU raises the issue with the PM in a foreign
land. So Christians have global brokers and Christian lives become
sacred and the PM is accountable to foreign powers for their
safety.-the lives of others can be snuffed out without even a whimper.
What is the root cause of this warped perception but religion? This is
not to down play the rape of the nun but to point out that it is a
harsh world we are living in and to high light the discrimination in
our perception. Does a crime become more heinous because the victim
belongs to a particular religion? 'Terrorists do not belong to any one
community knows no religion', pontificates our political leaders. Is
this again reserved only when it comes to the terrorists of the
Minority community?
It must be said that violence is nurtured within
religious ghettos, madrassas, and only religions/beliefs are strong
enough to provoke and sanctify spilling of the blood of the innocents.
It is in the name of religion that the world had witnessed violence,
genocide, torture and oppression and a Talibanism justifying the
imposition of religious domination and curtailment of the rights of
humans.
It is a utopia that Michael Pinto is envisaging when he states that no
amount of provocation can justify violence. This is armchair wistful
thinking. When the Christians were oppressors this theory vanished.
The tables are turned and when there is an assertion of the Hindus to
retain their culture, their religion and their heritage then the drum
beating of the Constitutional guarantees is heard. It is the right of
the Hindus to protect the Hindu ethos of this country which they feel
is threatened.
Was Art 30 not enacted to ensure the Right of the
Minorities to establish manage and administer institutions to
safeguard their ethos? It is shocking that politicians are equating
the Bajrang Dal and the VHP with the SIMI. The latter is a terror
outfit with its branches now functioning in new names. The suspects
belonging to these outfits are involved in serial blasts all over the
country, they are trained in Pakistan and in POK .These are anti
national
outfits. What is the purpose/aim of these serial blasts-killing of
innocent people who are about their daily business? The aim is to
destabilize the country, create panic and insecurity and unrest within
the country. Why was Parliament targeted? And who were behind it?
But
the same cannot be said of Bajrang Dal and the VHP. They are
nationalists-they may be attacking a particular community for reasons
of their own- the root cause being forced conversion and a reaction to
the denigration of the Hindu gods and goddesses. Those involved in
such violence and criminal activities must be apprehended and brought
to justice. But where is the justification to demand a ban on such
outfits? This is indulging in vote bank politics.
Till date not a
single terrorists has been brought to justice. The reality of wars,
underworld dons killing, custodial deaths, political bosses unleashing
terror against their opponents are all part of the harsh reality of
today's world. Conversion from time immemorial has a concomitant violence.
Indian history is replete with it. The oppression, force, torture,
massacre of the Indians to convert them to Islam and Christianity is
not a fable. The Inquisition and all that it wrought is world record.
Again it is in the name of religion. What you sow you reap. Violence
begets violence-this is nature's order.
In 'Don't target converts' (TOI 8/10/08) the author finds it strange that converts are targeted in a country which constitutionally upholds the right to
preach and propagate one's religion. But then to preach and propagate
one's religion does not mean to force and use fraudulent means to
pressurize people to change from one religion to another. I am shocked
that in this context the author compares inducements like 'buy one and
get one free' in the market of commodities, to faith changing. If the
market goods can be sold with inducements why not it be extended to
faith and belief changing is the author's argument. Can faith and
belief be brought to the market level of sales of commodities? By this
analogy the author accepts that there is inducement.
Money is flowing
from foreign based churches and the gods of these churches need
recruits-the greater the strength the greater the power of these gods
and hence the brokers of these gods are all out
targeting the poor.The inducement-a plate of rice, a loaf of bread to
the hunger, shelter for the homeless, and also the promise of the
green pastures in the next world.The strategy has first an entry
point-first denigrate, abuse, degrade and demolished their gods and
icons. Second instill in these victims the doubt that their gods are
false and then promise to lead them to the true god.
A vulnerable
victim, with a vacuum inner self is then ready for the initiation into
a New Life/to be Born Again. The false propaganda is vicious because
of its attack on another religion. This kind of provocation is not
easy to overlook because human nature is to refute and repel this
atrocious slander/blasphemy. What will the author say if one prints
pamphlets that the mother of Jesus was a prostitute and Jesus' birth
was not a virgin birth? That after her marriage Joseph found her
pregnant and toyed with the idea of putting her away. Only the
intervention of an angel restrained him from taking such a drastic action. This is what
the bible narrates.
Will the Catholic Church and other fund churches
sit back and humbly submit to such provocation? When posters depicting
Jayalalitha as a Virgin Mary appeared in Chennai there were massive
rallies and protests. But if Madhuri Dixit is depicted as Durga and
the goddess is painted nude it comes under the freedom of expression
of a painter. Only difference is that the same painter will not dare
to let his artistic acumen and constitutional right to freedom of
expression to depict Allah even in the best form. This is how we
perceive the operation of guarantees/rights enshrined in our
Constitution.
If opting for a New Life/Born Again, demands discarding of one's
culture, social practices, adapting a western life style and adapting
western forms of worship then the convert becomes an alien to the
Indian/Hindu 'ethos', and is sucked into a process of alienation.
This has other ramifications. Why did East Timor break away from
Indonesia when its Christian population swelled to 27percent just in a
matter of ten years? Similarly in our own context the partition of
India was based on the theory that two religions-Islam and Hinduism
cannot co-exist as a nation-that was the contention of then Muslims
leaders.
World history and Indian history is replete with the
experience that 'peace cannot co-exist with conversion. The reason
being conversion has an inbuilt violence: physical, psychological,
social and cultural. It may even abet one to be anti-national. At
times church laws and rules are in variance with national rules and
laws. The Christians and the Muslims have their own Personal laws. Whom will the
Christians take orders from-their respective church leaders or the
government of India when it comes to a national decision? When
loyalties of a person are divided and clash then there is the likelihood of
becoming a victim to schizophrenia. A leader from Kashmir proclaimed on
the floor of the Parliament that he is a Muslim and an Indian. No
Muslim/Christian will state, 'I am first an Indian and then a
Muslim/Christian'. One can change one's religion but not one's
nationality into which one is born.
Politicians too have abetted this
by not addressing citizens but focusing on communal/caste/religious
divide. Another aspect to be noted in the business of conversion is that
conversions are made even in proxy. A few years ago in Trichy district
of Tamilnadu a whole list of names were produced in paper and the
bishop of that evangelical church baptized them in absentia! Would
this qualify as conversion?
I belong to the Catholic Church and my
understanding of conversion is that it is a process-a life long search
for truth. Conversion is a private affair and not a street
tamasha-neither is it an activity intended to swell numbers.
It is not
that conversion is from one religion to another the Fundamentalist
churches poach on the grounds of other Christian sects. So the Jesus
of one church is different from the Jesus of another. This creates
also distrust and disharmony among the Christian community. Freedom is
always accompanied by restrictions. Freedom is restricted when it
encroaches the freedom of others and of a whole society. Rights are
not hierarchically. When conversions are a threat to peace then it needs to be banned.
Like the curfew order-the ban to strike etc.
The million dollar
question is why conversion? Is it a prerequisite for development work?
Why are the foreign agencies funding conversion activities?
It is strange that the fundamental Christians and the churches to
which they belong do not turn their attention and energy in this
salvation ensuring business to the Muslims. Development and upliftment
of the poor is the camouflage of evangelization all the more why the
need for the churches to work with the Muslims. Because according to
Sachar report the Muslims are the lowest in India-both economically
and educationally. Is it not strange that not a single Muslim has been
converted?
According to Michael Pinto the Christian population has
fallen from 2.6 percent in 1971 to 2.3 percent in 2001.This does not
mean that lakhs are not converted by the hundreds of fundamental
churches that have mushroomed in the country. Today we are one billion
so what does the 2.3 indicate in absolute numbers? When one reviews
numbers a few other indicators must also be listed-Christians follow
Family planning, the celibacy of nuns and priests, and the fact that
most of the converts for the sake of reservation and other benefits retain the
religion and the caste in which they were born on records. Conversion
has been commercialized by the fundamentalistic churches.
The number
of converts is co-related to the quantum of funds that flow in. This
must not be overlooked. Why not ban foreign funds and watch how
evangelization evaporates? All laws have their accompanying
lacunae/loopholes and difficulties in implementation, do we on such
grounds fight shy of enacting laws? Conversions must be banned to
ensure peace and harmony. Let us give peace a chance-for peace and
conversion cannot co-exist.
Dr. Hilda Raja
(Former member of the National Advisory committee of the Catholic Bishops Conference in India)
From: Swami
Dr. Hilda Raja was a professor at Queen Mary's College, Chennai. She is a Roman Catholic by religion and has held an advisory position in the Catholic Bishops Conference in India. This letter is worth reading in full.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From:Hilda Raja
Date: Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 5:29 PM
Subject: My response to 'Don't target converts'--Don't convert.
To:
'Don't target Converts '(8th OctTOI) by Michael Pinto poses many
questions than it answers. No amount of provocation can justify
violence is easily said but humanly not easy to follow. All are not
Gandhians or Jesus to show the left cheek when slapped on the right.
Some countries follow a justice system which is based on 'eye for an
eye'.
Aggressive policy of conversion followed by some fundamentalist
churches and fundamental Christians cannot justify taking law into
one's hand and no amount of provocation can justify violence is
correct theoretically and logically. But if such logic rules the
hearts and minds of men/women why is there so much of violence in the
world? Why do countries violate the rights of other countries? Why do
law makers turn into law breakers? Why do those in the Khaki who have
to operate the law on the streets become violators of human rights? In
the midst of such oppression, exploitation can we expect the people to
meekly be submissive and subservient? Or is the author's theory held
good only in the provocation rising in the business of conversion?
When Indira Gandhi was assassinated why thousands of Sikhs were
butchered in the capital? Was it not justified by the Congress party?
When the Brahmin pundits were killed and chased away from their homes
in the Valley and forced to become refugees in their own country under
ethnic cleansing no voices were raised against such an abuse and
violation? When a holy man held in great reverence was brutally
murdered with his three disciples in his own ashram will the author's
theory be strong enough to hold back the emotional, social, and
religious upheaval of the hurt psyche? Every action has a reaction.
When a nun is raped then all hell breaks loose-Daily children are
sexually violated and raped and murdered, no protest voice is heard
-no church rallies are held, no Archbishop/bishop rebukes Chief
Ministers and express
pain and anguish. And no EU raises the issue with the PM in a foreign
land. So Christians have global brokers and Christian lives become
sacred and the PM is accountable to foreign powers for their
safety.-the lives of others can be snuffed out without even a whimper.
What is the root cause of this warped perception but religion? This is
not to down play the rape of the nun but to point out that it is a
harsh world we are living in and to high light the discrimination in
our perception. Does a crime become more heinous because the victim
belongs to a particular religion? 'Terrorists do not belong to any one
community knows no religion', pontificates our political leaders. Is
this again reserved only when it comes to the terrorists of the
Minority community?
It must be said that violence is nurtured within
religious ghettos, madrassas, and only religions/beliefs are strong
enough to provoke and sanctify spilling of the blood of the innocents.
It is in the name of religion that the world had witnessed violence,
genocide, torture and oppression and a Talibanism justifying the
imposition of religious domination and curtailment of the rights of
humans.
It is a utopia that Michael Pinto is envisaging when he states that no
amount of provocation can justify violence. This is armchair wistful
thinking. When the Christians were oppressors this theory vanished.
The tables are turned and when there is an assertion of the Hindus to
retain their culture, their religion and their heritage then the drum
beating of the Constitutional guarantees is heard. It is the right of
the Hindus to protect the Hindu ethos of this country which they feel
is threatened.
Was Art 30 not enacted to ensure the Right of the
Minorities to establish manage and administer institutions to
safeguard their ethos? It is shocking that politicians are equating
the Bajrang Dal and the VHP with the SIMI. The latter is a terror
outfit with its branches now functioning in new names. The suspects
belonging to these outfits are involved in serial blasts all over the
country, they are trained in Pakistan and in POK .These are anti
national
outfits. What is the purpose/aim of these serial blasts-killing of
innocent people who are about their daily business? The aim is to
destabilize the country, create panic and insecurity and unrest within
the country. Why was Parliament targeted? And who were behind it?
But
the same cannot be said of Bajrang Dal and the VHP. They are
nationalists-they may be attacking a particular community for reasons
of their own- the root cause being forced conversion and a reaction to
the denigration of the Hindu gods and goddesses. Those involved in
such violence and criminal activities must be apprehended and brought
to justice. But where is the justification to demand a ban on such
outfits? This is indulging in vote bank politics.
Till date not a
single terrorists has been brought to justice. The reality of wars,
underworld dons killing, custodial deaths, political bosses unleashing
terror against their opponents are all part of the harsh reality of
today's world. Conversion from time immemorial has a concomitant violence.
Indian history is replete with it. The oppression, force, torture,
massacre of the Indians to convert them to Islam and Christianity is
not a fable. The Inquisition and all that it wrought is world record.
Again it is in the name of religion. What you sow you reap. Violence
begets violence-this is nature's order.
In 'Don't target converts' (TOI 8/10/08) the author finds it strange that converts are targeted in a country which constitutionally upholds the right to
preach and propagate one's religion. But then to preach and propagate
one's religion does not mean to force and use fraudulent means to
pressurize people to change from one religion to another. I am shocked
that in this context the author compares inducements like 'buy one and
get one free' in the market of commodities, to faith changing. If the
market goods can be sold with inducements why not it be extended to
faith and belief changing is the author's argument. Can faith and
belief be brought to the market level of sales of commodities? By this
analogy the author accepts that there is inducement.
Money is flowing
from foreign based churches and the gods of these churches need
recruits-the greater the strength the greater the power of these gods
and hence the brokers of these gods are all out
targeting the poor.The inducement-a plate of rice, a loaf of bread to
the hunger, shelter for the homeless, and also the promise of the
green pastures in the next world.The strategy has first an entry
point-first denigrate, abuse, degrade and demolished their gods and
icons. Second instill in these victims the doubt that their gods are
false and then promise to lead them to the true god.
A vulnerable
victim, with a vacuum inner self is then ready for the initiation into
a New Life/to be Born Again. The false propaganda is vicious because
of its attack on another religion. This kind of provocation is not
easy to overlook because human nature is to refute and repel this
atrocious slander/blasphemy. What will the author say if one prints
pamphlets that the mother of Jesus was a prostitute and Jesus' birth
was not a virgin birth? That after her marriage Joseph found her
pregnant and toyed with the idea of putting her away. Only the
intervention of an angel restrained him from taking such a drastic action. This is what
the bible narrates.
Will the Catholic Church and other fund churches
sit back and humbly submit to such provocation? When posters depicting
Jayalalitha as a Virgin Mary appeared in Chennai there were massive
rallies and protests. But if Madhuri Dixit is depicted as Durga and
the goddess is painted nude it comes under the freedom of expression
of a painter. Only difference is that the same painter will not dare
to let his artistic acumen and constitutional right to freedom of
expression to depict Allah even in the best form. This is how we
perceive the operation of guarantees/rights enshrined in our
Constitution.
If opting for a New Life/Born Again, demands discarding of one's
culture, social practices, adapting a western life style and adapting
western forms of worship then the convert becomes an alien to the
Indian/Hindu 'ethos', and is sucked into a process of alienation.
This has other ramifications. Why did East Timor break away from
Indonesia when its Christian population swelled to 27percent just in a
matter of ten years? Similarly in our own context the partition of
India was based on the theory that two religions-Islam and Hinduism
cannot co-exist as a nation-that was the contention of then Muslims
leaders.
World history and Indian history is replete with the
experience that 'peace cannot co-exist with conversion. The reason
being conversion has an inbuilt violence: physical, psychological,
social and cultural. It may even abet one to be anti-national. At
times church laws and rules are in variance with national rules and
laws. The Christians and the Muslims have their own Personal laws. Whom will the
Christians take orders from-their respective church leaders or the
government of India when it comes to a national decision? When
loyalties of a person are divided and clash then there is the likelihood of
becoming a victim to schizophrenia. A leader from Kashmir proclaimed on
the floor of the Parliament that he is a Muslim and an Indian. No
Muslim/Christian will state, 'I am first an Indian and then a
Muslim/Christian'. One can change one's religion but not one's
nationality into which one is born.
Politicians too have abetted this
by not addressing citizens but focusing on communal/caste/religious
divide. Another aspect to be noted in the business of conversion is that
conversions are made even in proxy. A few years ago in Trichy district
of Tamilnadu a whole list of names were produced in paper and the
bishop of that evangelical church baptized them in absentia! Would
this qualify as conversion?
I belong to the Catholic Church and my
understanding of conversion is that it is a process-a life long search
for truth. Conversion is a private affair and not a street
tamasha-neither is it an activity intended to swell numbers.
It is not
that conversion is from one religion to another the Fundamentalist
churches poach on the grounds of other Christian sects. So the Jesus
of one church is different from the Jesus of another. This creates
also distrust and disharmony among the Christian community. Freedom is
always accompanied by restrictions. Freedom is restricted when it
encroaches the freedom of others and of a whole society. Rights are
not hierarchically. When conversions are a threat to peace then it needs to be banned.
Like the curfew order-the ban to strike etc.
The million dollar
question is why conversion? Is it a prerequisite for development work?
Why are the foreign agencies funding conversion activities?
It is strange that the fundamental Christians and the churches to
which they belong do not turn their attention and energy in this
salvation ensuring business to the Muslims. Development and upliftment
of the poor is the camouflage of evangelization all the more why the
need for the churches to work with the Muslims. Because according to
Sachar report the Muslims are the lowest in India-both economically
and educationally. Is it not strange that not a single Muslim has been
converted?
According to Michael Pinto the Christian population has
fallen from 2.6 percent in 1971 to 2.3 percent in 2001.This does not
mean that lakhs are not converted by the hundreds of fundamental
churches that have mushroomed in the country. Today we are one billion
so what does the 2.3 indicate in absolute numbers? When one reviews
numbers a few other indicators must also be listed-Christians follow
Family planning, the celibacy of nuns and priests, and the fact that
most of the converts for the sake of reservation and other benefits retain the
religion and the caste in which they were born on records. Conversion
has been commercialized by the fundamentalistic churches.
The number
of converts is co-related to the quantum of funds that flow in. This
must not be overlooked. Why not ban foreign funds and watch how
evangelization evaporates? All laws have their accompanying
lacunae/loopholes and difficulties in implementation, do we on such
grounds fight shy of enacting laws? Conversions must be banned to
ensure peace and harmony. Let us give peace a chance-for peace and
conversion cannot co-exist.
Dr. Hilda Raja
(Former member of the National Advisory committee of the Catholic Bishops Conference in India)
7 comments:
>> Does a crime become more heinous because the victim
belongs to a particular religion?<<
Indeed YESSS. Consider the following facts:
A Hindu Dhananjoy son of poor Priests of Kali Temple gets hanged for raping & killing a girl in an apartment complex where he worked as a watchman.
Instant alacritous * judgement* from law courts.
Whereas , a converted indian christian student of Chidambaram Annamalai University not only forcefully sodomizes a fellow Hindu student but also strangles , cuts his body into several pieces , cocksure that he would be acquitted.
Yes ! he does get acquitted despite overwhelming evidence ; he also receives a congratulatory hug from the local pastor or bishop ( who cares) and escorted back when he ( the killer ) walks out of the court.
Recall summoning of Indian Ambassador by the Vatican in the wake of the anti-conversion law, passed by the Rajasthan Assembly?
" ... It is a fact that the Churches and missionaries take the help of Maoists to fight Hindu organisations and Vatican must be aware of it, as it organises enough funds for such activities in the name of education and health care.
Also, with the blessings of the Papacy, many coercive methods have been operationalised by the Christian Missionaries and the ‘inculturation technique’ is one among them. Adaptation of Hindu cultural customs and rituals to propagate Christian faith has been vigorously going on and it has reached its height with the release of ‘Indianised’ New Community Bible (NCB), which includes references from the Vedas, Upanishads, Mahabaratha and other Hindu scriptures.
This inculuration modus operandi is devious strategy, literally mocking at the Hindu majority and provoking them to beyond the limits of tolerance. Such provocations, added with militancy, insults the Hindu majority forcing them to react. Even then, they do not stop their activities and continue with the help of the pseudo-secular media and political parties.
A new breed of missionaries tied to expansionist evangelical movements from the US, GB and Australia are playing havoc in tribal and coastal areas. The destruction caused by the 2004 tsunami was fully utilised by these missionaries to convert many coastal belts of Taminadu.
They constitute ‘Indian Evangelical Teams’ (IET), which are very aggressive and unprincipled in nature. The Christian Science Monitor reports that these IETs have already planted 2000 Churches and they have set a goal of 7,777 Churches by the end of 2010.
The Vatican, which called for the evangelisation of India in 1999, cannot claim to be ignorant on all these matters. The Pope, who had said that St.Thomas had never landed on Indian soil, has also agreed to promote the movie on St.Thomas being produced by the Madras Archdiocese, knowing pretty well that a total distortion of history and inclusion of false history has been a part of the making.
On one side the Pope has been appealing for love, peace, harmony and co-existence of all religions and on the other side, he has been promoting all sorts of evangelical methods..."
newstodaynet.com
All foreign funds into India for "evangelism works" should be banned immediately. This has been a long pending request - but who heeds? Politicians bent on vote banks will never do that.
Raja Krishnamoorthy
Strangely, a news story in The Times of India | 08 October 2008 is titled 'Peace, conversion can't co-exist'
Although the article as a whole has not veered from ToI’s malicious anti-Hindu path, it quotes Ashok Sahu, head of the Hindu Jagran Samukhya. Sahu a “1975-batch officer, quit the force as Assam ADGP in 1997 because he was “unhappy with the system””. Sahu strongly believes that “Christians” killed Swami Laxmananda. Sahu asserted, “Tribals are being threatened, coerced, and cheated into becoming Christians.”
Also from the news story: “Sahu was, however, quick to say that he neither fomented trouble nor incited people in Kandhmal — something which Subhash Chauhan, national co-convenor of the Bajrang Dal, too, emphasized. "People rise in rebellion when there is unfairness and injustice. No one has to encourage them. The Christian leaders are to blame," Chauhan said.”.
Strictly speaking , all money pouring in towards conversions and mosques building should be rerouted to Hindu Temples.
As they have been looted for aeons.
Funny isn't it , all bomb blasts by jihadists are condoned & justified by toilet papers as their angry reactions towards "structural rearrangement " of Hindus' Raam Temple.
The reason behind this frenzied breast beating from vatican to dhimmi india? Simple.
Our oppressors took us for granted---that Hindus not only have any right to react but are also incapable of reacting.
We are not amainos to crave for good conduct certificates from slurdesais & karan thappads.
You are right Hilda Raja. I do not understand this eagerness to convert people to one's religion. If I am a good Hindu, how am I less even than the worst Christian sinner is what completely defeats my logical faculty.
I have read Hindi scriptures, the Quoran and the Bible and I cannot agree with the secularist fanatics who say that all the religions are the same and all of them tell you to love thy neighbour. They are as alike as cheese and chalk. I do not see how I can change to adhere to any other belief even if I convert, because what I have believed till now is so different from what I will be converting to. What sort of christian or Muslim will I be?
So, those who are converting people to their own faith are making their faiths into political parties to present a larger majority before god (if there is one) as if god is going to be swayed by numbers.
Post a Comment