Modi government likely to bring bill to prevent religious conversion in next Parliament session

[someone]

5 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

With mass conversions, people are being brainwashed or bought out.  They are helpless people looking for some solace and are vulnerable to these forceful groups.  This is really sad.  Are their lives/livelihoods also  being threatened in some way if they don't comply?  What is the objection to Hindu organizations adopting similar tactics to woo them or woo them back?  I think pujaris, mahants etc. must make this happen at the grassroots level with funding from private sources (e.g., super-rich BAPSians can fund it). 

 

It's a weak argument. It's like saying why doesn't the (weak) person fightback or hit the other (bully)? It's simply because it's not capable enough.

 

Those big religions have centuries of years head-start, they have far bigger infrastructure and numbers. Hindus are no position to use the "same tactic" to covert people.

 

[BacktoCricaddict]

1 minute ago, someone said:

It's a weak argument. It's like saying why doesn't the (weak) person fightback or hit the other (bully)? It's simply because it's not capable enough.

 

Those big religions have centuries of years head-start, they have far bigger infrastructure and numbers. Hindus are no position to use the "same tactic" to covert people.

 

You would be correct if the goal was to go out into the world and spread Hinduism.  But, that is not the ask here.  It is to do it within India's borders where Hinduism is still the dominant religion and the infrastructure exists.  It will take more money, more effort and less rhetoric.    

[someone]

5 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

You would be correct if the goal was to go out into the world and spread Hinduism.  But, that is not the ask here.  It is to do it within India's borders where Hinduism is still the dominant religion and the infrastructure exists.  It will take more money, more effort and less rhetoric.    

Because conversions is never a goal. It's not in our books, nor spoken about in worship places, parents and upbringing. We don't have a binary system or the One God idea...

 

The line is all about Hinduphobia. People can follow other religions, but when the foundation is based on Hinduphobia, it is dangerous. This is getting mainstream in the last decade...

[Swag]

2.3% of the population are Christians.  It is laughable a bill has to be brought in to deal with conversions.  Evangelism has been going on for centuries, it really has not made much of a difference.

As previously mentioned, they are a very peaceful community , most are decent people.

Christian countries like the US, UK etc. also afford the same rights to Hindus in their countries, there are no restrictions or laws.

It would be good to focus where the actual threats lie!

[BacktoCricaddict]

4 hours ago, someone said:

Because conversions is never a goal. It's not in our books, nor spoken about in worship places, parents and upbringing. We don't have a binary system or the One God idea...

 

The line is all about Hinduphobia. People can follow other religions, but when the foundation is based on Hinduphobia, it is dangerous. This is getting mainstream in the last decade...

So, the issue is Hinduphobia.  Rather, defaming Hinduism to spread other religions.  Then, we are talking about a law to ban religious defamation, not conversions per se.  Don't those already exist?

[Mariyam]

17 hours ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

So, the issue is not that conversion is legal.  It is the hypocrisy of how liberals react depending on the direction of the conversion.  How do you stop that? 

 

17 hours ago, Yoda-esque said:

18 hours ago, Mariyam said:

I have a radical ( pun unintended) idea here.
 
Religious conversion should be totally free market. There should be no GoI interference at all.
 
Let whoever preach whatever after seeking due permission. Let them market themselves in whatever way.
 
In the long run, it is good for the Indian economy. You already have funds from Vatican sponsored shell companies and those from the Middle East remitted to India to proselytise. Rich NRIs ie the Raj Malhotras, [mention=890]coffee_rules[/mention] and such like of the world should also remitt money to Arya Samaj type organizations either as individuals or institutionally to re-convert/ ghar wapsi the converted people. Would be a type of FDI. Obviously any of these conversions/re-conversions would incur a cost. The people who are ready to convert can hence be recipients of various divine 'schemes' for alternatively uttering Hail Mary/ Allah o Akhbar/ Jai Shree Ram/ Sat Sri Akal and improve their material condition and set a higher monetary bar for those seeking converts.
 

But but..you saw how the libbies cried fascism when 16 families did that wapsi..conversion is always a one way street ,much like secularism ,in India

 

17 hours ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

So, the issue is not that conversion is legal.  It is the hypocrisy of how liberals react depending on the direction of the conversion.  How do you stop that? 

My post was half in jest. I was trying to troll @coffee_rules but Queen's gambit declined!

 

My serious response here would be, reaction of 'liberals' is hardly a matter of concern. The 'liberals' and their publications can be bought. That what you guys claim the 'other' sides have done. If one set of proselytisers start throwing around their gold mohurs, the tunes of the same 'liberals' would change. Their opeds would extol virtues of the faith/culture that foots their bill.

 

My broader point is; treat this like an advertising campaign. Don't criticize your 'opponents', but wax eloquent your utopia and incentivize people to believe in it by handing em sops. I can see only inflows of $ here!

 

[Ranvir]

I say let the country develop, get everyone literate and then allow people to convert. Otherwise people will simply be tricked into conversions.

[coffee_rules]

6 hours ago, Mariyam said:

 

 

My post was half in jest. I was trying to troll @coffee_rules but Queen's gambit declined!

 

My serious response here would be, reaction of 'liberals' is hardly a matter of concern. The 'liberals' and their publications can be bought. That what you guys claim the 'other' sides have done. If one set of proselytisers start throwing around their gold mohurs, the tunes of the same 'liberals' would change. Their opeds would extol virtues of the faith/culture that foots their bill.

 

My broader point is; treat this like an advertising campaign. Don't criticize your 'opponents', but wax eloquent your utopia and incentivize people to believe in it by handing em sops. I can see only inflows of $ here!

 

Wish I was so rich, but still wouldn’t pay people to convert. My motto is Na (convert) karoonga, na karne doonga. It is not a dole to get votes. 

[BacktoCricaddict]

41 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

Wish I was so rich, but still wouldn’t pay people to convert. My motto is Na (convert) karoonga, na karne doonga. It is not a dole to get votes. 

Na karne doonga is a difficult (and possibly incorrect) stance to take here.  As long as the converter and the convertee both achieve their end of the transaction, i.e., the converter increases his numbers and the convertee gets the monetary or material benefit they agreed upon, how can you say "na karne doonga"?  If both parties are happy in their choice - unlike in slavery or forced prostitution - religious conversion should not be a crime.  If the religious stakes are so high for you, you must "karo" something.  

 

Admittedly, I am looking at this from a transactional viewpoint, which is not the same as yours.  

[someone]

7 hours ago, Ranvir said:

I say let the country develop, get everyone literate and then allow people to convert. Otherwise people will simply be tricked into conversions.

Education has failed to deal with extremism. The terrorists are educated also.

 

The issue is mutual respect, not tolerance.  All religions are to be respected and same, and true equality.

[someone]

18 hours ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

So, the issue is Hinduphobia.  Rather, defaming Hinduism to spread other religions.  Then, we are talking about a law to ban religious defamation, not conversions per se.  Don't those already exist?

Developing nations need to be stop exploitation of its poor people. Thus, stronger anti-conversion laws is a must...

[BacktoCricaddict]

12 minutes ago, someone said:

Developing nations need to be stop exploitation of its poor people. Thus, stronger anti-conversion laws is a must...

With a free will clause, maybe?    

[someone]

9 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

With a free will clause, maybe?    

It's case by case, and evidence based.

 

Take love Jihad, where young people are first exploited by "love", or "lust", and afterwards, pressurized to convert. There are fake identities, gang networks, unethical NGOs, illegal foreign funding. It's a big chain....

[BacktoCricaddict]

18 minutes ago, someone said:

It's case by case, and evidence based.

 

Take love Jihad, where young people are first exploited by "love", or "lust", and afterwards, pressurized to convert. There are fake identities, gang networks, unethical NGOs, illegal foreign funding. It's a big chain....

Understood.  I was born Hindu.  Now I am an atheist.  Let's say a devout Christian (or BAPS Patel) tells me that he will pay off my home mortgage if I convert to Christianity (or Hinduism) and go to church (or BAPS Mandir) every week for a year.  I have no religious principles or scruples.  I will gladly do it even if I don't believe in it because that is a huge chunk of change for me and it does not really hurt anyone.   

 

Is that good evidence?  Note that. at the end of that transaction, he is happy, I am happy.       

Edited January 8, 2021 by BacktoCricaddict

[someone]

20 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

Understood.  I was born Hindu.  Now I am an atheist.  Let's say a devout Christian tells me that he will pay off my home mortgage if I convert to Christianity and go to church every week for a year.  I have no religious principles or scruples.  I will gladly do it even if I don't believe in it because that is a huge chunk of change for me and it does not really hurt anyone.    

 

Is that good evidence?  Note that. at the end of that transaction, he is happy, I am happy.       

Hypothetical examples led nowhere. My example say where to settle outstanding debt, one asks the debtor's XYZ to marry/sleep with him. So is it win, win for both sides? As the debt is gone at the end.

 

Maybe it is numbers? Where it should not be a trend that society it becomes dangered. Today, conversions, love jihad is spread in increasing numbers and all around the country...

 

 

Edited January 8, 2021 by someone

[coffee_rules]

We are talking exploitation of large group of poor people being exploited by so-called soul harvesters. India is fully educated to give free access to everybody to coerce people to convert. You converting for money is not the issue, whole lot of tribal people have been converted. They are asking Tribal communities who have declared themselves as Hindus to be declared non-Hindus. Why can't the tribals worship their own tree god or stone god. What good does it serve their indigenous culture getting wiped out and replaced with some foreign god? This is a case of Human Rights world over and affects Asia and Africa.

[BacktoCricaddict]

22 minutes ago, someone said:

 

 

 

 

 

 

Hypothetical examples led nowhere. My example say where to settle outstanding debt, one asks the debtor's XYZ to marry/sleep with him. So is it win, win for both sides? As the debt is gone at the end.

Bad comparison.  If Debtor forces Debtor's XYZ into sleeping with a loan shark, how is that a win-win?  That is enslavement. with XYZ being a slave here ... and both loan shark and Debtor need to be thrown in jail.     

 

Maybe it is numbers? Where it should not be a trend that society it becomes dangered. Today, conversions, love jihad is spread in increasing numbers and all around the country...

 

It is very subjective. If a million Muslims convert to Hinduism, is society endangered?  You will say no, but a Muslim will disagree. 

 

In my opinion, you cannot legislate the conversion itself. The peripheral deceptions and coercions can be made illegal. But if both parties are happy in the transaction you cannot stop that.

 

The solution may lie in the government taking care of the poor better, giving them more resources and providing education, upliftment and upward mobility for them so they don't have a reason to take money and convert.  And if Hindus using positive recruitment strategies to woo non-Hindus to convert or prevent Hindus from leaving the fold.  

Edited January 8, 2021 by BacktoCricaddict

[BacktoCricaddict]

36 minutes ago, coffee_rules said:

They are asking Tribal communities who have declared themselves as Hindus to be declared non-Hindus. Why can't the tribals worship their own tree god or stone god. 

Govt should just say that it is not their job to declare someone as a Hindu or non-Hindu.  It is each tribal member's prerogative to worship a tree or stone or nothing at all.  If, in the end, a 1000 tribals all agree to be Hindus and another 1000 tribals want to be X-ians, that's their business as long as they are not being incentivized and not threatened.  

 

  

 

 

Edited January 8, 2021 by BacktoCricaddict

[someone]

30 minutes ago, BacktoCricaddict said:

 

Hypothetical examples led nowhere. My example say where to settle outstanding debt, one asks the debtor's XYZ to marry/sleep with him. So is it win, win for both sides? As the debt is gone at the end.

Bad comparison.  If Debtor forces Debtor's XYZ into sleeping with a loan shark, how is that a win-win?  That is enslavement. with XYZ being a slave here ... and both loan shark and Debtor need to be thrown in jail.     

 

Maybe it is numbers? Where it should not be a trend that society it becomes dangered. Today, conversions, love jihad is spread in increasing numbers and all around the country...

 

It is very subjective. If a million Muslims convert to Hinduism, is society endangered?  You will say no, but a Muslim will disagree. 

 

In my opinion, you cannot legislate the conversion itself. The peripheral deceptions and coercions can be made illegal. But if both parties are happy in the transaction you cannot stop that.

 

The solution may lie in the government taking care of the poor better, giving them more resources and providing education, upliftment and upward mobility for them so they don't have a reason to take money and convert.  And if Hindus using positive recruitment strategies to woo non-Hindus to convert or prevent Hindus from leaving the fold.  

That's my point. A free market doesn't give you the right to victimize or exploit other people.

 

Of course, the onus primarily lies on Hindus themselves. They must get first aware of the challenge, and work to bring greater education and development. But there is also the side of religious accountability, disclosure of funds, ethics, and morality. Stronger laws are necessarily in developing nations.

 

And when we talk about need for anti-conversion laws, it is for everybody.  Likes of Muslims convert to Hindus, they also deserve protection if somebody is exploiting them. Even our intelligence agencies have talked about the increased number of conversions from Hinduism, and it's danger for internal security.

 

[BacktoCricaddict]

7 minutes ago, someone said:

That's my point. A free market doesn't give you the right to victimize or exploit other people.

 

Of course, the onus primarily lies on Hindus themselves. They must get first aware of the challenge, and work to bring greater education and development. But there is also the side of religious accountability, disclosure of funds, ethics, and morality. Stronger laws are necessarily in developing nations.

 

And when we talk about need for anti-conversion laws, it is for everybody.  Likes of Muslims convert to Hindus, they also deserve protection if somebody is exploiting them. Even our intelligence agencies have talked about the increased number of conversions from Hinduism, and it's danger for internal security.

 

I think we are in much more agreement than disagreement.  We agree that exploitation should not happen.  So, if so and so converts, but does not complain about being exploited, we just stay out of their business.

 

Now, let's talk exploitation.  What is exploitation?  You may not like hypotheticals, but sometimes they help to frame a question:

 

The Debtor XYZ example was clearly exploitation.  We agree there.  What about this:

 

If a missionary agency walks into a village and says - we will dig 5 borewells, set up irrigation for all your farms, fix all the roads, open a dispensary and give everyone INR 500 every month as long as everyone accepts Yesu as your lord and savior.  Is this exploitation?

 

Perfectly good Friday afternoon whiled away arguing about religion and GMOs on ICF. Now I have to work over the weekend. Crap!

Edited January 8, 2021 by BacktoCricaddict