This is really sad. These guys should make their mission of removing brahmin
priesthood and replacing with caste-free temple management --that requires real
guts - of going against their support base - which perhpas they don't have.
Umesh
Pradip Kumar Datta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Fundamentalists - of love and
hate Fri,
04/05/2007 - 05:39 Tarique Anwar By Vishal Arora
The attack on a Christian priest allegedly by members of the Vishwa Hindu
Parishad (VHP) and the evangelistic zeal demonstrated by the victim right after
the assault April 29 in Jaipur brings to light the contrast between the
Hindutva and Christian "fundamentalism" in our country.
The VHP members launched the attack on Pastor Walter Masih at his house after
inviting TV news channels to cover their mission. A sense of pride was evident
in their gesture, which was later shared by VHP leaders who refused to condemn
the incident. The bleeding Christian victim, accused of "conversion", too stood
his ground by turning towards the camera to preach his religion before he was
taken to a hospital, saying this is how Jesus Christ was killed 2,000 years ago.
Given that fundamentalism means returning to the fundamentals of a religion or
ideology, both Hindutva forces and Christian missionaries can rightly be termed
as fundamentalists. But their goals and methodologies are as different as the
east is from the west if seen in the light of the law of the land and universal
values.
Hindutva fundamentalists are said to indulge in hate campaigns against
religious minorities, mainly Christians and Muslims, and perpetrate violence.
Besides, they train their cadres in arms to fight the "enemies". These
activities are unlawful under several sections of the Indian Penal Code.
They also do social service, but the pockets where they serve often witness
violence against the minorities.
On the other hand, Christian fundamentalists preach the Gospel with the people
of other faiths by personal interaction, public meetings and distribution of
literature, permissible under Article 25 of the Indian constitution. But
proselytisation is not allowed, as the Supreme Court has ruled.
Christian groups also serve marginalised sections through developmental
programmes and educational and medical institutions. In the areas where they
work, sections of the people convert to Christianity. Do they convert using
unfair means? Converts, who have the sole right to make such an allegation, do
not say so. Besides, anti-conversion laws are in force in Orissa, Madhya
Pradesh and Chhattisgarh for close to 40 years, but not even a single person
has been convicted of "forced" conversion by any court of law.
There are, however, sporadic incidents of sections of Christian
fundamentalists criticising other religions in their evangelistic zeal, which
is distasteful and untenable besides being unlawful.
Christian fundamentalists are also accused of receiving foreign money - an
accusation that is true. But so do Hindutva groups to fund their activities.
Money comes through and is regulated by the Indian home ministry as per the
Foreign Contribution Regulation Act.
As regards the Hindutva dream of making India a Hindu nation, it is both
impossible and undesirable. The basic structure of the constitution mandates
India to be a secular state. This cannot be amended even if a clear-cut
majority in parliament seeks to do so. Even otherwise, the progressive Indian
society would never like to regress to a theocracy like Saudi Arabia.
Similarly, preaching of non-Hindu faiths cannot be banned, as that would defy
both the constitution and international human rights conventions to which India
is a party. Besides, any such restriction will subsequently curtail the rights
of mainly Hindus - who are in majority in the country - to embrace any religion.
The infamous killing of Australian missionary Graham Staines and his two minor
sons in Orissa in 1999 by a mob led by Dara Singh, supposedly a follower of
Hindutva, had demonstrated the different natures of the Hindutva and Christian
fundamentalism.
Staines moved from Australia to one of the most backward areas in India and
served leprosy patients besides preaching Christianity for 34 years before he
was killed. On the other hand, Singh, who preached hate against Christians,
managed to convert a few to his ideology and allegedly organised the burning of
Staines and his children - an act that can be ascribed to Hindutva, but not
Hinduism, which teaches tolerance.
Eight years later, Singh, who is in jail in Orissa, continues to spread hate
against Christians through his Dara Sena. Staines' widow Gladys, who forgave
Singh and others for the killing, is also furthering the mission of her late
husband by serving leprosy patients. Both are undeniably fundamentalists, but
one is a fundamentalist of love, and the other of hate.
(Vishal Arora writes on religious fundamentalism. The views presented here are
his. Arora can be contacted at [EMAIL PROTECTED])
http://www.twocircles.net/2007may04/fundamentalists-love-and-hate.html
---------------------------------
8:00? 8:25? 8:40? Find a flick in no time
with theYahoo! Search movie showtime
shortcut._______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
Umesh Sharma
Washington D.C.
1-202-215-4328 [Cell]
Ed.M. - International Education Policy
Harvard Graduate School of Education,
Harvard University,
Class of 2005
http://www.uknow.gse.harvard.edu/index.html
http://hbswk.hbs.edu/
http://jaipurschool.bihu.in/
---------------------------------
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo!
Security Centre._______________________________________________
assam mailing list
assam@assamnet.org
http://assamnet.org/mailman/listinfo/assam_assamnet.org
