>Why then did the Hindu Dalits convert to Christianity to begin with?
*** Is it to mean that they do, so that they won't not have to seek the prtections available for Dalits? In other words that by converting to Christianity, they would instantly become IMMUNE to the oppression meted out by the upper caste Hindus? Or would they? >If they had wanted to avail of the govt protection, they could have >remained Hindus and still >demanded that. *** Say what? Does it mn mean that they could avail of the protection ONLY if they remained Hindus? That they cannot have it both ways--convert to Christianity and avail of protection for Dalits? Are we suggesting here that only HINDU Dalits can receive such protection? And the moment a Hindu Dalit bolts from Hinduism, their Dalit-ness gets wiped out and they become eligible for EQUAL treatment from their oppressors ? That would be quite an antidote to erase one's Dalittwa, wouldn't it? >When Christianity is supposed to be free of caste, the question of a >particular caste in >Christianity should not arise. *** Christianity is a religion. Not a social/economic condition. If a Dalit can elevate himself from his socio economic condition by switching to a religion like Christianity or Islam, from a condition IMPOSED on him as children of lesser Hindu gods by his birth into such communities, then the class of Dalits would have long been gone. > Let's hear from the folks who have reconverted. "We were promised free >education and economic >emancipation if we converted, but we followed the >old way all along. *** Whose old ways? The Dalits' deprivation or the upper caste Hindus' oppression? *** The difference here lies in the fact that switching to a religion such as Christianity the Dalit has a CHANCE to break out his condition in time, thru education, healthcare, shelter and perhaps even spiritual upliftment as well. But remaining a lesser Hindu, he reduces that chance dramatically. And his condition won't change for a generation -- even if all the promises of Christianity get fulfilled. In the meantime what does he do? Forego the protection he is entitled to - just like the others who are still noiminally Hindus as a penance for his sins of conversion? >What sort of "soul saving" is this? Worst still, missionaries do not tend >the flock forever. *** Whose prerogative is it to decide that? The Dalit, or the caste Hindu? >It's just a numbers game.....as in "Go one million."( Rediff.com) *** I don't know what that means. But we are the LEAST qualified to make arguments like that. At 10:10 PM -0400 9/11/03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: >In a message dated 9/10/03 9:39:41 PM Central Daylight Time, >[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: > > > ><< Under the circumstances, IF there are governmental protections available > for born Hindu Dalits , why should the converted Christian Dalits be > deprived of such protections? > > Punishment for conversion would be the explanation.>> > > Very boring! Those who refuse to understand, no explanation is possible. >This line of argument will be fine in the Christian outback. Why then did >the Hindu Dalits convert to Christianity to begin with? If they had wanted >to avail of the govt protection, they could have remained Hindus and still >demanded that. When Christianity is supposed to be free of caste, the >question of a particular caste in Christianity should not arise. > > Let's hear from the folks who have reconverted. "We were promised free >education and economic emancipation if we converted, but we followed the >old way all along. What sort of "soul saving" is this? Worst still, >missionaries do not tend the flock forever. It's just a numbers >game.....as in "Go one million."( Rediff.com) > > KJD. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ Assam mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://pikespeak.uccs.edu/mailman/listinfo/assam
