Marshal in 'Atypical style' of diverting attention from main subject poses me 2 questions e! He must re-read my covering lines on this subject which reads as follows:
'I can well understand that the Hindus not allowing the burial in the cremation grounds, but their objection to the other areas does not seem to be fully justified. However, the position taken by the various churches is quite worrying.' In fact Marshall should have answered: 'Why the position taken by the various churches is quite worrying? Will Marshall answer this question? U G Barad On Sun, 18 Aug 2013 Marshall Mendonza mmendonz...@gmail.com wrote: Response: Dr Barad, I quote from the report: 1. "DSP Ratneshwar Thakur said Kanti's husband, Shiv Prakash Ram, first decided to bury the body as per Christian tradition at the village burning ghat because there was no cemetery there. However, the villagers stopped him from digging a grave. The DSP said they told Ram that they could only allow a Hindu funeral at the ghat and advised him to cremate his wife as he was the only Christian in the village." 2."Ram then decided to bury her body in his own orchard, but this, too, was opposed by Hindus. "The villagers refused to let Ram use his residential plot as a graveyard because the house has an old Shiva temple," a police source said.' Now I have to ask you: 1. Are you in agreement with the refusal of the villagers to permit burial at the *village burning ghat * in the absence of a cemetery? 2 .Are you in agreement with the objection to Ram burying his wife in* his own orchard?* Regards, Marshall