Venkat wrote:
> Mishra Ish wrote: > Coversion is a protest, how does it concern you what > religion I follow? This is another new definition. just now Cynthia wrote conversion was by heartful emotion. Another writes that it is a choice and Mahatma Gandhi called it a commerce, Swamy Vivekanada called it change of nationality . Now is your turn. So in this freedom of definitions, let me add mine. Conversion is sellout of one's soul. You asked, why it should concern me . It concerns me terribly when an alien , unknown culture is thrust upon an unsuspecting people, who are illiterate, ignorant and innocent. In what way evangelism is better ? Let me highlight some points. 1. When America was thrown open to European Christians, what happened to the 35 crores of mayan and incan native population ? Were they converted ? Nope. They were murdered within a century. All the 350 million people. 2. Who owns the vast lands in Africa ? What the Africans gained by conversion ? Only slavery ! 3. In the American civil war, when slavery was abolished, did not the church stand behind the southerners, who wanted slavery to continue ? 4. Who was responsible for the destruction of one of the finest civilizations of the world- the Greek civilization ? Conversion is much much more than a mere protest, a change of heart etc. It is simply capturing nations without bloodshed. Venkat Cynthia Stephen wrote: Dear Prof. Murthy: I do not "loathe" Hinduism, I wonder where you get this impression. My effort is to correct the misconceptions that are being held, and spread, by certain people either from being misinformed or with intentions to do so, on issues related to religious extremism. This is surely not to be counted as "loathing" Hinduism or any other religion for that matter. I firmly believe in keeping politics separate from religion. With regard to your remark that >>>Unfortunately the religious politics in India spoiling the whole fabric of spirituality. As long as Christianity and Islam treats Hinduism as caste system ridden and demonly, they may be treading on foolishness>>>> I am sure all will agree that the anti-caste critique came first not from Christianity or Islam. It came from numerous poets and seers including the Bhakti poets, Basaveshwara, Sant Tuka, Kabirdas, and any number of people's poets. And it is not Christians or Muslims who are criticising casteism or caste discrimination. That is being done by the masses who are choosing to forego the privilege of staying within Hinduism and facing discrimination in order to choose a life of relative freedom from discrimination in the less oppressive forms of religions they are exposed to - whether it is Islam, Christianity, Buddhism or any other. Again, this is not a must - a religion is only a means to an end. Some may choose to do without any religion. That is a matter of individual choice, and no one has any right to interfere with it. I am puzzled as to what to make of your argument that people of all religions follow Vastu and Yoga - while one is a kind of superstitious practice linked to construction of buildings going by the name of science, the other is, at least in its simpler forms, a kind of physical exercise. What has this to do with the religion called Hinduism (or Vedic Brahminism)? And the dress patterns of women - these are lifestyles and cultural things. The point is neither here nor there. Actually, I think there is need to introspect about the meaning of the terms Humanism and freedom, in the context of the religious beliefs in a broader way, and I do agree that there is need to see the good - without being blind to the bad - in any belief system. Cynthia Stephen Independent Researcher and writer Bangalore, India Senthil wrote: Dear Mishra, The Maiosts themselves said that their local christian cadres were involved in this under pressure from christian leaders.. The world vision employees were among those culprits caught by the people..Because these news are not covered properly, most of the people are misled.. Regards, Senthil
