[Goanet] The right to convert
Date: Fri, 26 Dec 2008 16:57:13 -0500 From: MD mmdme...@gmail.com He will say, on the issue of bush thrown shoes at, which is the worst of insults in the many of the religions, he will argue, if the shoe was thrown at Saddam, he would have been summarily executed (meaning Iraq is a democratic country now). Mario responds: Hey, Morris, I have no idea how Iraq is connected with this thread on the right to convert, so your post may be proof that you may not have understood the discussion that has been going on since Selma's common sense hypothesis that citizens in a free India must have the right to voluntarily change their religion if they wished. However, since the moderators have allowed your post, I guess it is OK for me to go ahead and respond. Regarding your comment above, you must be the only person in the world who does not know that the Baghdad shoe thrower would not have made it out of that interview room alive if Saddam had been his target unless Saddam wanted to have some fun that day and decided to torture him before sending him on his way to meet with Allah and the 72 virgins. In today's Iraq, he is not only alive and well but President Bush, who was nimble enough to dodge the leather missiles, had some fun at his expense because it was President Bush who has led the fight for the Iraqis to be free. In today's Iraq the fool will tried in a court of law and even provided with an attorney at government cost. Besides, since he has begged for a pardon, I don't know what kind of insult did he really achieve? I think he should be sentenced to be insulted with his own shoes and then let go:-)) Finally, since you seem to have missed it in the news, Iraq has been a democracy since its new government was elected by Iraqi citizens and sworn in on May 20, 2006, with all their various diverse factions represented. The liberation is going well enough that the Iraqis will soon be able to manage their own security without US help and the main US forces will be able to go home. MD writes: This Govea should concentrate the Trillions of Dollars that was handed out to the Bush crony billionaires at the same time, the Auto Industry that supports of millions of US workers is kept waiting for the handout and cleverly the oil price has been brought down to below $40 a barrel, millionaire investors have become paupers overnight, Mario responds: What good would it do for this Govea (sic) to concentrate on the financial crisis which is being addressed by the same people who caused it? Just for your information, this Govea (sic) does not run the US government, though the US would be a lot better off if he did:-)) Besides, what does this have to do with liberating Iraq or the right of Indians to convert? It looks like you are still fumbling around trying to make some sense and failing to do so. MD writes: so Govea, please look into some western blogs/websites instead of stirring venom in this forum or visit a doctor, probably you have contacted jaundice, that's why whole world seems yellow to you. Mario responds: FYI, I have my own live-in doctor, thank you, and am happy to report I have no jaundice and even my cancer has disappeared, God and medical science be praised, which is why I am able to clearly see the world for what it is, the good, the bad and the ugly. MD wrote: And please do not use thesaurus to make us to do the same, as simple words will suffice, we may not be as educated as you. Mario responds: There are some Goanetters who are better educated than me and others who may not be. Education imparts knowledge but not always wisdom as we see on a daily basis on Goanet. Though there is not much I can do in a forum like Goanet to teach wisdom - though God knows, I try - I highly recommend the use of a Thesaurus as well as a Dictionary, to reduce the ignorance and codswallop to a minimum.
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
Date: Sun, 28 Dec 2008 08:36:52 +0530 From: Dr. U. G. Barad dr.udayba...@gmail.com After all his postings on this subject I see Mario Goveia running away!!! Mario responds: Dr. Barad, We have already established that you often do not understand what is being written in a thread before you respond, sometimes with unbelievable codswallop, as you did in wrongly citing a Supreme Court decision that did not even support your case. Thus, you can continue to bury your head in the sand but you cannot escape the fact that you did not understand what Selma had written in her original post in this thread, which I have explained in the following post: http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2008-December/085809.html Now you are reduced to responding to my specific explanations with vapid generalities which make no sense and do not address either the topic or the specific points raised in a post you are responding to. You have become like a stuck record on this thread. Dr. Barad wrote: YOU, including some others think that GOANET is meant only for Goan CHRISTIANS or for those with Christian identity. Mario responds: More codswallop from Dr. Barad. I have been as objective in responding to those with Christian surnames as I have been with anyone else and I never distinguish anyone by their caste or creed. I doubt Dr. Barad, or anyone else for that matter, can cite any examples where I have suggested that Goanet is meant only for Christians or for those with a Christian identity or cite a post where I have shown any bias in favor of someone who may be a Christian. Just ask Marshall, Gilbert, Selma, Edward, Morris and a host of others too numerous to be listed here:-)) However, I think what we will see from Dr. Barad is more smoke and mirrors to create the appearance that he knows what he is talking about. In fact, I was one of the few defenders of Sonal Shah when a small cabal began to slander her without any evidence to support their allegations, even though she is my political adversary in the US. I have also repeatedly advocated that Christians who are found to have forced anyone to convert against their will be prosecuted to the full extent of the law and have described the Crusaders and perpetrators of the Inquisition as Christian-fascists on par with Al Qaeda and other radical Muslims who use force in the name of religion. Dr. Barad wrote: Don't run away from Goanet for you have to answer queries that follow your responses. Mario responds: You must be the only one on Goanet who thinks I run away from anything. I'm sure any one of the Goanet moderators will confirm that THEY wish I would run away more often:-)) This is yet another example where we see evidence that Dr. Barad is either unable to understand what is going on on Goanet - especially how often I post, what I write and to whom, and he is also unable to refer to the archives to see how ridiculous his comment above must seem to everyone else, who have often joined the moderators in suggesting that I should run away more often:-))
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
This is in reply to Message: 1, Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2008 From: Mario Goveia under Subject: The Right to Convert. After all his postings on this subject I see Mario Goveia running away!!! The writer writes while running: Since you have caught the bull by the tail in your response to Selma's hypothesis that Indians must have the right to voluntarily change their religion, until you understand the content of the discussion, whatever else you write in this thread does not address the topic. My response: I must thank for all your postings on this subject. Sure my responses to your postings took you on GOLDEN RIDE. I will catch you (In Goanet) not from tail side of BULL (?) but from FRONT. I have already done the needful, doing and will continue to do!! I suspect you recognized this and you are trying to run away from the questions that arise from your responses. My concluding remark: Don't run away from Goanet. YOU, including some others think that GOANET is meant only for Goan CHRISTIANS or for those with Christian identity. Mario from all your postings Goanet members has concluded that you are nothing but Jack of all trades and Master of?? Ask Goanet members this question . My frank advice- It's not important that one must write or react to each and every mail / messages appearing in Goanet. And lastly I repeat - Don't run away from Goanet for you have to answer queries that follow your responses. Best regards, Dr. U. G. Barad
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
The Right to Convert Fri Dec 26 13:57:13 PST 2008 By MD. Hi, Maurice D'Mello's article above (which I do not wish to repeat) is brilliantly written. The question to be asked is - has it or will it suffice to convince some, 'the great big thinkers on goanet?'. They say there is shortage of thinking on Goanet. (if he assumes something else as Sandeep says, like shortage of thinking worldwide). This is not a world forum. Samir's God may suck but my devil is no better either. Meaning, because God sucks in UK, the children now in UK are gone 'feral'. This an official verdict - not my made up story. Therefore the good and bad via God and the devil is an essential part of early upbringing. We being animals, we do not fully understand why 'certain' things happen in our life that is why we are helplessly addicted to the 'supreme force'. ED.
Re: [Goanet] The Right to Convert
From: julian Gonsalves juliangonsal...@yahoo.com I am shocked, saddened and very bothered by these exchanges between Barad and Fr Ivo. ***To correct misunderstandings on religion and conversions is not to stoop so low. I cant imagine that whatever religion we are we can stoop so low. ***You must be used to hear what is happening in India, because religion is a part of our life and a very sensitive issue. I think its time to get out and look within our communities to do something more meaningful to do than to be taking pot shots at each other in this manner( see exchanges below and previously). ***Do not close your eyes to the good that people are doing with the vision and strength derived from Religion. Everyone has a choice in life today and that matters. ***Today is also conditioned by yesterday. History teaches us a lot. But we have to interpret it correctly and decide wisely. What happend in the past is a matter of history and its pure waste of good energy to be doing this. Lets look for how we can brighten our lives irrespective of religion. ***People live by their religion. Religion should help us. Atheists and agnostics have their religion and they are guided by it... Regards. Fr.Ivo
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2008 13:00:51 +0530 From: Dr. U. G. Barad dr.udayba...@gmail.com I suspect from your using the word - codswallop - that you are a member of Wikipedia trying to define codswallop or your are trying to divert the attention of Goans to Wikipedia or you are deliberately using this word for you have no answer to my questions / responses. Mario observes: I am not a member of Wikipedia. However, here is what the Merriam-Webster Dictionary has to say: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/codswallop The meaning of codswallop is NONSENSE. Since you have caught the bull by the tail in your response to Selma's hypothesis that Indians must have the right to voluntarily change their religion, until you understand the content of the discussion, whatever else you write in this thread does not address the topic Selma started. Now, if you want to start a new topic on the right of Indians to convert others, I will be glad to respond to what you write, if I choose to.
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
Date: Thu, 25 Dec 2008 10:12:12 +0530 From: Dr. U. G. Barad dr.udayba...@gmail.com Only request to the writer is don't run away from the track which is his specialty!! Mario responds: Dr. Barad, Here is the answer to your questions: Selma's post: http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2008-December/085437.html Excerpt: Freedom of choice is a basic right that an individual must enjoy in any progressive society. In matters of utmost privacy, and religion is a private matter, the individual must be at liberty to determine his own course. If we deny him this right, we are enslaving him, bounding him and sentencing him to a lesser life. Dr. Barad's answer: http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2008-December/085448.html Excerpt: Article 25(1) of Constitution of India guarantees ''freedom of conscience to every citizen, and not merely to the followers of one particular religion''. This Article postulates that there is no fundamental right to convert another person to one's own religion because if a person purposely undertakes the conversion of another person to his religion, that would impinge on the freedom of conscience guaranteed to all the citizens of the country alike. Clearly, Selma is talking about the right of an individual to voluntarily change their religion when she writes, In matters of utmost privacy, and religion is a private matter, the individual must be at liberty to determine his own course. In his reponse, Dr. Barad's says that there is no fundamental right to convert another person. Dr. Barad obviously did not understand the issue. Further proof that he did not understand the issue lies in his citing a Supreme Court decision, which he also did not understand. This decision does not postulate ...that there is no fundamental right to convert another person to one's own religion... The decision simply affirmed that the government of Orissa could continue a sensible procedure for the police to verify that an Oriya was changing their religion voluntarily and not being forced by someone else to do so. I have no idea what Dr. Barad is trying to prove after catching the bull by the tail.
[Goanet] The right to convert
I am extremely sorry I can't understand this M.Govea, who just wants to raise some controversy over every subject some one else is discussing. I am sorry to butt in, but time and again, despite proven evidence, this guy seems to disagree with everyone but his foregone conclusions. He will say, on the issue of bush thrown shoes at, which is the worst of insults in the many of the religions, he will argue, if the shoe was thrown at Saddam, he would have been summarily executed (meaning Iraq is a democratic country now). This Govea should concentrate the Trillions of Dollars that was handed out to the Bush crony billionaires at the same time, the Auto Industry that supports of millions of US workers is kept waiting for the handout and cleverly the oil price has been brought down to below $40 a barrel, millionaire investors have become paupers overnight, so Govea, please look into some western blogs/websites instead of stirring venom in this forum or visit a doctor, probably you have contacted jaundice, that's why whole world seems yellow to you. And please do not use thesaurus to make us to do the same, as simple words will suffice, we may not be as educated as you. Maurice D'Mello
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
There are historical records of commercial trading between Kerala and Middle East during 7th Century AD. The Jews and Arabs of the Pre-Islamic period were among the pioneers of spice trade with Kerala. It is believed that Apostle of Jesus, St. Thomas himself, introduced Christianity in India in the year 52 A.D. The early Christians (St. Thomas Christians) were called Syrian Christians because they followed the Syriac liturgy, a dialect of Aramaic, the language of Jesus. With the arrival of Portuguese (1498) and the establishment of their political influence, the Latin rite emerged as an important factor and a large community of Latin Christians sprang up and grew, particularly in the coastal areas. The arrival of Islam in India could be traced back to the sea port named Kodungaloor, an ancient sea port located at present day central Kerala. This happened during the life time of Muhammad, the founder of the religion and the propagator was Malik bin Deenar. Probably in the 7th century. The Portuguese though they arrived in India for Trade purpose, sere also involved in conversion, voluntary or otherwise (many fled to outside Portuguese controlled areas and even, there were some prominent Hindus who controlled trade accounting and tax collection etc as Portuguese were mere soldiers rather than Tradesmen, and there is evidence some Hindu families were treated with high esteem as they managed trade, accounting for the Portuguese. Basically at that time, there was no term as India was neither one country, nor immigration control and was ruled by several kings, feudatories and was no at all one India and one rule. Secondly, the Spanish and Portuguese missionaries deemed Christianity is the true religion and wanted to propagate and though initially some force may have been used, later, when rest of Goa was occupied by the Portuguese, such procedure no longer existed. All that happened during the time, there was no wireless communication or internal cyber media. One should understand. Even the Christians who fled Goa for various reasons did not revert to their previous religion as they felt at home with Christianity and continued their new faith despite the absence of spiritual head for months together. Marriages were conducted at home and solemnized only when the priest was available, probably the couple may have had children too by the time the Goan priest showed up to solemnize these weddings!!. So why all this hue and cry?
Re: [Goanet] The Right to Convert
I am shocked, saddened and very bothered by these exchanges between Barad and Fr Ivo. I cant imagine that whatever religion we are we can stoop so low. I think its time to get out and look within our communities to do something more meaningful to do than to be taking pot shots at each other in this manner( see exchanges below and previously). Everyone has a choice in life today and that matters. What happend in the past is a matter of history and its pure waste of good energy to be doing this. Lets look for how we can brighten our lives irrespective of religion.I wish i had the luxury of time Julian
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
This message is in reply to message: 8, dated: Wed, 24 Dec 2008 on the subject: The Right to Convert The writer responds: Dr. Barad, Your responses on this topic on Goanet have been nothing but codswallop. My response: Writer did not answer any of my messages / responses on this topic / subject but preferred to write rubbish... Therefore I conclude that the writer is Atypical Goanet member!! And if he thinks that he is not Atypical member, I welcome the writer to run marathon on this topic. Only request to the writer is don't run away from the track which is his specialty!! Be with Goanet . continue with Goanet.. run short and marathon races in Goanet. Best regards, Dr. U. G. Barad
Re: [Goanet] The Right to Convert
--- On Wed, 12/24/08, Fr. Ivo C da Souza icso...@bsnl.in wrote: Missionaries came to India and Goa and changed the face by providing Gospel values. Did people who lived in India and Goa before the missionaries came not have a decent face? Did they not have good values? Cheers, Santosh
[Goanet] The right to convert
Selma wrote: There cannot be a sinister and subversive plot when people have a power to say no. Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:24:57 -0800 (PST) From: Vinay Natekar vinaynate...@yahoo.com There is a provision in our Constitutional which gives one right to practice or propagate any religion. There is a right also to ask people to convert. However, when it comes to maintain public order these rights need to be restricted. Mario asks: Vinay, I think restricting any citizen's constitutionally guaranteed rights is what would disrupt public order. What good is a right if it can then be restricted? Besides, who decides which right is now inconvenient and to what extent it should be restricted? This is a slippery slope that must be avoided at all costs. This does not mean that its use should not be monitored, to prevent misuse. Vinay wrote: The conversions by force, fraud and inducements was are under debate. Have a look at the conversions in Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and Arunachal Pradesh and their impact on law and order there which compelled some Indian states to implement ban on conversions. Even the Supreme Court ruled that these states had acted legally and within the spirit of the Constitution. Thus, a fundamental right to convert has been denied by the Supreme Court. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=162018 Mario observes: I'm not sure why people are having such a hard time understanding what the SC ruled, or in understanding the difference between converting others against their will versus individuals or groups voluntarily deciding to change their religion for whatever reason. The Supreme Court narrowly ruled only that Orissa could continue to implement a reasonable procedure for the police to verify that a conversion was voluntary. That's it. The right of any Indian citizen to voluntarily change their religion remains intact. The very notion of a fundamental right to convert others against their will is absurd because that would seek to deny the target individual's freedom to follow whatever religion they choose to. It would be similar to someone trying to force you to not speak your mind if you wanted to. The operative word is force. People can ask, which would be fine. Vinay wrote: While a person cannot be denied a right to convert himself on his own free will, and after his own study of the religion he wishes to adopt and the one that he wishes to leave, the right to ask someone else to change should be questioned. Mario responds: Questioning a person's right to ask someone else to change their religion would be a violation of the asker's freedom of speech. Asking a person to change their religion is not the same thing as forcing a person to change their religion. Vinay wrote: But Today we can see conversions by enticement and fraud are quite rampant. Mass conversions by the so-called faith healing programmes in the guise of offering social service, etc should be checked at root. Mario responds: Vinay, has it occurred to you that the Hindu community has done nothing for poor and downtrodden Hindus after damning them for all eternity by classifying them by castes? Why do you think the need was felt for Sikhism and Buddhism? Why can't Hindu charitable organizations put their caste nonsense aside and help uplift the poor rural Hindus who become easy targets for unscrupulous Christian evangelists? Unfortunately, in a free society, alleged religious charlatans have the same rights as everyone else. However, their rights do not include forcing people to change their religion. As Selma has noted, people have the right to say no. If they feel they are being forced they can even file a FIR if the enticements become intrusive and oppressive. The Orissa government's procedure, officially legalized by the SC, serves to discourage oppressive enticements and coercive measures.
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 11:57:24 +0530 From: Dr. U. G. Barad dr.udayba...@gmail.com You had no answer(s) to my responses to Goanet. Mario responds: Dr. Barad, Your responses on this topic on Goanet have been nothing but codswallop. As anyone can see from the following post by Selma and your response, you clearly caught the bull by the tail and went off on a tangent. You still don't seem to understand a) the Supreme Court ruling on Orissa, b) someone trying to convert others by force which n one has any right to do, and c) the freedom of Indians to voluntarily change their religion which the SC ruling did not even address. Selma's initial post: http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2008-December/085437.html Dr. Barad catching the bull by the tail: http://lists.goanet.org/pipermail/goanet-goanet.org/2008-December/085448.html
Re: [Goanet] The Right to Convert
From: Dr. U. G. Barad dr.udayba...@gmail.com Under subject mentioned as in above, Fr. Ivo C da Souza, on Sat, 12/20/08, makes a good point saying: There have been cases of conversion by force in the 16th century, but that was never an official policy of the European missionaries who worked in India. The First Provincial Council of Goa, held in 1567, forbade the use of force, by decreeing that it is not lawful to bring anyone over to our faith and baptism by means of force with threats or terror, because no one comes to Christ by faith, unless he is drawn by the heavenly Father with voluntary love and prevenient grace (Bullarium Patronatus APP I, p.6). My query: Fr. Ivo, without contesting to your above points and considering what you wrote above is correct; please answer my stupid / ignorant questions: 1) Did Christianity prevailed in Goa much before 1567? **Christianity began to operate in India since 52 of the Christian Era. Missionaries came to India and Goa and changed the face by providing Gospel values. There were missionaries before the Portuguese came. When St.Francis came to Goa on May 6, 1542, there were Christians in Goa. The Society of Jesus worked through institutions. Missionaries did a lot for Goa. Conversions by force, as I said, are not excluded, but there were conversions by free choice and in mass. People would join them. What I affirmed was that the official policy of the missionaries was against conversions by force. 2) In which year Portuguese took over Goa? ***Your question is really stupid. There have been Christians in Goa before 1510. My answer is to your ignorant question. 3) Is the year you quoted (The First Provincial Council of Goa, held in 1567) synchronizes with second point as is mentioned above. If not, The First Provincial Council of Goa, held in 1567 as is mentioned by you is totally wrong. Do you agree with this! ***No, the Council is not wrong. That has been always the policy. You are wrong when you surmise that their policy was conversions by force. Goans of those times were not so ignorant as to follow blindly the colonial masters. There were Christians by choice. 4) How Christianity got spread in Goa after Portuguese started ruling Goa? ***The Church worked for the people of Goa. There were Christians by choice. We are generations of these Christians by choice. Even today I meet Hindu people who are dissatisfied with their religion (of their gods and goddesses, to use their own words), and wish to join the Church and follow the Saviour of the World, Jesus of Nazareth (in their own words). They would be Christians by choice. It is our fundamental human right. I am not elaborating this point, because you refuse to discuss your religion, and also there are Goanetters who do not like discussion on religion at all... 5) What is the percentage of Catholics in Goa as of date? ***Your question is again stupid. You should know the answer. I know it also. But the point that you are making is really stupid, whatever may be the percentage of Christians in Goa today (25 or 23 per cent). There is a great influx of people today in Goa. There are more non-Goans than Goans... The number of Catholics will be naturally less. We are a little flock (only 2.4 per cent), but evangelization continues in India and in Goa, since that is our duty. In the Indian context, the number of Christians is decreasing, because there are re-conversions by force of Dalits to Hinduism even today. Remember that Dalits are not Hindus and they cannot enter the Hindu temples. There are cases of Dalits being killed because they entered the Hindu temples. We cannot measure the work of the Christians in India by numbers. Christianity is a powerful leaven in India. Fr. Ivo, what ever be your explanations, I will not respond to your message. I only need clarification / rather answer from you in this forum. ***I am not elaborating these points, since you do not want explanations. But I have given you clarification and answer to your stupid/ignorant questions (in your own words)... I forgive you for these silly questions, since I am writing after the Midnight Mass on Christmas Day. Forgive me for my blunt answers. May the Lord Jesus bless us all! Merry Christmas and Happy New Year! Regards. Fr.Ivo
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
This message is in reply to message: 8, dated: Wed, 24 Dec 2008 on the subject tiled: The Right to Convert To my response, Mario replies: Dr. Barad, Your responses on this topic on Goanet have been nothing but codswallop. My response: Not that I am running away from main topic . I am on marathon on this topic..I thought I should not disturb your X'mass enjoyment. Therefore I only suggest on this good day only to check your grammar and spelling in your postings unless you are writing World Englishes may be like me? What say? I suspect from your using the word - codswallop - that you are a member of Wikipedia trying to define codswallop or your are trying to divert the attention of Goans to Wikipedia or you are deliberately using this word for you have no answer to my questions / responses. Towards concluding I must say: Mario don't forget to reply all my earlier messages that I posted to Goanet, which are addressed to you. You appear to be running away and yet telling me not to run away from your response. Best regards, Dr. U. G. Barad
[Goanet] Ref: Right to Convert
In Response to: Message: 6 Date: Tue, 23 Dec 2008 11:12:21 +0530 From: Marshall Mendonza mmendonz...@gmail.com Subject: [Goanet] Right to Convert Dear Marshall, Dr. Barad, Santosh, Samir, Vinay , I tried to refrain myself from getting tangled in this thread that was turning rather myopic. First and foremost I am sure you all will agree with me, that each one of you is voicing his support, for his beliefs because of your birth in that particular sect of society. Religion did not come from haven it was introduced by man so that we could live in peace, harmony and in morality, but unfortunately religion has divided humanity and humanitarian values are forgotten in the bargain. Comparatively, by percentage Goa is just second in India as far as Christian population is concerned, next only to Kerala. I have said this before, and say it again, I am sure every one will agree with this, conversions by force and fraud are wrong and should not be supported in any way, if it is happening. Did we hear of any conversions by force or fraud in Kerala or Goa ? Both Kerala and Goa have a very high literacy rate and minimal castes beliefs compared to the rest of India. Education does play a very important role in society. Are any of the guys on this particular thread living in MP, AP or Orissa ? I am sure not, so it's hearsay and links that we are bickering over, the facts that transpired there, only the people involved and affected know the bitter truth. I will only say, let the truth speak for it's self. Getting back to the reasons, force and fraud condemned, lets take on allurement or enticement. Lets take a look at the our great politicians that sit in the Parliament and Vidhan Sabhas and pass laws and rules, before election lots of favours in cash and kind exchange hands for support, what is it called - allurement, after election horse trading goes on, what is that called - allurement, where we work, we keep on changing jobs for better prospects, what is that called - allurement or enticement. We go to other countries in search of jobs or a better life, what is it called - allurement. Who on earth does not want to be better off in life ? That's the universal right of a person. I am not saying conversions on allurement are being done or not, because I do not know, neither do you. So if allurement is used hypothetically, what is wrong, if that is wrong all the above should be wrong and stopped, did we not all see the cash bundles fiasco in Parliament, the whole world saw it. As for faith healings, it's each ones beliefs, one will not know it until one experiences it. I have seen it happen, you may not have, so keep the option open. I have seen a lot of non Christians get healed and embrace the religion out of their own free will, people who have not seen it will definitely say other wise. Lets leave it to each one to decide which faith one wants to change to after all it's each ones right. Why doesn't the VHP, BD, RSS match or out do the Christian missionaries is public service ? If they do that , then certainly there wouldn't be any problems. Would there be ? To preach is very easy to put it in practice is very difficult. There is another problem that's making the rounds with links, foreign funds. Most of the charity institutions get foreign funds imperative of religion, the only problem is how the organization uses those funds, I can assure Dr. Barad that the IRA is not having a rebirth in India and thank God for that, otherwise we would have gulped down more than we could chew. So lets all be sensible and show that we are educated enough to put aside our religious biases and take a real hard look at what's happening in Goa and fight in unity for a better Goa for Goans. Lets all say SAYANORA to this THREAD Freddy Agnelo Fernandes The content of this electronic communication is intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom it is addressed and any others who are specifically authorized to receive it. It may contain confidential or legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution or otherwise placing reliance on the contents of this information is prohibited and may be unlawful in certain legal jurisdictions. If you have received this communication in error please notify the sender immediately by responding to this email and then delete it from your system. __ This email has been scanned by the MessageLabs Email Security System. For more information please visit http://www.messagelabs.com/email __
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
Under subject mentioned as in above, Fr. Ivo C da Souza, on Sat, 12/20/08, makes a good point saying: There have been cases of conversion by force in the 16th century, but that was never an official policy of the European missionaries who worked in India. The First Provincial Council of Goa, held in 1567, forbade the use of force, by decreeing that it is not lawful to bring anyone over to our faith and baptism by means of force with threats or terror, because no one comes to Christ by faith, unless he is drawn by the heavenly Father with voluntary love and prevenient grace (Bullarium Patronatus APP I, p.6). My query: Fr. Ivo, without contesting to your above points and considering what you wrote above is correct; please answer my stupid / ignorant questions: 1) Did Christianity prevailed in Goa much before 1567? 2) In which year Portuguese took over Goa? 3) Is the year you quoted (The First Provincial Council of Goa, held in 1567) synchronizes with second point as is mentioned above. If not, The First Provincial Council of Goa, held in 1567 as is mentioned by you is totally wrong. Do you agree with this! 4) How Christianity got spread in Goa after Portuguese started ruling Goa? 5) What is the percentage of Catholics in Goa as of date? Fr. Ivo, what ever be your explanations, I will not respond to your message. I only need clarification / rather answer from you in this forum. Best regards, Dr. U. G. Barad
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
This message is in reply to message: 2, dated: Mon, 22 Dec 2008, from: Mario Goveia under subject titled: The Right to Convert Mario writes: Dr. Barad, I have good news for you. The Bush administration, which BTW has only been in power since 2001 and has had their hands full in converting 50 million Muslims to freedom and democracy, will be over in another month, so you can begin to transfer the hatching to Barack Obama's transition team. Sonal Shah may be able to help you get to the right people. Isn't it sinister and subversive to demand in a free society like India that people must continue to profess the religion of their birth even if if they want to follow a different religion after they grow up? MY RESPONSE: Mario, you tried a lot to impress on this topic but failed like Bush. You had no answer(s) to my responses to Goanet. So Mario, please continue to enjoy with your favorite Bush in bush. Sun will rise on 20th January 2009 with bright colors and if you and Bush are unwilling to see those bright colors I suggest you start bushing around in dark with your favorite BUSH. Best regards, Dr. U. G. Barad
Re: [Goanet] The right to convert
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 14:33:54 -0800 (PST) From: Carvalho elisabeth_...@yahoo.com Hurray. Viva la India. Mario asks incredulously: Viva la India? VIVA LA INDIA?! Shee! Kitem mhontai, go? Selma, you have been away from India far too long. It's been Jai Hind since before you were born, for about 60 years now, or 47 years for Goans if one wants to be picky:-)) Viva la India, indeed:-))
[Goanet] The Right to Convert.
Dear Editor, Religions entered this part of our continent from north-west and by sea.The inhabitants here practiced traditional ways of living. There were no religions.Nature was worshipped.Then came the entry of warriors,calling the inhabitants HINDU as they crossed river SINDHU,with their religions and beliefs.The inhabitants who believed in Vasudhaiva Kutumbakam i.e.earth as family,could not withstand the force of evil-thinkers.What followed is now seen. With best regards, Shyam Bale.
Re: [Goanet] The Right to Convert
Yes it did and i was born 7 centuries ago a catholic and i also knew someone who was a catholic and would pose similar questions then, inbetween i have been born a hindu 5 times (do believe the reincarnation theory) and now i am a Catholic again. But that guy is born hindu NOW and pose the same questions, so the recognition was instant. The year is 1547...to be exact, So now you know:-) I think i will get the Bharat Ratna for intelligence:-) Did someone not say so? hAVE a nICE dAY Seb PS: This is a fiction and any resemblance to any person living or dead is purely coincidental. PS1: Moderator's can we close this thread plz. Even the DEL key on the keyboard has gone plain. Also don't reply, i am on a weeksoff, enjoying the Holiday Season. MERRY CHRISTMAS TO ALL GOANETTERS AND A JOYOUS, PROSPEROUS NEW YEAR 2009 * My query:, without contesting to your above points and considering what you wrote above is correct; please answer my stupid / ignorant questions: 1) Did Christianity prevailed in Goa much before 1567?
[Goanet] The right to convert
The right to convert Thanks Selma for missing me on Goanet. Should I construe it as love or hate Anyway your penchant for conjuring up bizarre examples to buttress your points are amazing. In contradiction of reality, the above examples wouldn't come close to being reasonable unless Hindus are killing their Christian neighbors everyday just the way Islamists are doing. The same lack of in-depth knowledge on reality is showing in your hesitance to come to grip with the hypothesis that the mayhem in Orrisa may not be Hindus v/s Christians. I agree with you that innocent Christians were attacked in this recent spurt in communal violence which I do not condone nor justify. I also believe that there can be no place for violence when it is fuelled by religious hatred. The guilty must be punished irrespective of any religious group he belongs including VHP, RSS or Bajrang Dal. I do not want to elaborate on conversions or communal violence as there are scores of websites you can find to read on these topics. Regards Vinay By the way Vinay, where were you hiding when Christians were being tormented in Orissa? I was waiting for you and Barad to come on Goanet and condemn what was happening. Strangely enough I didn't hear from either of you then. Is this the India you want to create? Hurray. Viva la India. selma
[Goanet] The Right to convert
Sandeep: There is no such thing as a fundamental right to convert any person to one's own religion and the government can impose certain restrictions keeping in view public order, the Supreme Court has ruled.The court's ruling came while dismissing a petition challenging an Orissa law requiring police verification of all religious conversions. Citing the SC's landmark 1977 ruling in Rev Stanislaus vs Madhya Pradesh, a Bench of Chief Justice V N Khare and Justice S B Sinha said that ''what is freedom for one is freedom for the other, in equal measure''. Response: I believe the Supreme Court ruling was flawed. Refer critique given below. Excerpts: Quote: And, although many legal luminaries believe that the 1977 judgment was unconstitutional, since it has been ruled by the Apex Court, we must abide by it. This means, as of now, Christians have the right only to communicate their beliefs or expose the tenets of Christianity to others, and not to convert. However, if the person to whom the faith is propagated is convinced and wants to profess or practice on his own volition, he or she has the right to do so. Unquote. http://www.combatlaw.org/information.php?article_id=949issue_id=34 To me conversions are a non-issue for the following reasons: 1.The population of christians in India has shown a steady decline from 2.7% to 2.3% as per the last census. 2.The anti-conversion laws have been on the statute in some states like Orissa, MP, Arunachal Pradesh for over 30-40 years. During this time there has not been a single case of conviction. This puts paid to the false propaganda expounded by the sangh parivar. 3. In today's world there can be no 'forced conversion' unless backed by the power of the state. Ironically, it is the VHP which is indulging in forced conversion in Orissa and elsewhere. Refer: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/oct/19/orissa-violence-india-christianity-hinduism http://www.asianews.it/index.php?l=enart=13213 http://www.zeenews.com/Nation/2008-10-03/473823news.html http://orissaburning.blogspot.com/2008/08/great-conversions-lie.html 4.The bogey of 'forced conversions' in reality exposes the true intentions of the the Sangh Parivar, whose ideologue Golwalkar expounded, The foreign races in Hindustan must either adopt the Hindu culture and language, must learn to respect and hold in reverence Hindu religion, must entertain no ideas but those of glorification of the Hindu race and culture[..] or may stay in the country, wholly subordinated to the Hindu nation, claiming nothing, deserving no privileges, far less any preferential treatment — not even citizen's rights.' http://www.hindu.com/mag/2008/10/26/stories/2008102650150500.htm 5.The underlying objection to conversions is the fact that the missionaries by uplifting the poorest of the poor by providing them education and healthcare has removed them from the expoitative clutches of vested interests. Regards, Marshall
Re: [Goanet] The Right to convert
--- On Sun, 12/21/08, Mario Goveia mgov...@sbcglobal.net wrote: I am firmly opposed to coercing others to convert against their will by force or fraud. However, in a free society that guarantees freedom of religion, every individual must have the right to voluntarily change their religion at any time, for any reason, other than under duress and against their will. - Very good point Mario. I think I am experiencing forced conversions here in the UK. Every time I am on a bus or walking to my favourite butcher to buy mutton (Muslim butchers sell the best mutton here), I have these Jamaican ladies who come running up to me, guaranteeing eternal salvation through Jesus Christ. No amount of telling them that I am already Catholic seems to dissuade them. They insist I must read the Bible. Maybe there is something about me that says I can't possibly be Christian, like that Madonna T-shirt I keep wearing :-) Stop forced conversions in the UK, especially on the Red Bus, since there is absolutely no chance of me getting my British driving license and I have to keep using that bus. Say no to forced conversions :-) Wishing everyone a Wonderful Christmas and New Year! Cheers guys, Selma
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
This is a reply to Selma carvalho's message No: 9, dated: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 on the subject: The Right to Convert Selma writes: Excellent post Father Ivo. We must make clear the position of the church as it has been for a long time. There is grave misconception out there fuelled by right-wing fundamentalist groups that we must correct. India has gotten into the nasty habit of taking away civil liberties in the guise of upholding its democracy. If there are brutalities in the Gulf carried out against maids, rule that maids cannot work in the Gulf. If HIV becomes prevalent, propose that HIV testing be made mandatory before marriage. If there is a high incidence of foetocide, makes sure that every women is denied the right to know the gender of her baby before birth. And now this court has deliberately split hairs on its definition of what is freedome of religion. It's is a dire sign that barely 60 years after independence our Constitution should come under attack like this. Little by little, we ensure that our civil liberties are being curtailed and India can successful trot its way to a totalitarian country based on some preconceived Raj model. My response: But conversions in India, as they are happening today, are not merely about empowering the poor. It is about a sinister and subversive strategy, hatched in the US, backed by the Bush administration over the years. This is the first para of the article which is titled THOSE THAT SHALL DELIVER... Read more on this issue by clicking the link provided here below: http://www.tehelka.com/story_main.asp?filename=ts013004qaeda.asp Best regards, Dr. U. G. Barad
Re: [Goanet] The Right to Convert
--- On Mon, 12/22/08, Dr. U. G. Barad dr.udayba...@gmail.com wrote: My response: But conversions in India, as they are happening today, are not merely about empowering the poor. It is about a sinister and subversive strategy, hatched in the US, backed by the Bush administration over the years. Barad, we are not talking about people being given sweeties here or enticed to eat a dollop of ice-cream. We are talking about a change of religion, a change that for most people would require deep examination of their conscience and then an informed decision. There cannot be a sinister and subversive plot when people have a power to say no. That is the point I am trying to make. Knowing evangelical groups, I bet they are appealing to people not through money but with the promise of miracles. The miraculous possibility that one's life can change through embracing a new philosophy is a powerful motivator to anyone. You don't have to be poor, living in the tribal belt of Orissa to believe in fairytales. Most of our Catholics living in Goa also believe in these Born again fairytales nowadays. The answer to this problem is not legislation or violence. It is education and continuous counter-information. Once you understand something about evangelical groups and the sort of ideology they profess then you can be well on your way to tackling it. I am as much against evangelicals as I am against some of our Goan activists. But I defend the right of both to exist without hindrance in a civil society. Because if we undermine this basic right then we are inturn undermining democracy. Best, Selma
[Goanet] The Right to convert
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 22:26:10 +0530 From: Marshall Mendonza mmendonz...@gmail.com I believe the Supreme Court ruling was flawed. Refer critique given below. Excerpts: Quote: And, although many legal luminaries believe that the 1977 judgment was unconstitutional, since it has been ruled by the Apex Court, we must abide by it. This means, as of now, Christians have the right only to communicate their beliefs or expose the tenets of Christianity to others, and not to convert. However, if the person to whom the faith is propagated is convinced and wants to profess or practice on his own volition, he or she has the right to do so. Unquote. http://www.combatlaw.org/information.php?article_id=949issue_id=34 Mario responds: We got off on this tangent because Dr. Barad turned the thread on its head and cited this Supreme Court ruling inappropriately in answer to Selma's comment that Indians in a free society that guarantees freedom of religion MUST have the right to convert from their religion at birth. Both you and Tehmina Arora are missing the point. The Indian Supreme Court correctly overruled the Orissa High Court on a very narrow issue challenging the state of Orissa for instituting procedures to verify whether Oriyas were converting voluntarily and not under duress or against their will, which has been an allegation in impoverished and socially backward parts of rural India. The state of Orissa was not impeding anyone's freedom of religion, simply monitoring that freedom. That's it. Case closed. None of this prevents Indians from preaching their religion or from voluntarily converting from their religion at birth.
Re: [Goanet] The Right to convert
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 14:37:21 -0800 (PST) From: Carvalho elisabeth_...@yahoo.com I think I am experiencing forced conversions here in the UK. Every time I am on a bus or walking to my favourite butcher to buy mutton (Muslim butchers sell the best mutton here), I have these Jamaican ladies who come running up to me, guaranteeing eternal salvation through Jesus Christ. No amount of telling them that I am already Catholic seems to dissuade them. They insist I must read the Bible. Maybe there is something about me that says I can't possibly be Christian, like that Madonna T-shirt I keep wearing :-) Mario observes: These Jamaican women obviously Googled Strange Indian woman with Madonna T-shirt which led them to you on Goanet where you have loudly and frequently proclaimed yourself to be an agnostic, i.e. fence-sitter, which makes you a perfect target for those who want to pull people to their side of the fence. Just ask them where you can get the best Jamaican jerk chicken or goat curry. Selma wrote: Stop forced conversions in the UK, especially on the Red Bus, since there is absolutely no chance of me getting my British driving license and I have to keep using that bus. Say no to forced conversions :-) Mario responds: Now this is embarrassing - for you to say that you cannot earn a driver's license in a country with the most benign and polite drivers on earth where everyone religiously follows the rules - at least they used to. And, after suggesting how freedom of religion should work and sending both Dr. Barad, a hardworking defender of Hindutva, and the equally hardworking defender of Christianity, Marshall, off on the same constitutional tangent, you are now insisting that people cannot preach and advertise their religion, thereby impeding their freedom of religion:-)) Selma wrote: Wishing everyone a Wonderful Christmas and New Year! Mario adds: Here's adding the same wishes to all Goanetters.
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 11:39:27 +0530 From: Dr. U. G. Barad dr.udayba...@gmail.com But conversions in India, as they are happening today, are not merely about empowering the poor. It is about a sinister and subversive strategy, hatched in the US, backed by the Bush administration over the years. Mario responds: Dr. Barad, I have good news for you. The Bush administration, which BTW has only been in power since 2001 and has had their hands full in converting 50 million Muslims to freedom and democracy, will be over in another month, so you can begin to transfer the hatching to Barack Obama's transition team. Sonal Shah may be able to help you get to the right people. Isn't it sinister and subversive to demand in a free society like India that people must continue to profess the religion of their birth even if if they want to follow a different religion after they grow up?
[Goanet] The right to convert
Selma wrote : There cannot be a sinister and subversive plot when people have a power to say no. Dear Selma, There is a provision in our Constitutional which gives one right to practice or propagate any religion. There is a right also to ask people to convert. However, when it comes to maintain public order these rights need to be restricted. The conversions by force, fraud and inducements was are under debate. Have a look at the conversions in Madhya Pradesh, Orissa and Arunachal Pradesh and their impact on law and order there which compelled some Indian states to implement ban on conversions. Even the Supreme Court ruled that these states had acted legally and within the spirit of the Constitution. Thus, a fundamental right to convert has been denied by the Supreme Court. http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=162018 L.K. Advani who has been termed a communal, however he himself rejected ban on religious conversions. http://ibnlive.in.com/news/advani-against-ban-on-religious-conversion/74252-3.html While a person cannot be denied a right to convert himself on his own free will, and after his own study of the religion he wishes to adopt and the one that he wishes to leave, the right to ask someone else to change should be questioned. But Today we can see conversions by enticement and fraud are quite rampant. Mass conversions by the so-called faith healing programmes in the guise of offering social service, etc should be checked at root. Regards Vinay
Re: [Goanet] The right to convert
--- On Mon, 12/22/08, Vinay Natekar vinaynate...@yahoo.com wrote: Mass conversions by the so-called faith healing programmes in the guise of offering social service, etc should be checked at root. Regards Vinay --- Yes Vinay, right behind you mate. While we are at it let us just stop Christians from celebrating Christmas Mass because Hindus do attend it, tear down their public statues because Hindus do pay homage to them, ban their holidays (Parrikar already tried I believe) and ensure we rewrite India's history so that every child knows that these Christians are the direct descendants of those who brought the Inquisition to India. Otherwise who know, Hindus might want to convert. By the way Vinay, where were you hiding when Christians were being tormented in Orissa? I was waiting for you and Barad to come on Goanet and condemn what was happening. Strangely enough I didn't hear from either of you then. Is this the India you want to create? Hurray. Viva la India. selma
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
This message is in reply to message: 11, dated: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 from: Mario Goveia on subject: The Right to Convert Mario responds: Dr. Barad, Please don't be ridiculous. Ths issue is not anyone's right to convert someone else. The last time I checked India had what is called freedom of religion. The right to convert means that any Indian citizen has the right to voluntarily change their religion and convert to any other religion or atheism. My response: Mario let me start my response using your first line. Mario please don't be ridiculous for you have not followed the thread nor have you followed my reply to Selma but preferred to pour in your intelligence. If you think you are wiser than Supreme Court (SC) judges in interpreting the articles contained in Indian Constitution including Article 25(1) please write to SC. You might be even awarded Bharat Ratna 2008 for sharing your intelligence to SC. Best regards, Dr. U. G. Barad
Re: [Goanet] The Right to Convert
--- On Sat, 12/20/08, Fr. Ivo C da Souza icso...@bsnl.in wrote: There have been cases of conversion by force in the 16th century, but that was never an official policy of the European missionaries who worked in India. The First Provincial Council of Goa, held in 1567, forbade the use of force, by decreeing that it is not lawful to bring anyone over to our faith and baptism by means of force with threats or terror, because no one comes to Christ by faith, unless he is drawn by the heavenly Father with voluntary love and prevenient grace (Bullarium Patronatus APP I, p.6). --- Excellent post Father Ivo. We must make clear the position of the church as it has been for a long time. There is grave misconception out there fuelled by right-wing fundamentalist groups that we must correct. India has gotten into the nasty habit of taking away civil liberties in the guise of upholding its democracy. If there are brutalities in the Gulf carried out against maids, rule that maids cannot work in the Gulf. If HIV becomes prevalent, propose that HIV testing be made mandatory before marriage. If there is a high incidence of foetocide, makes sure that every women is denied the right to know the gender of her baby before birth. And now this court has deliberately split hairs on its definition of what is freedome of religion. It's is a dire sign that barely 60 years after independence our Constitution should come under attack like this. Little by little, we ensure that our civil liberties are being curtailed and India can successful trot its way to a totalitarian country based on some preconceived Raj model. Best, Selma
Re: [Goanet] The Right to convert
I was hoping that the Supreme court would rule that conversion was legal in all circumstances except when physical or psychological coercion or threat was used. But it seems it has essentially banned all conversion activity now. I fear that this would lead to more strife in areas where conversions and re-conversions were going on because there is a huge enforcement problem for this kind of a law. Moreover, one of the principal motivations for any religious charity to do good in the toughest environments and against great odds has been removed. What a pity! Cheers, Santosh --- On Sat, 12/20/08, Sandeep Heble sandeephe...@gmail.com wrote: Follow the news report below to know the legal position of this in India. Nobody has right to convert: SC NEW DELHI: There is no such thing as a fundamental right to convert any person to one's own religion and the government can impose certain restrictions keeping in view public order, the Supreme Court has ruled.
Re: [Goanet] The Right to convert
My dear Santoshbab, It is worth noting that Courts rule on the 'issues' before them. All the SC has stated, in this case, is that there is NO fundamental right to convert. I doubt such a fundamental right exists in any country. This does not make conversions illegal. The Orissa Act (in question),IMHO, impinges on freedom guaranteed by the Indian Constitution - but the case could have been argued better in court than it was. The way the opponents of the Orissa Act argued the case, I submit, would have given the Christians special privileges which would would violate the principle of equality. BTW: The provisions in the Orissa Act are draconian and are similar in intent and application as those found in many authoritarian countries. Sometimes, it depends on the way a case is argued. This case, I submit, was argued poorly by the petitioners' lawyers. juss my view jc. 2008/12/21 Santosh Helekar chimbel...@yahoo.com I was hoping that the Supreme court would rule that conversion was legal in all circumstances except when physical or psychological coercion or threat was used. But it seems it has essentially banned all conversion activity now. I fear that this would lead to more strife in areas where conversions and re-conversions were going on because there is a huge enforcement problem for this kind of a law. Moreover, one of the principal motivations for any religious charity to do good in the toughest environments and against great odds has been removed. What a pity!
[Goanet] The Right to convert
Date: Sun, 21 Dec 2008 11:36:52 +0530 From: Dr. U. G. Barad dr.udayba...@gmail.com Mario let me start my response using your first line. Mario please don't be ridiculous for you have not followed the thread nor have you followed my reply to Selma but preferred to pour in your intelligence. If you think you are wiser than Supreme Court (SC) judges in interpreting the articles contained in Indian Constitution including Article 25(1) please write to SC. You might be even awarded Bharat Ratna 2008 for sharing your intelligence to SC. Mario responds: Dr. Barad, It is entirely possible that the Supreme Court is as wise as I am, and I may even be in line for a Bharat Ratna, not in 2008 but in 2009, but that is not the subject of this thread:-)) As the only voice of reason, truth and peace on Goanet, let me spell it out for you and other Goanetters. There is also no point in my writing to the SC because a) they are surely at least as wise as I am, and b) they were not ruling on what Selma wrote about and what I referred to in my previous post, which is that individuals in a free society with guaranteed freedom of religion MUST be free to VOLUNTARILY change their religion if they choose to, which you turned upside down by twisting it into a totally different issue of someone converting others against their will. The reason this was described as ridiculous was that you cited an inappropriate Supreme Court ruling to make your point. Here is an article on the SC ruling from the Times Of India: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=162018 The Time reporter writes, At dispute was a 1999 provision added to the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967, stipulating that a person wanting to convert to a particular religion must make a personal declaration which would be verified by the police also. What the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967 required was simply a procedure to verify that a person was not converting against their will. The SC overruled the Orissa High Court and allowed Orissa to continue to use this procedure. I don't have a major problem with this ruling because it was a decision of the SC which is the same ruling I would have made in the circumstances because there have apparently been cases in Orissa of coerced conversions by force or fraud. If I were a resident of Orissa and wanted to convert, I would have no problem following this procedure, which contains a minimal level of intrusion in a persons freedom of religion. The procedure does not prevent a person from voluntarily converting. It only verifies that everything is on the up and up. Even the article from the Indian Express you posted has this to say, If a person freely chooses to change his or her faith, this too is guaranteed by our Constitution. Isn't this precisely what Selma and I have said? I am firmly opposed to coercing others to convert against their will by force or fraud. However, in a free society that guarantees freedom of religion, every individual must have the right to voluntarily change their religion at any time, for any reason, other than under duress and against their will.
Re: [Goanet] The Right to convert
--- On Sun, 12/21/08, J. Colaco jc cola...@gmail.com wrote: The way the opponents of the Orissa Act argued the case, I submit, would have given the Christians special privileges which would would violate the principle of equality. Dear Josebab, Thanks for this clarification. Phew! I agree that there is no fundamental right to convert. As you know, on this issue I am more concerned about elimination of the motivation to dispense empathy rather than enlightenment. Cheers, Santosh --- On Sun, 12/21/08, J. Colaco jc cola...@gmail.com wrote: It is worth noting that Courts rule on the 'issues' before them. All the SC has stated, in this case, is that there is NO fundamental right to convert. I doubt such a fundamental right exists in any country. This does not make conversions illegal.
Re: [Goanet] The Right to Convert
--- On Sat, 20/12/08, Dr. U. G. Barad dr.udayba...@gmail.com wrote: Selma Carvalho on subject: The Right to Convert Selma, Right to convert is NOT a basic right in a civil society at least in India. This reply is based on following facts: NASCY is telling and teaching you thus: Do not turn around and say I am proselytising you, 'cause that is what u are in need of. If it is not a Basic Right in India, means that India is NOT A CIVIL SOCIETY YET! India still has to be civilised! Specially all the Hidutwa wallahs. (Sudralaich Paygee!) Including those like you, who claim the Dr. title. BARAD: Article 25(1) of Constitution of India guarantees ''freedom of conscience to every citizen, and not merely to the followers of one particular religion''. This Article postulates that there is no fundamental right to convert another person to one's own religion because if a person purposely undertakes the conversion of another person to his religion, that would impinge on the freedom of conscience guaranteed to all the citizens of the country alike. NASCY: Your interpretation of this is twisted! Why 'cause, in a process of any person 'changing his religion' he is fully 'conscious', his/hers conscience has been enlghtened. The person thereby 'converts' say from Hindu Hindu (un-enlightened) to Hindu Christian (enlightened) of their own volution. Nobody else has 'to convert him/her! It looks like, you and other hindutwa wallahs like you, can not understand this simple logic; since your minds are so obviously confused with 'bullshit'. I recommend that U ask for 'lessons' on Christianity, and then I will recommend some one qualified; At the end of these lessons, U will at least have 'rejected' your perverse Hindu beliefs, if not convert to Christian as well. Barad, we do not convert you! U convert yourself! If U want to live for ever with the way U are, fine. It will be your loss. Please also remember that U will still be an Indian, albeit a better enlghtened Indian. A change of religion does not entail 'changing your Nationality or your loyalties. I hope this is simple enough for you to understand. Now please spread this 'Good News' around and preach peace, harmony and good will, Stop practicing 'Casteism' 'cause Casteism is Racism! India as of now, is the only country where casteism related racism is truly practiced. What a shame!! And all Indians, even Christian Indians have to bear this shame, 'cause of majority like you. I am afraid the U. N. or other big powers will have to intervene, if India can not discipline itself. Furthermore, let me tell you, there is no international or national crime involved in change of religion. Only the socially backward and un-enlightened persons like the die hard hindutwa wallahs are mistakenly treating it as a crime, and taking the 'Law in their own Goonda Hands'. Samja kiye nahin? Nascy Caldeira Stay connected to the people that matter most with a smarter inbox. Take a look http://au.docs.yahoo.com/mail/smarterinbox
Re: [Goanet] The Right to Convert
--- On Fri, 12/19/08, Dr. U. G. Barad dr.udayba...@gmail.com wrote: My response: Selma, Right to convert is NOT a basic right in a civil society at least in India. This reply is based on following facts: Article 25(1) of Constitution of India guarantees ''freedom of conscience to every citizen, and not merely to the followers of one particular religion''. --- I'm glad we can atleast agree that the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to free speech in, so that everyone with an opinion is free to express it. Selma Opinions are like noses, everyone has one.
[Goanet] The Right to convert
Selma, Follow the news report below to know the legal position of this in India. Cheers Sandeep --- Nobody has right to convert: SC NEW DELHI: There is no such thing as a fundamental right to convert any person to one's own religion and the government can impose certain restrictions keeping in view public order, the Supreme Court has ruled. The court's ruling came while dismissing a petition challenging an Orissa law requiring police verification of all religious conversions. Citing the SC's landmark 1977 ruling in Rev Stanislaus vs Madhya Pradesh, a Bench of Chief Justice V N Khare and Justice S B Sinha said that ''what is freedom for one is freedom for the other, in equal measure''. At dispute was a 1999 provision added to the Orissa Freedom of Religion Act, 1967, stipulating that a person wanting to convert to a particular religion must make a personal declaration which would be verified by the police also. Petitioner's counsel Janardhan Das said this provision was unwarranted as it makes a person wanting to convert to a religion of his choice a suspect in the eyes of law. As early as 1976, the Orissa High Court had struck down as unconstitutional the Orissa Act. It quashed all criminal proceedings against those who were alleged to have resorted to conversion through inducement or by ''force'' or ''fraud''. It had also held that the Act violated Article 25 (1) of the Constitution which guarantees propagation of religion and conversion — something the petitioners had argued ''is a part of the Christian religion''. On appeal, however, the SC in 1977 overturned the decision. Recalling that judgment by a Constitution Bench headed by the then Chief Justice A N Ray, the apex court said on Tuesday: ''What Article 25(1) grants is not the right to convert another person to one's own religion, but to transmit or spread one's religion by an exposition of its tenets.'' Thus, the court said, it must be remembered that Article 25(1) guarantees ''freedom of conscience to every citizen, and not merely to the followers of one particular religion''. It said: ''The Article postulates that there is no fundamental right to convert another person to one's own religion because if a person purposely undertakes the conversion of another person to his religion, that would impinge on the freedom of conscience guaranteed to all the citizens of the country alike.'' Source: http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/cms.dll/html/uncomp/articleshow?msid=162018
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
Date: Sat, 20 Dec 2008 07:51:27 +0530 From: Dr. U. G. Barad dr.udayba...@gmail.com Selma, Right to convert is NOT a basic right in a civil society at least in India. This reply is based on following facts: Article 25(1) of Constitution of India guarantees ''freedom of conscience to every citizen, and not merely to the followers of one particular religion''. This Article postulates that there is no fundamental right to convert another person to one's own religion because if a person purposely undertakes the conversion of another person to his religion, that would impinge on the freedom of conscience guaranteed to all the citizens of the country alike. Mario responds: Dr. Barad, Please don't be ridiculous. Ths issue is not anyone's right to convert someone else. The last time I checked India had what is called freedom of religion. The right to convert means that any Indian citizen has the right to voluntarily change their religion and convert to any other religion or atheism.
Re: [Goanet] The Right to Convert
From: Carvalho elisabeth_...@yahoo.uk --- On Fri, 12/19/08, Dr. U. G. Barad dr.udayba...@gmail.com wrote: Selma, Right to convert is NOT a basic right in a civil society at least in India. This reply is based on following facts: Article 25(1) of Constitution of India guarantees ''freedom of conscience to every citizen, and not merely to the followers of one particular religion''. --- I'm glad we can atleast agree that the Indian Constitution guarantees the right to free speech in, so that everyone with an opinion is free to express it. Selma ***1) India is a secular state, namely it is not anti-god or anti-religion, but there is separation between the state and religion. All religions have an equal place in India. But we cannot say that all religions are equal. All religions are different ways to God. Each citizen has the right to profess, practise and propagate any religion. The Article 25 of the Indian Constitution deals with the Freedom of Religion. It states that: Subject to public order, morality and health and to other provisions of this part, all persons are equally entitled to freedom of conscience and the right freely to profess, practise and propagate religion. While dealing with the aspect of conversions, the Supreme Court felt the right to propagate one's religion means the right to communicate a person's beliefs to another person or to expose the tenets of the faith, but would not include the right to 'convert' another person to the former's faith, because the latter person is equally entitled to freedom of conscience (AIR 1977 SC 908). Of course, the latter person is free to adopt another religion, but nobody has the fundamental right to 'convert' him/her to another religion if s/he does not do it out of his/her free choice. This verdict was delivered by a constitution bench of five judges headed by Chief Justice A.N.Ray in the case of Rev.Stanislaus vs State of Madhya Pradesh. 2)There are no conversions by force in Christianity today. But it is an irony that dalits and tribals are being forcibly converted to Hinduism. Dalits turn to Buddhism and neo-Buddhism movements as a social protest. The process of 're-conversion by force' to Hinduism is going on. The government itself functions as a missionary agent to assimilate scheduled castes and tribals into Hinduism. The ill-treatment by caste people forced many dalits to join Chritianity--in the process many changed their way of life and took on European names, dress and ways. Social upward mobility, search for social equality, economic and political factors and opposition to Hinduism are cited as causes by sociologists. The 'untouchables' were in search of equality and betterment of their status by escaping from the tyranny, rigidity, exploitation and oppression. Conversion has become a form of social protest. It is a complete break with their past and with all its painful memories. 3)Hindutva fanatics have raised the bogey of forced conversions by allurements or foreign funds, in order to conceal their real targets. If there are cases of conversions by force or fraud, there is the Law to take stock of these abnormalities. Can they prove even one of such forcible conversion? There have been cases of conversion by force in the 16th century, but that was never an official policy of the European missionaries who worked in India. The First Provincial Council of Goa, held in 1567, forbade the use of force, by decreeing that it is not lawful to bring anyone over to our faith and baptism by means of force with threats or terror, because no one comes to Christ by faith, unless he is drawn by the heavenly Father with voluntary love and prevenient grace (Bullarium Patronatus APP I, p.6). The enthusiasm of the European missionaries and the exclusive mentality of the gone times may attenuate the reality, but will not excuse every violence... We need not be defensive about the colonial past. Mistakes were made and we must apologize for the past... But let the truth prevail: Today there are no conversions by force. The Church does not accept forced conversions. Vatican II provides clear guidelines for the work of evangelization: The Church strictly forbids forcing anyone to embrace the faith, or alluring or enticing people by unworthy techniques. By the same token, she also strongly insists on a person's right not to be deterred from the faith by unjust vexations on the part of others (Ad Gentes, Decree on the Missionary Activity of the Church, n.13). 4)This right to religious freedom has its foundation in the dignity of the human person itself, in the light of the revealed Word of God and the reason itself. This right of the human person to religious freedom is to be recognized in the
Re: [Goanet] The Right to convert
Dear Sandeep, Thank you for that forward. Sadly the court is splitting hairs here and it is indeed doing Indian society a grave injustice. Such intolerance in the end will lead to much disquiet in our society. Best, Selma --- On Sat, 12/20/08, Sandeep Heble sandeephe...@gmail.com wrote: From: Sandeep Heble sandeephe...@gmail.com Subject: [Goanet] The Right to convert To: goa...@goanet.org Date: Saturday, December 20, 2008, 9:29 AM Selma, Follow the news report below to know the legal position of this in India. Cheers Sandeep --- Nobody has right to convert: SC NEW DELHI: There is no such thing as a fundamental right to convert any person to one's own religion and the government can impose certain restrictions keeping in view public order, the Supreme Court has ruled.
Re: [Goanet] The Right to Convert
--- On Fri, 12/19/08, Carvalho elisabeth_...@yahoo.com wrote: From: Carvalho elisabeth_...@yahoo.com Subject: [Goanet] To: Goa's premiere mailing list, estb. 1994! goanet@lists.goanet.org Date: Friday, December 19, 2008, 11:38 AM This article appeared in the London Chaplaincy magazine, Contacto. The Right to Convert: A basic right in a civil society by Selma Carvalho In the summer of 1772, the English Earl of Rochford had chanced upon a rumour that Goa was up for sale. He wrote to Robert Walpole, an English diplomat embedded in the Portuguese court and assigned to keep an eye on Portugal’s dealings in India, to investigate the veracity of this rumour. Goa was of interest to the colonial and local powers, flexing their muscle in the region. From the British and the French to the Marathas, the strategic port of Goa was worth a king’s ransom to them all. Walpole, after making discreet enquiries responded on the 8 of July, 1772, to say that far from selling Goa, Portugal intended to make every effort to reconcile with the natives. He writes, “the power of the Inquisition at Goa which by the extension of its Jurisdiction and Severity had driven the Natives from a communication with Goa, is to be diminished; and all Encouragement is to be given to the Natives with respect to the quiet exercise of their Religion and in other respects.” It was the last, dying days of the Portuguese Inquisition in Goa. The Inquisition would finally be abolished in 1821 by the “General Extraordinary and Constituent Courts of the Portuguese Nation.” Liberal ideas were sweeping across Europe and changing the way people viewed issues of equality and tolerance. The Church itself was changing. There was an underlying emphasis on enhancing one’s spirituality and relationship with God, rather than on mindlessly pursuing numbers or forcing one’s doctrine onto others. Nearly two centuries later, the Church in India, stands accused once again of subversively and insidiously trying to “harvest souls.” On November 24, 2008, one of India’s BJP stalwarts, Balbir Punj, wrote: “Post-Independence, the Church changed its methods. Open confrontation was dropped in favour of covert methods like inducements to target groups (the poor, illiterate sections). The new strategy, focused on specific areas, yielded a handsome harvest.” Even if we were to take this statement at face-value, that indeed the “Church” is involved in manipulatively luring people to convert, it begs the basic question of the sanctity of individual choice in a free society. Who is to say, the poor and the illiterate are incapable of making informed choices? We can safely presume these are grown individuals, who make adult decisions everyday of their life. They would have decided on an occupation, the names of their children, who they voted for in the last election or what crops to grow the next season. Is it only in the area of faith and conviction that they must be accorded a secondary place in society? Are they to accede and adhere to some predetermined faith for eternity? Even if the desperately poor are lured to the Church with bribes of bread and water, change of faith calls for a deep commitment. It requires one to renounce a way of life, a way of thinking and embrace another ideology altogether. Is it at all possible, that people can be made to undergo such a metamorphosis by emoluments of food? Surely common sense would dictate that once the belly was full, they would return to their religion of choice and comfort. It is easily accomplished. One can pretend to be something to the world, whilst be something different unto oneself. One can go to a Church of Christ, and still pray to a God of one’s own preference at home. We are, afterall, no longer living in the sixteenth century. The Church today has neither the manpower nor the inclination to rigourously police people’s religious beliefs and practices. Freedom of choice is a basic right that an individual must enjoy in any progressive society. In matters of utmost privacy, and religion is a private matter, the individual must be at liberty to determine his own course. If we deny him this right, we are enslaving him, bounding him and sentencing him to a lesser life. Renowned writer, Khushwant Singh, wrote: “To start with, let it be understood that these days there are no forced conversions anywhere in the world. India is no exception. Those who assert that the poor, innocent and ignorant of India are being forced to accept Christianity are blatant liars. A few, very few educated and well-to-do men and women convert to another faith when they do not find solace in the faith of their ancestors. A large number converted out of gratitude. They were neglected, ignorant and poor. When strangers came to look after them, opened schools and hospitals for them, taught them, healed them and helped them to stand on
[Goanet] The Right to Convert
This message is in reply to message: 4, dated: Fri, 19 Dec 2008 from: Selma Carvalho on subject: The Right to Convert My response: Selma, Right to convert is NOT a basic right in a civil society at least in India. This reply is based on following facts: Article 25(1) of Constitution of India guarantees ''freedom of conscience to every citizen, and not merely to the followers of one particular religion''. This Article postulates that there is no fundamental right to convert another person to one's own religion because if a person purposely undertakes the conversion of another person to his religion, that would impinge on the freedom of conscience guaranteed to all the citizens of the country alike. This means there is no such thing as a fundamental right to convert any person to one's own religion and the government can impose certain restrictions keeping in view public order. This is the interpretation of Supreme Court of Indian on Article 25(1) which was misunderstood as Right to Convert. You could also read a debate on this issue by clicking the link provided here below: http://www.indianexpress.com/news/debating-the-right-to-convert/369524/ Best regards, Dr. U. G. Barad
