ss wrote: [ on 06:27 PM 2/29/2008 ]
It is not the convert's choice, but the implication that another's belief is
wrong that hurts. Expressing the sentiment should not be a problem, but often
leads to argument and accusation of extremism.
You may have a right to swing your fist, but it ends where my nose begins.
Exactly why do you need to "express the sentiment" to me, if I am a
convert? Or to instigate or participate in riots or worse in the name
of such expression?
> If there are forcible conversions, I am still unable to see the
> problem - can't the individual repudiate the conversion process, or
> convert back to the original religion if unsatisfied?
From the Hindu viewpoint this is needless meddling with society.
"needless"? Surely the people who are directly affected are the only
ones who are the best judges of that?
And of course there is the problem of whether the reconvert was really
dissatisfied in the first place before the damage was done, or was converted
as part of an elaborate charade to fulfil the quota of some priest.
This is yet another example of smuggling in the desired answer as
part of the question. Exactly what des the above mean? (I find your
choice of words interesting to say the least)
Udhay
--
((Udhay Shankar N)) ((udhay @ pobox.com)) ((www.digeratus.com))
