Back to article list

Why the need for anti-conversion law ?

Conversion generates and fosters a rift in the society and leads a stable society
into a disintegrated society. It disturbs the social structure and leads to a
clash of cultures. Conversions arouse resentment and indignation and help to the
flames of communal frenzy and passion creating problems of Law and Order.

Why the need for Anti-Conversion Law

Formidable forces operating in the field of conversion warrant anti-conversion law.
The phenomenal financial wherewithal available for Christian missionaries
(NEW BORN CHRISTIANS- BENNY HINN) for proselytisation and evangelistic activities
to facilitate conversion of people of other religions to Christianity is indeed
mind-boggling. Their annual financial budget for proselytisation and evangelic
activities in foreign countries is 145 billion dollars (Rs. 7,50,000 crore).
Looking at the infrastructure facilities they have on role four million full-time
workers numbering larger than the combined military strength of United States of
America and Europe. This is the largest single army of workers save the red army
of China to propagate Christianity. They run 13,000 major libraries. They publish
22,000 periodicals and print four billion tracts every year. They operate 1800 TV and
radio stations propagating Christianity.

What about their strength in India?

They have more than 1,00,000 Pastors evangelists and preachers(NEW BORN CHRISTIANS-
BENNY HINN). They have set a goal of building 2010 new churches by the year 2010
and to build in Tamil Nadu alone 1000 churches in the far-off villages. These are
the plans of just one sect of Christianity.

Globally supported and funded and with meticulous planning, preparation and follow-up
action the converters have exterminated hundreds and thousands of native Americans and
turned the United States into a Christian nation. Whole of Europe has been turned
into a Christian nation leaving no native element. Latin American Countries have
become Christians. 92 per cent of the Philippines, 32 per cent of Africa and Korea
have embraced Christianity. The ancient Rome and Greek Civilisations have gone into
the archives after the advent of Christianity.

Should this happen to India? Should Hindu civilisation and culture to be a thing of the past?
In the world there are 52 countries for Muslims and 88 countries for Christians. For
Hindus there is only one country and that is India. Should Hindu India be allowed to
be exterminated and wiped out as happened to other countries of the world?

China, Taiwan and Sri Lanka refused the Pope's request to visit and launch his new
activities that aim at the evangelisation of Asia. Hindu majority India, though not
a Christian country, has allowed him to do so. Therefore the Pope should feel grateful
to the tolerant people of India. Clearly no Western country would give a state welcome
to a Hindu religious leader seeking to promote Hindu conversion activities in the West.

India is one of the few countries that recognises the Pope as a head of state. The
United States and most Western countries recognise the Pope only as a religious leader.
Clearly the Pope is not coming to India as the political leader of a secular state but
as a religious leader. He is not coming here because he wants to make a pilgrimage to
honour the great Yogis and swamis of India or to visit her great temples and tirthas.

Today the Catholic Church is losing power in the West. Without replenishing its population
base it is facing a severe crisis. India offers perhaps the best possibility for doing
this with a large population with a history of religious devotion and monastic activity
that could readily become priests and nuns.

The bloody history of the Church in America, Africa and Asia is an open book and well
known. The Native Americans in the United States still tell stories about how the feet
of their people were cut off for refusing to walk to church or their tongues cut off
for refusing to recite prayers. The church has claimed that its intolerance is a thing
of the past.

The problem is that the same attitudes and behaviour that resulted in such violence in
the past still go on today. The official policy of the Catholic Church today is still
that Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism and other Indian religions are not valid or
true. This promotes division, misunderstanding and can still lead to violence.

What are the reasons for the sudden anger against the Radicle Evangalic Christians or
the so called NEW BORN CHRISTIANS?

The anger is not so much sudden as that today we have a more aware Hindu populace and
a larger media forum for airing such grievances. Oppressed religious and social groups
of all types are now making such protests. Christians will more quickly protest against
Hindus if they feel that Hindus are not treating them fairly. Hindus have actually
protested a lot less than other groups, though they have more commonly been the target
of denigration. Such a Hindu awakening was inevitable. The real question is why it took
so long.

An entire new attack is being launched. China is also emerging as a new target. Religious
tolerance is not a one way street. We cannot ask Hindus to honour Christianity when
Christians, starting with the pope, don't honour Hinduism, however much they may talk of
God, humanity or peace.Why can't the Pope say that Christianity is not the only way and
that Hinduism by itself can be enough? That would be an expression of tolerance and
open-mindedness. Why are Hindus who accept the validity of many paths called "hardliners"
while a Pope who refuses to do so is honoured as a Holy man? Is not pluralism a sign of
tolerance and exclusivism the hallmark of intolerance?

Catholicism today is not a pluralistic tradition honouring different religious and spiritual
paths as valid. It is an exclusivist tradition dominated by a leader who will not accept
a Buddha, Krishna, Rama or Guru Nanak as a Son of God but only Jesus.

Mahatma Gandhi said, I came to the conclusion long ago that all religions were true and
also that all had some error in them, and whilst I hold by my own, I should hold others as
dear as Hinduism. So we can only pray, if we are Hindus, not that a Christian should become
a Hindu. But our innermost prayer should be a Hindu should be a better Hindu, a Muslim
a better Muslim, a Christian a better Christian. (Young India: January 19, 1928)

Back to article list