The Law of Conscience Overrides all Man-made laws.
I went through the Madhya Pradesh Dharma Swatantrya Adhiniyam of 1968. The Congress Party government of Madhya Pradesh passed these Anti-Conversion laws in 1968. At the time, Chhattisgarh was a part of Madhya Pradesh. According to these laws (amended again in 2006), Chhattisgarh detained five Christian priests in 2021 when the Congress party ruled the state. What's more, all the states that subsequently adopted the Anti-Conversion laws framed their laws following this model. Now, the Bajrang Dal is using the laws to curb activities related to mission work.
In my view, these laws are draconian. For instance, law point 3 does not describe "allurement" with clarity. They can term anything, ranging from the promise of life after death to healing or any assistance, as allurement. Every religion has a concept of the afterlife. If we include such things as allurement, it would hinder people from practicing or preaching their faith freely. Besides, how can we term selfless service as allurement? Suppose a nun helps my ailing and aged mother. How ridiculous would it sound if I filed a lawsuit against the nun, arguing that she tried to convert my mother by offering assistance?
The Catholic nuns detained in Chhattisgarh on baseless charges face a similar situation. The nuns offered the two women, who are Christ-followers for the past 4-5 years, employment. How can it be an allurement or crime? Suppose they were trying to convert these women. In that case, they must have offered the job opportunity five years ago, that is, before the girls' families joined Christianity? Where were these allured women five years ago? Why did they not file a lawsuit then?
Besides, how can offering employment be an allurement? The government provides farmers with direct financial assistance, deposited into their bank accounts. Can we consider it as an allurement to seek their votes? Across the world, many Christian institutions employ non-Christians. Can it all be termed as allurement? So, now, where do we draw the line to define allurement? Perhaps that is why these Anti-Conversion or Freedom of Religion laws did not get federal approval at any stage despite being proposed many times in the past.
In the 1930s, the British drafted Anti-Conversion laws to protect Tribals from converting to Christianity. However, post-independence Bharat did not adopt those laws. Only Odisha and Madhya Pradesh (ruled by the Congress party of the time) framed such insensitive and pointless laws to hurt the sentiments of religious minorities. Our country is not Pakistan. We won't let anyone treat religious minorities unjustly. For that's how we know we are Bharat and not Pakistan or Bangladesh.
Therefore, the arrest of individuals working to support the poor and neglected by providing them with employment seems outrageous. Why couldn't Ambaniji hire those poor girls? The nuns are only filling the void our Hindus have left by neglecting the poor, weak, sick, orphans, tribals, and the Dalits. So, let us not create laws to harass the helpers. Otherwise, the same rules will come back to haunt us one day.
If you still think there's a need for such Freedom of Religion laws, we first need to reform these laws. First, only the converted person should be allowed to file the lawsuit. Second, we need to scrap the ambiguous “allurement" clause. Third, only if the converted person is threatened or harmed by the people of the new community do they need to be protected. Let all people preach, let those who want to believe, believe. Our constitution guarantees all people these fundamental rights. The international community also assures all humans the freedom of faith.
Even when Hindu kings ruled India, Christ-followers enjoyed freedom to worship. Only Aurangzeb created problems for free worship. Even Akbar, Asoka, or local kings had no issues. Hindus in India are now scared because of love Jihad and Terrorism. They have become defensive, and all these mob lynchings and persecutions are a result of such an attitude. They feel Christians would alter their culture permanently. We respect our Hindu culture. But we believe in the Christian faith. We support Modiji for two reasons. 1. Development of all without any divisive agenda, and 2. Zero tolerance for Terrorism.
We still believe that in this country, Modiji and Amit Shahji have sufficient power to release these nuns. They granted citizenship to the persecuted minorities, including Christians, who came from Pakistan. In this matter also, we believe they stand with the cause of these innocent nuns in their fifties. Suppose somebody accuses our ISKON people in America of human trafficking, without any evidence of the same. How would we respond to it? To Catholics and Christians across the world, it is an act of insulting our Sanyasin.
Suppose it was a plain case of human trafficking, a punishable offence. What was the need to impose forced conversion charges? We believe people filed the human trafficking case to strengthen the offence and render it un-bailable. It is an attack on Christians across the world if these women are innocent. The law of conscience always overturns the verdict of unfair laws and their proposers. Therefore, we would pray for their release, hoping that common sense will prevail. Release the nuns immediately!
n.b. I am grateful to God and to the Indian government for helping the distressed nuns get bail quickly. I thank Modiji, Amit Shahji, and Rajeev Chandra Shekharan Nair for standing with the persecuted minority in this matter. May God bless you all and keep you safe and healthy.
In my view, these laws are draconian. For instance, law point 3 does not describe "allurement" with clarity. They can term anything, ranging from the promise of life after death to healing or any assistance, as allurement. Every religion has a concept of the afterlife. If we include such things as allurement, it would hinder people from practicing or preaching their faith freely. Besides, how can we term selfless service as allurement? Suppose a nun helps my ailing and aged mother. How ridiculous would it sound if I filed a lawsuit against the nun, arguing that she tried to convert my mother by offering assistance?
The Catholic nuns detained in Chhattisgarh on baseless charges face a similar situation. The nuns offered the two women, who are Christ-followers for the past 4-5 years, employment. How can it be an allurement or crime? Suppose they were trying to convert these women. In that case, they must have offered the job opportunity five years ago, that is, before the girls' families joined Christianity? Where were these allured women five years ago? Why did they not file a lawsuit then?
Besides, how can offering employment be an allurement? The government provides farmers with direct financial assistance, deposited into their bank accounts. Can we consider it as an allurement to seek their votes? Across the world, many Christian institutions employ non-Christians. Can it all be termed as allurement? So, now, where do we draw the line to define allurement? Perhaps that is why these Anti-Conversion or Freedom of Religion laws did not get federal approval at any stage despite being proposed many times in the past.
In the 1930s, the British drafted Anti-Conversion laws to protect Tribals from converting to Christianity. However, post-independence Bharat did not adopt those laws. Only Odisha and Madhya Pradesh (ruled by the Congress party of the time) framed such insensitive and pointless laws to hurt the sentiments of religious minorities. Our country is not Pakistan. We won't let anyone treat religious minorities unjustly. For that's how we know we are Bharat and not Pakistan or Bangladesh.
Therefore, the arrest of individuals working to support the poor and neglected by providing them with employment seems outrageous. Why couldn't Ambaniji hire those poor girls? The nuns are only filling the void our Hindus have left by neglecting the poor, weak, sick, orphans, tribals, and the Dalits. So, let us not create laws to harass the helpers. Otherwise, the same rules will come back to haunt us one day.
If you still think there's a need for such Freedom of Religion laws, we first need to reform these laws. First, only the converted person should be allowed to file the lawsuit. Second, we need to scrap the ambiguous “allurement" clause. Third, only if the converted person is threatened or harmed by the people of the new community do they need to be protected. Let all people preach, let those who want to believe, believe. Our constitution guarantees all people these fundamental rights. The international community also assures all humans the freedom of faith.
Even when Hindu kings ruled India, Christ-followers enjoyed freedom to worship. Only Aurangzeb created problems for free worship. Even Akbar, Asoka, or local kings had no issues. Hindus in India are now scared because of love Jihad and Terrorism. They have become defensive, and all these mob lynchings and persecutions are a result of such an attitude. They feel Christians would alter their culture permanently. We respect our Hindu culture. But we believe in the Christian faith. We support Modiji for two reasons. 1. Development of all without any divisive agenda, and 2. Zero tolerance for Terrorism.
We still believe that in this country, Modiji and Amit Shahji have sufficient power to release these nuns. They granted citizenship to the persecuted minorities, including Christians, who came from Pakistan. In this matter also, we believe they stand with the cause of these innocent nuns in their fifties. Suppose somebody accuses our ISKON people in America of human trafficking, without any evidence of the same. How would we respond to it? To Catholics and Christians across the world, it is an act of insulting our Sanyasin.
Suppose it was a plain case of human trafficking, a punishable offence. What was the need to impose forced conversion charges? We believe people filed the human trafficking case to strengthen the offence and render it un-bailable. It is an attack on Christians across the world if these women are innocent. The law of conscience always overturns the verdict of unfair laws and their proposers. Therefore, we would pray for their release, hoping that common sense will prevail. Release the nuns immediately!
n.b. I am grateful to God and to the Indian government for helping the distressed nuns get bail quickly. I thank Modiji, Amit Shahji, and Rajeev Chandra Shekharan Nair for standing with the persecuted minority in this matter. May God bless you all and keep you safe and healthy.
Comments
Post a Comment