[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: the tolerance debate



========================================================
Administrative Note:
-------------------

Week's Agenda: Economy
========================================================

> POINT TWO: I would caution you against focusing too much attention
> on economic bribery in the interests of converting people: the
> evidence in India at present is that it is not Christian
> organisations which are using money to convert Hindus so much as it
> is certain Hindu organisations that are using economic incentives to
> convert Christians and Muslims to their brand of Hinduism (one only
> has to read the publications of these organisations for the evidence
> to become clear). 

Gimme a break, professor. That just flat ain't true. But even if it 
were, here you reveal a curious bias. You appear to construe my argument 
as one that says Hindus should not be converted, whereas I have been 
arguing that proselytization should not be permitted. Somehow you 
decided that this is a pro-Hindu idea. For all you know, I might be a 
muslim who wants to preserve the existing numbers at least for my faith. 
Are you defending your position against mine or are you simply trying to 
negate my argument by offering responses to a totally different one from 
what I put forward?

As for the argument that peddling an idea of God is not much different 
from marketing toothpaste, that's ludicrous. Is it then much different 
from phone sex or prostitution? This is some bizarre form of free-market 
fundamentalism, to reduce everything to matters which can be bought and 
sold. 

You say that notwithstanding my belief that kaffirs should be killed 
(which is hypothetical!), the state can still regulate the execution of 
my religious beliefs and prevent me from exercising the faith fully. I 
don't see why such a restriction should not be applied to a different 
expression of faith equally? Can the state determine that street-corner 
proselytization is to be banned as well? The economic force / physical 
force distinction didn't  go down well with many others, (including you, 
if I recall correctly). You need to come up with a good reason why the 
state should regulate faith.

Ash

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a posting to India_Policy Discussion list:  debate@indiapolicy.org
Rules, Procedures, Archives:            http://www.indiapolicy.org/debate/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------