11 October, 2008

Writers voice concern over attacks on Christians

We write to express our anguish and outrage at the continuing brutalities visited upon Christian communities and places of worship in Orissa and Karnataka, and elsewhere in India, as well as at the pusillanimous attitude of our political leaders towards the perpetrators of these atrocities.

While the police have stood by and watched churches being desecrated and acts of assault and rape carried out, the Central Government has reacted vigorously only after representatives of the European Union expressed their concern. The perceived damage to India's international image should not be a greater concern than the actual damage that such violence causes to the inclusive, multi-religious and multi-ethnic character of Indian society.

This violence is a failure of our political institutions and of civil society. It is a consequence of our failure to uphold the principles of the rule of law, mutual understanding, and civil dialogue. Eventually, such violence does not remain confined to a few clearly targeted victims. Rather, it spreads to engulf and destroy the entire society that spawns it, as is evident in neighbouring Pakistan and Sri Lanka, for instance.

The worst contributors to this scenario are politicians who dream of electoral victory at the cost of social catastrophe. The powerful ideal of 'unity in diversity', which has held this country together for six decades, has been seriously imperilled by the use of religious and ethnic prejudice as a political weapon. Intolerance of those different from ourselves, and the abandoning of reasoned discussion to deal with differences, spells the end of the India for which the freedom struggle was waged.

More and more of us must come out and say clearly that we do not share the dreams of these cynical opportunists. Their India is not the India we dream of. The India we dream of is a just society, not an aggressive power.

We call upon the Indian Government to ensure that hate speech is outlawed from the domain of public discourse. We also call upon the Indian Government to outlaw those political parties which, directly or through their cohorts, promote communal discord and encourage violence. The rule of law implies that every citizen's life is sacred. Let the law act decisively to punish those who perpetrate the appalling crimes of pogrom and murder.

Girish Karnad


Salman Rushdie


Amitav Ghosh


Vikram Seth


Ramachandra Guha

Kiran Nagarkar


Amit Chaudhuri


Mukul Kesavan


Suketu Mehta


Ranjit Hoskote


Arundhathi Subramaniam


Sampurna Chattarji


Nancy Adajania


Shobhana Bhattacharji


Romesh Bhattacharji


Sridala Swami


THE PEN ALL-INDIA CENTRE

3 comments:

  1. Anonymous10:54 PM

    http://greathindu.com/2008/09/proof-of-christian-complicity-in-abusing-hindu-gods-in-mangalore/#more-75

    Read that and comment sir. Sir, these missionaries are the real terrorists who start every violence in our country. and why you media men backing these anti-nationals and terrorists? are you getting paid by dollars?
    Ask the missionaries to stop their fraudeulent techniques and sexual harassments and you too stop supprting their terror acts. then eveything will be normal. why blame VHP etc when the real militants are already in your own pot. ..the pot calling the kettle...
    -jairam

    ReplyDelete
  2. Jairam (Anonymous), Nice to find you are back. Assuming that Christians abused Hindu gods, what the self-appointed defenders of Hindu gods did is still a heinous crime.
    You may read this too:
    http://www.telegraphindia.com/1081011/jsp/opinion/story_9938551.jsp

    ReplyDelete
  3. Anonymous5:31 PM

    Sir, Dont divert the topic hereand avoid the politics for the time being. You are just assuming the evil missionaries did the heineous crime when it is a reality. My question is why the media not reporting the real reasons behind the Orissa attacks? Why the media is biased and Ramachandra Guhas shay away from facts? Yes no one has the right to takelaw in his hands but when evil elements try to destroy the society by conversions...society will react. Evil should be defeated by all means and if media cannot see the truth, then it the media's fault.
    -jairam
    ---------- Forwarded message ----------
    From:Hilda Raja
    Date: Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 5:29 PM
    Subject: My response to 'Don't target converts'--Don't convert.
    To:

    'Don't target Converts '(8th OctTOI) by Michael Pinto poses many
    questions than it answers. No amount of provocation can justify
    violence is easily said but humanly not easy to follow. All are not
    Gandhians or Jesus to show the left cheek when slapped on the right.
    Some countries follow a justice system which is based on 'eye for an
    eye'.

    Aggressive policy of conversion followed by some fundamentalist
    churches and fundamental Christians cannot justify taking law into
    one's hand and no amount of provocation can justify violence is
    correct theoretically and logically. But if such logic rules the
    hearts and minds of men/women why is there so much of violence in the
    world? Why do countries violate the rights of other countries? Why do
    law makers turn into law breakers? Why do those in the Khaki who have
    to operate the law on the streets become violators of human rights? In
    the midst of such oppression, exploitation can we expect the people to
    meekly be submissive and subservient? Or is the author's theory held
    good only in the provocation rising in the business of conversion?

    When Indira Gandhi was assassinated why thousands of Sikhs were
    butchered in the capital? Was it not justified by the Congress party?
    When the Brahmin pundits were killed and chased away from their homes
    in the Valley and forced to become refugees in their own country under
    ethnic cleansing no voices were raised against such an abuse and
    violation? When a holy man held in great reverence was brutally
    murdered with his three disciples in his own ashram will the author's
    theory be strong enough to hold back the emotional, social, and
    religious upheaval of the hurt psyche? Every action has a reaction.

    When a nun is raped then all hell breaks loose-Daily children are
    sexually violated and raped and murdered, no protest voice is heard
    -no church rallies are held, no Archbishop/bishop rebukes Chief
    Ministers and express
    pain and anguish. And no EU raises the issue with the PM in a foreign
    land. So Christians have global brokers and Christian lives become
    sacred and the PM is accountable to foreign powers for their
    safety.-the lives of others can be snuffed out without even a whimper.

    What is the root cause of this warped perception but religion? This is
    not to down play the rape of the nun but to point out that it is a
    harsh world we are living in and to high light the discrimination in
    our perception. Does a crime become more heinous because the victim
    belongs to a particular religion? 'Terrorists do not belong to any one
    community knows no religion', pontificates our political leaders. Is
    this again reserved only when it comes to the terrorists of the
    Minority community?

    It must be said that violence is nurtured within
    religious ghettos, madrassas, and only religions/beliefs are strong
    enough to provoke and sanctify spilling of the blood of the innocents.
    It is in the name of religion that the world had witnessed violence,
    genocide, torture and oppression and a Talibanism justifying the
    imposition of religious domination and curtailment of the rights of
    humans.

    It is a utopia that Michael Pinto is envisaging when he states that no
    amount of provocation can justify violence. This is armchair wistful
    thinking. When the Christians were oppressors this theory vanished.
    The tables are turned and when there is an assertion of the Hindus to
    retain their culture, their religion and their heritage then the drum
    beating of the Constitutional guarantees is heard. It is the right of
    the Hindus to protect the Hindu ethos of this country which they feel
    is threatened.

    Was Art 30 not enacted to ensure the Right of the
    Minorities to establish manage and administer institutions to
    safeguard their ethos? It is shocking that politicians are equating
    the Bajrang Dal and the VHP with the SIMI. The latter is a terror
    outfit with its branches now functioning in new names. The suspects
    belonging to these outfits are involved in serial blasts all over the
    country, they are trained in Pakistan and in POK .These are anti
    national
    outfits. What is the purpose/aim of these serial blasts-killing of
    innocent people who are about their daily business? The aim is to
    destabilize the country, create panic and insecurity and unrest within
    the country. Why was Parliament targeted? And who were behind it?

    But
    the same cannot be said of Bajrang Dal and the VHP. They are
    nationalists-they may be attacking a particular community for reasons
    of their own- the root cause being forced conversion and a reaction to
    the denigration of the Hindu gods and goddesses. Those involved in
    such violence and criminal activities must be apprehended and brought
    to justice. But where is the justification to demand a ban on such
    outfits? This is indulging in vote bank politics.

    Till date not a
    single terrorists has been brought to justice. The reality of wars,
    underworld dons killing, custodial deaths, political bosses unleashing
    terror against their opponents are all part of the harsh reality of
    today's world. Conversion from time immemorial has a concomitant violence.
    Indian history is replete with it. The oppression, force, torture,
    massacre of the Indians to convert them to Islam and Christianity is
    not a fable. The Inquisition and all that it wrought is world record.
    Again it is in the name of religion. What you sow you reap. Violence
    begets violence-this is nature's order.

    In 'Don't target converts' (TOI 8/10/08) the author finds it strange that converts are targeted in a country which constitutionally upholds the right to
    preach and propagate one's religion. But then to preach and propagate
    one's religion does not mean to force and use fraudulent means to
    pressurize people to change from one religion to another. I am shocked
    that in this context the author compares inducements like 'buy one and
    get one free' in the market of commodities, to faith changing. If the
    market goods can be sold with inducements why not it be extended to
    faith and belief changing is the author's argument. Can faith and
    belief be brought to the market level of sales of commodities? By this
    analogy the author accepts that there is inducement.

    Money is flowing
    from foreign based churches and the gods of these churches need
    recruits-the greater the strength the greater the power of these gods
    and hence the brokers of these gods are all out
    targeting the poor.The inducement-a plate of rice, a loaf of bread to
    the hunger, shelter for the homeless, and also the promise of the
    green pastures in the next world.The strategy has first an entry
    point-first denigrate, abuse, degrade and demolished their gods and
    icons. Second instill in these victims the doubt that their gods are
    false and then promise to lead them to the true god.

    A vulnerable
    victim, with a vacuum inner self is then ready for the initiation into
    a New Life/to be Born Again. The false propaganda is vicious because
    of its attack on another religion. This kind of provocation is not
    easy to overlook because human nature is to refute and repel this
    atrocious slander/blasphemy. What will the author say if one prints
    pamphlets that the mother of Jesus was a prostitute and Jesus' birth
    was not a virgin birth? That after her marriage Joseph found her
    pregnant and toyed with the idea of putting her away. Only the
    intervention of an angel restrained him from taking such a drastic action. This is what
    the bible narrates.

    Will the Catholic Church and other fund churches
    sit back and humbly submit to such provocation? When posters depicting
    Jayalalitha as a Virgin Mary appeared in Chennai there were massive
    rallies and protests. But if Madhuri Dixit is depicted as Durga and
    the goddess is painted nude it comes under the freedom of expression
    of a painter. Only difference is that the same painter will not dare
    to let his artistic acumen and constitutional right to freedom of
    expression to depict Allah even in the best form. This is how we
    perceive the operation of guarantees/rights enshrined in our
    Constitution.

    If opting for a New Life/Born Again, demands discarding of one's
    culture, social practices, adapting a western life style and adapting
    western forms of worship then the convert becomes an alien to the
    Indian/Hindu 'ethos', and is sucked into a process of alienation.
    This has other ramifications. Why did East Timor break away from
    Indonesia when its Christian population swelled to 27percent just in a
    matter of ten years? Similarly in our own context the partition of
    India was based on the theory that two religions-Islam and Hinduism
    cannot co-exist as a nation-that was the contention of then Muslims
    leaders.

    World history and Indian history is replete with the
    experience that 'peace cannot co-exist with conversion. The reason
    being conversion has an inbuilt violence: physical, psychological,
    social and cultural. It may even abet one to be anti-national. At
    times church laws and rules are in variance with national rules and
    laws. The Christians and the Muslims have their own Personal laws. Whom will the
    Christians take orders from-their respective church leaders or the
    government of India when it comes to a national decision? When
    loyalties of a person are divided and clash then there is the likelihood of
    becoming a victim to schizophrenia. A leader from Kashmir proclaimed on
    the floor of the Parliament that he is a Muslim and an Indian. No
    Muslim/Christian will state, 'I am first an Indian and then a
    Muslim/Christian'. One can change one's religion but not one's
    nationality into which one is born.

    Politicians too have abetted this
    by not addressing citizens but focusing on communal/caste/religious
    divide. Another aspect to be noted in the business of conversion is that
    conversions are made even in proxy. A few years ago in Trichy district
    of Tamilnadu a whole list of names were produced in paper and the
    bishop of that evangelical church baptized them in absentia! Would
    this qualify as conversion?

    I belong to the Catholic Church and my
    understanding of conversion is that it is a process-a life long search
    for truth. Conversion is a private affair and not a street
    tamasha-neither is it an activity intended to swell numbers.

    It is not
    that conversion is from one religion to another the Fundamentalist
    churches poach on the grounds of other Christian sects. So the Jesus
    of one church is different from the Jesus of another. This creates
    also distrust and disharmony among the Christian community. Freedom is
    always accompanied by restrictions. Freedom is restricted when it
    encroaches the freedom of others and of a whole society. Rights are
    not hierarchically. When conversions are a threat to peace then it needs to be banned.
    Like the curfew order-the ban to strike etc.

    The million dollar
    question is why conversion? Is it a prerequisite for development work?
    Why are the foreign agencies funding conversion activities?
    It is strange that the fundamental Christians and the churches to
    which they belong do not turn their attention and energy in this
    salvation ensuring business to the Muslims. Development and upliftment
    of the poor is the camouflage of evangelization all the more why the
    need for the churches to work with the Muslims. Because according to
    Sachar report the Muslims are the lowest in India-both economically
    and educationally. Is it not strange that not a single Muslim has been
    converted?

    According to Michael Pinto the Christian population has
    fallen from 2.6 percent in 1971 to 2.3 percent in 2001.This does not
    mean that lakhs are not converted by the hundreds of fundamental
    churches that have mushroomed in the country. Today we are one billion
    so what does the 2.3 indicate in absolute numbers? When one reviews
    numbers a few other indicators must also be listed-Christians follow
    Family planning, the celibacy of nuns and priests, and the fact that
    most of the converts for the sake of reservation and other benefits retain the
    religion and the caste in which they were born on records. Conversion
    has been commercialized by the fundamentalistic churches.

    The number
    of converts is co-related to the quantum of funds that flow in. This
    must not be overlooked. Why not ban foreign funds and watch how
    evangelization evaporates? All laws have their accompanying
    lacunae/loopholes and difficulties in implementation, do we on such
    grounds fight shy of enacting laws? Conversions must be banned to
    ensure peace and harmony. Let us give peace a chance-for peace and
    conversion cannot co-exist.
    Dr. Hilda Raja
    (Former member of the National Advisory committee of the Catholic Bishops Conference in India)

    ReplyDelete