Christian missionaries can get away with murder

India is known for its hospitality towards guests, from allowing Mughals to rule to allowing the traders from Britain to loot to current day where Islamic terrorists bomb every major city and now apparently some of the Christian missionaries hiring goons to kill anyone opposing them and their conversion agenda. The murder of Swami Lakshmanananda in Kandhamal district on August 23 has taken a new twist.
The Maoist rebels have claimed the murder as he was "forcing" the tribals and Dalit Christians to "convert to Hinduism". Apparently the Maoists are now the hired henchmen of the Christian missionaries and can now threaten anyone,

Mr. Panda reiterated his party’s threat to eliminate 14 local leaders of the VHP/RSS and their allied organisations if they did not stop the violence in Kandhamal and end forcible conversion of tribals and Dalits. Tribals were not Hindus, he said.

Why are the Maoists angry when someone is converting to Hinduism?


Why did they not raise a ruckus when Hindus were being converted to Christianity?


Why is LiC not writing in depth about the nexus between the Christians and the Maoist rebels who are terrorists?


The statements below reflect the crazed mind of Mr.Panda in trying to cover up the nexus,

Noting that most of the cadre members and supporters in Orissa belonged to Christian community, Panda said, "It is a fact that Christians are in majority in our organisation.

and this,

We do not believe in any religion or are attached to any religious groups. We are not in favour of any religion

The irony here is that LiC demands multiple companies of the Army be deployed in Orissa, but what about those who are being killed in Assam by Bangladeshi immigrants? Or how about those people being killed in the various cities by Islamic militants? Perhaps LiC will come to his senses when an explosion occurs in his crystal tower in Anna Salai.

Biased coverage dominates Chindu

The writers of this blog have promoted discussions as a way to end all problems as Don Vito Corleone has long suggested. However the recent actions by the Chindu thirsting for vengeance against the mobs who attacked Christians in Orissa almost makes me puke on the screen.
Let us see the incidents by timeline,

1. Swami Lakshmananda, renowned human rights activist and vocal anti conversion supporter is murdered under suspicious circumstances.
2. Mobs riot and burn down churches and other institutions.
3. State government tries to bring the situation under control but fails.
4. Central government warns the State by issuing Article 355.
5. Riots continue and the State is unable to stop the violence.
6. LiC from his high horse in Anna Salai demands Navin Patnaik to protect the Chrisitans in an editorial.
   

Before we go any further, I would like to clearly state that the actions of the mob are not being defended by this blog.

The Chindu has provided expanded coverage to this situation treating it like a mini-Gujrat, perhaps to please its 'secular' bandwagon. There are at least 6 articles in yesterdays paper including the editorial which refer to this, like
CBI probe into nun's rape, Patil threatens Orissa State Govt., Two killed in violence in Orissa, Congess condemns violence and so on...

There are many questions which should be asked that are being swept under the rug questions like,

• Why was Swami Lakshmananda fighting against anti-conversion? Who were the culprits who murdered him?
• Why were the tribals and Dalits taken advantage of by missionaries to be converted to Christianity and where do the missionaries get their money from?
• How is it that the Maoist guerillas who commit so many atrocities in that and neighboring states get away?
• What are the ties between Sonia Maino and the Christian missionaries and their parent organizations whom she allows in so many states?
• Why is the police being made the scapegoat for this and so many other recent incidents?
  

The Chindu lead by its inept LiC appears to be stuck in analysis paralysis.
It decides to jump to conclusions without doing proper analysis.
I would recommend thinking deeply about this incident and ask the proper questions.

A Critique of Ammu Joseph's Article on Conversions

Guest Post by (Shrivathsa.Brahma):

Christian/muslim/communist apologetics is regularly bandied out as genuine intellectual discourse by chindu. The article by Ammu Joseph is a case in point.

The conclusions from the article could be summarised as follows:

• Although the christian missionaries target vulnerable populations, one has to trust the wisdom of the same vulnerable populations who "make use of the educational, healthcare and other services of faith-based organisations without changing their creed", because you see, "After all, these are the people — not the educated middle classes — who repeatedly throw up election results that surprise and baffle political pollsters and pundits." The fact that malicious means are used to convert, the fact that physical force is used to convert, the fact that economic pressure is used to convert, all stand obfuscated.


• Although the church has indulged in malicious slander of Hindu Gods and given rise to conflicts in converts' families, its ok because "for every story about a family divided by religious conversion there are many about families who find their own amicable ways of dealing with religious difference". Hail the (Indian?) family!


• Although there is an open religious conflict in kandamahal, it is because of "a number of complex factors, including issues of land and livelihood, contributed to the recent eruption of prolonged violence — especially in Orissa. As in other situations, what appears to be a communal conflict is not necessarily or primarily rooted in religion. However, the power of religion is often used to rally the troops on either side of any divide". Even if you grant that  there are issues of "land and livelihood" in kandamahal? and for how long were they there? if they are here recently, who is the reason for such conflicts?


• Although the christian religion is intolerant of any dissent, it is ok because "For instance, on a trip to Israel with a group of Indian artists (all Hindu) a couple of years ago, I found that many of them were more enthusiastic about genuflecting and lighting candles in various churches than I was". No acknowledgement or appreciation of the "pUjya bhAva" in the hindus towards anything projected as divinity, hence I think this sentence is a condescending remark. 


• "At the same time it is impossible to disregard the role of religion as a source of security, comfort, succour and hope for large numbers of people. Many middle class Indians of different faiths find meaning in the teachings of one or other of a wide range of gurus (past and present), join various religious movements, and choose to make vows at places of pilgrimage associated with religions other than their own ...... Why then should Dalits or Adivasis — or any other citizens — not seek refuge in whatever faith answers their particular needs, spiritual or otherwise, at particular times? What right does anyone else have to question their right to do so". Seems like a QED, but what about the question of intolerance in the christian faith? what about the malicious slander they indulge in against Hindu Gods and Godesses? Have any of the "wide range of gurus (past and present)" ever indulged in slander of christianity? Have any of the "wide range of gurus (past and present)" ever taken advantage of the hunger to convert a person?


• "For example, in his closing speech Dr. K.M. Munshi, well-known champion of Indian culture and founder of the Bharatiya Vidya Bhavan, justified the inclusion of the right to propagate (along with the right to profess and practice) religion, saying: "I am sure, under the freedom of speech which the Constitution guarantees, it will be open to any religious community to persuade other people to join their faith. So long as religion is religion, conversion by free exercise of conscience has to be recognised. The word 'propagate' in this clause is nothing very much out of the way as some people think, nor is it fraught with dangerous consequences." " QED again.


• "What a sea change there has been in public discourse in this country over the past few decades. If anything endangers Indian society and culture today it is the virtual abandonment of civilised debate over political and ideological differences and the widespread adoption of violent means to all kinds of ends." The writer here has totally obfuscated the fact as to who started the violence first. Was Swami Lakshmanananda Saraswati killed by a bolt of lightning from high up in the sky? Or was he killed by the christians?


• "At a time when unacceptably large numbers of Indians continue to have no access to basic needs such as food and shelter, when too many have too little access to education and healthcare, and when there is extensive unemployment and economic exploitation, not to mention social exclusion, across the land maybe we all need to rethink our priorities. Is religious conversion the best that we can do? Is it the worst?". This sentence seems to be either 
  
  
  
  • a planned addition to beguile those ones like me who generally look at the beginning and end of an article to see a writer's "abstract" and the end for its "conclusion". I hope the editor/publisher didn't fall into a similar trap.
  
  
  • Or it should be that the writer is genuinely confused that she concludes something one sidedly in the middle of the article and then she puts the same conclusion to question at the end of the article.

Conversion Conundrum

I was intrigued by two articles today on the recent violence in Orissa. One is by Soumitro Das in the Hindustan Times which takes a strongly anti-VHP line (Given her views, I am quite surprised that she has never written in The Hindu before). An excerpt is indicated below though I recommend to our readers to read the entire article:

On the Christian side, thanks to the Foreign Contributions Regulation Act, the Home Ministry is in possession of the Annual Report on Foreign Contributions for 2005-06. It lays out in minute detail the funds received by churches and Christian organisations in India. We know, for example, that the top donors are church-based or Christian-inspired organisations from the US, Britain, Germany, the Netherlands and Italy. We also know that a greater part of the funds — Rs 7,785 crore — goes to mainly Christian and church-based organisations in India. According to the Home Ministry’s analysis, the major part of the fund are spent on disaster relief and establishment costs. Welfare of scheduled tribes gets only Rs 25 crore and welfare of scheduled Castes only Rs 9 crore. The rest of the money goes into social work — building of schools, colleges, hospitals, etc. Nowhere is the word proselytisation mentioned. There are also no records of mass conversions.

Hence, the Sangh parivar’s argument that Christian charitable and social work is a disguise to convert ‘innocent, illiterate’ tribals and Dalits is a lie — at least as far as the records go. The Home Ministry report also tells us that the bulk of the money is spent in Tamil Nadu, Andhra Pradesh and Delhi — not in Orissa or Gujarat.

Note her claim that the Sangh Parivar's argument is a lie. She asserts that no money is being spent by missionaries and there is no record of mass conversion.

I found a second report in the Washington Post on the same topic. Here is the relevant excerpt:

Conversions to Christianity have been happening fast among impoverished tribal communities in Kandhamal, a remote district with few links to the outside world or state services. The Christian population here, largely made up of traditionally nature-worshiping ethnic groups, has swelled from 6 percent in 1971 to 27 percent today, according to government census data.

Some people who convert often get better access to schools and health clinics run by Western Christian groups.

My question: Can they both be right or is one of them lying? Perhaps there have been no mass conversions but that does not discount a much more insidious process. If so, that might explain the census data but it still leaves the question of financing unanswered. Do the missionary organizations have other sources of funding besides foreign aid or have they found a way to bring in that money bypassing the government scanner?