Thursday, June 18, 2009

Vijayvaani.com Interfaith dialogue: in whose interest? - I

  • Interfaith dialogue: in whose interest? - I
  • tags: no_tag

    • B R Haran
    • Hindus have co-existed with other indigenous creeds (Buddhists, Jains, Sikhs and others) without problems for ages, and the peace and harmony prevailing in this great Hindu land was affected only with the advent of Abrahamic faiths, mainly Islam and Christianity, which oppressed the Hindu majority in various ways.
    • Monotheistic religions have no space for non-believers (in Allah or Mohammed or Yahweh or Jesus).
    • Christianity introduced the concept of secularism in western society in order to end sectarian fratricide; as Hindus have no concept or tradition of such murderous sectarianism, secularism in India can at best be a quality of administration by the state.
    • India  lost huge territory when Pakistan was born, along with the current Bangladesh. Since then, the north-east has been Christianised; Kashmir is in trouble; so is Goa; 50% of Kerala is lost to minorities; large parts of Maharashtra, Bihar and Uttar Pradesh have become Islamic; a large portion of Karnataka, Andhra and Tamil Nadu have become Christianised.
    • When things go beyond tolerance, the majority reacts spontaneously, as happened in Gujarat, Orissa, Karnataka and Jammu (Amarnath). After such reactions, the Hindu majority reverts to its usual tolerant self, hoping that the minority with which conflict took place would also settle down, but the ‘Marxist-media-minority’ nexus plays ugly ‘victimhood’ games in the international arena, bringing disrepute to the country. 

    • The Catholic leadership always blames other denominations for “unethical” and “forced” conversions during these so-called interfaith dialogues, in order to convince leaders of other faiths to accept the dangerous concept of “ethical” conversions.
    • Dhimmitude resulted from Nehruvian secularism and impacted Hindus so much that they cannot see the monster standing gleefully before their eyes; they are still in deep slumber.

    • Some religious leaders are averse to identifying themselves and their ‘teachings’ as ‘Hindu;’ they are more interested in marketing their wares in a global market, than in spreading dharma among the masses in the remotest hamlets.

Posted from Diigo. The rest of my favorite links are here.