[dropcap]W[/dropcap]ith religious issues spurting up yet again, one is reminded of the violence on communal line in Odisha in the early 2000’s and the heinous Crime that occurred in the late 90s in the same state. When the macabre that happened on the night of 22nd -23rd January 1999, where Grahm Staines and his two minor sons were burnt alive, the then prime minister Atal Behari Vajpayee promptly offered a debate on conversion. Though such a debate would distort a lot of truth, one cannot deny the good sense behind Vajpyee’s offer who understood the urgent need to let the people properly understand secularism and conversion in order to bring communal harmony. The holder of the highest office of the most powerful state, Barack Obama, must have had good reasons behind his remark on secular India.The growing intolerance between different religious communities is a great danger to India’s secular character. Religion in India is alienating people in all spheres; one is made to view the other as a threat. At this juncture, an unbiased through examination of communal related issues would help towards communal harmony.
Religious tolerance would be a far cry in a society like the Indian society where everyone points a finger at the other and finds faults while holding their religion superior and beyond imperfection. Christians are accused of proselytizing, Muslims of destroying temples and replacing them with mosques, Hindus of evil practices like sati, caste and so on. These levels of accusation in some cases are genuine. Christians cannot deny proselytizing, who believe it is their duty to preach and spread the gospel, Christians and Muslims take idol worship as false. ‘Fatwa’ and ‘Jihad’, show extend of intolerance within religion. Xenophobia could be the answer to Hindus fundamentalism, being ruled by other races for centuries anything foreign is taken as a threat to their culture. This fear psychosis could be the reason behind Hindus lack of trust towards Muslim and Christians.
According to the Indian constitution religious freedom is a fundamental right (article 25-28). The framers of the constitution have, in so far as Article 25 and 30 are concern, the interest of the minority community is safeguarded. Article 25 reads that every person is equally entitled to freedom of conscience and right to profess, practice and propagate any religion of his choice. The next clause excludes the minority from the reformatory authority of the state. Further more, Article 30 gives minority community to establish and administer institutions of their choice. The article further provides a safeguard to the minorities against the whims of the majority and thus, provides a seemingly equality and a democracy where head count is important. This may seem contrary to article 25, but this was the only way to ally the fear of minorities. It may also be noted that though the word ‘secular’ was not mentioned in the original preamble of the constitution, however, the ‘right to freedom of religion’ was included in the original constitution as a basic rights of the people.
The exception of the principle of equal entitlement to religious freedom were possible granted by the farmers of the constitution with the best intention to dispel apprehension, if any, from the minds of the religious minorities about domination by majority, so that they would, of their own free will joint the national integration. The best intention did not pave the desired path since in the most cases such freedom has been misused.
According to the judgment of 1997 (Stainnilus vs state of MP), ‘The right to propagate one’s religion means, the right to communicate a personal belief to another person or to expose the tenets of that faith, but would not include to ‘convert’ another to formers faith’. Thus the decision to convert lies with the individual.
Religion is usually inherited; people are brought up to believe in certain religion. Religious values are among the central values for many. If an individual ceased to belief in a particular region, it would mean not only a transition to another system or believes, but also, a radical change in the values that govern the life of that person. Any form of conversion without true faith is not justified. Induced conversion, not of spiritual, will surely invite the wrath of the followers of his formers religion.
Secularism in India, as implied in the constitution, means there is no official state religion; that all religion get equal treatment and respect; that individual has the freedom to practice any religion according to his conscience; that no person has the right to convert another person except by that person’s free choice; that individual alone is responsible for his belief and worship. Thus, the Indian constitution clearly gives freedom to the individual in religious matter. The individual, rational and intelligent, should be left alone to decide his faith. Religion is a personal matter which should have no place in politics or any other activities for that matter.
T.PENTHUNGO LOTHA
BBC, WOKHA, NAGALAND.
