Online edition of India's National Newspaper
Thursday, Oct 10, 2002

About Us
Contact Us
Opinion
News: Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |

Opinion - Letters to the Editor Printer Friendly Page   Send this Article to a Friend

Exercise in futility

Sir, — The Tamil Nadu ordinance on conversion is not only childish but also mischievous and, above all, unconstitutional. The Constitution, drafted by the best legal luminaries such as B. R. Ambedkar, Benegal Narsing Rao and Alladi Krishnaswamy Iyer knew how proselytisation worked. Therefore, they made freedom of worship an important ingredient in the enumeration of fundamental rights.

If we extend the principle behind this hastily thought-out and promulgated ordinance to other aspects of life, one can understand the futility of the exercise. Instead of looking at conversion, the Chief Minister, Jayalalithaa, should enunciate, promulgate and implement rules and regulations to stop corruption and oppression of individuals. The Koothamkulam episode is a testimony for the irrelevance of the ordinance. An ineffective Government cannot get accolades for meaningless ordinances.

R. Narsimhan,

Chennai

* * *

Sir, — This has reference to your Editorial "Unwarranted move'' (Oct. 8). By attacking Sonia Gandhi's Italian origin and formulating an unconstitutional and anti-minority law, Ms. Jayalalithaa could surely cosy up to the BJP but not the voters. In the wake of the not-so-long-ago Gujarat riots, even the BJP's position is at stake. You have rightly pointed out to the ambiguity of the newly-framed ordinance.

Reema Sahay,

Chennai

* * *

Sir, — The Editorial rightly points to the real problem — of determining what constitutes "use of force, allurement and fraudulent means" in conversion. Can a person, forcibly subjected to the rituals of `conversion,' be deemed as `converted?' By the term ``allurement" and ``fraudulent means,'' the ordinance probably envisages only monetary benefits but should not the promise of a fabulous life in heaven or a ``nirvana'' after death be considered an ``allurement?''

These are questions that must be addressed before the ordinance becomes a law.

John P. Anthony,

Hyderabad

* * *

Sir, — The Global Council of Indian Christians has demanded the immediate withdrawal of the ordinance on conversions. What is wrong in prohibiting forcible conversions?

The missionaries are making use of the drought conditions in the State and extending loans to poor villagers. If they are unable to repay, the missionaries extend the offer that if the villagers convert, they will be taken off the hook of debt burden. Conversions are motivated and have geopolitical ramifications for the nationhood of India and its hard earned freedom.

Laura Kelly,

Bangalore

Printer friendly page  
Send this article to Friends by E-Mail

Opinion

News: Front Page | National | Southern States | Other States | International | Opinion | Business | Sport | Miscellaneous |
Advts:
Classifieds | Employment | Obituary |


The Hindu Group: Home | About Us | Copyright | Archives | Contacts | Subscription
Group Sites: The Hindu | Business Line | The Sportstar | Frontline | Home |

Copyright © 2002, The Hindu. Republication or redissemination of the contents of this screen are expressly prohibited without the written consent of The Hindu