Modi seeks to save Christians from Leftists and Muslims

[mindlight]

‘Deeply distressing’ to see violent riots against citizenship bill aimed at shielding victims of persecution outside India – Modi

Been interested to follow the BBCs obsession with the protests in India as if the government is the bad guys for offering asylum to Christians being persecuted in Muslim countries.

It really is a good example of the antichristian bias of the BBC and their willingness to turn a blind eye to the persecution of minorites by Muslims in Muslim majority countries.

 

[durangodawood]

‘Deeply distressing’ to see violent riots against citizenship bill aimed at shielding victims of persecution outside India – Modi

Been interested to follow the BBCs obsession with the protests in India as if the government is the bad guys for offering asylum to Christians being persecuted in Muslim countries.

It really is a good example of the antichristian bias of the BBC and their willingness to turn a blind eye to the persecution of minorites by Muslims in Muslim majority countries.

I'm fine with offering refuge to persecuted minorites.

But my understanding is that India is proposing an actual religious test for admission. India can do what it wants, of course. But I think thats a bad principle.

 

[mindlight]

I'm fine with offering refuge to persecuted minorites.

But my understanding is that India is proposing an actual religious test for admission. India can do what it wants, of course. But I think thats a bad principle.

Why!? Muslims are doing the persecuting in the countries these people are running away from, why should India be letting in the same people who caused the problem that people are running away from.

 

[durangodawood]

Why!? Muslims are doing the persecuting in the countries these people are running away from, why should India be letting in the same people who caused the problem that people are running away from.

If refugee status is really the issue, then isnt there some requirement to demonstrate actual persecution? If so, then a religious test is neither here nor there. Heck theres muslims from myanmar whove been hounded out of their country.

Oh and you tricked me into clicking on RT!

 

[mindlight]

If refugee status is really the issue, then isnt there some requirement to demonstrate actual persecution? If so, then a religious test is neither here nor there. Heck theres muslims from myanmar whove been hounded out of their country.

Oh and you tricked me into clicking on RT!

In some countries it is just enough to declare yourself a Christian and you know that person has been persecuted.

The BBC is running the opposite story that this is somehow discrimination against Muslims. It is the age old dilemma that WEstern news agencies are completely silent in the defence of Christians being persecuted in Muslim countries but listen to them roar when free Muslims in the West take offence.

 

[durangodawood]

....The BBC is running the opposite story that this is somehow discrimination against Muslims.....

Wait... a law that admits all but Muslims is somehow discriminatory against Muslims?

Somehow?

 

[adrianmonk]

The BBC is running the opposite story that this is somehow discrimination against Muslims.

It IS discrimination against Muslims. If refugees are denied entry solely on their religion, then they are being discriminated against. There are muslims who are persecuted in Muslim countries such as the Ahmaddiyas.

India by its constitution is a secular country. A religious test violates the constitution. Even though the bill has been passed, it could go up to the supreme court which can strike it down.

This law has other potential ramifications as well, such as a stepping stone to denying Indian Muslims equal rights as other citizens.

 

[mindlight]

It IS discrimination against Muslims. If refugees are denied entry solely on their religion, then they are being discriminated against. There are muslims who are persecuted in Muslim countries such as the Ahmaddiyas.

India by its constitution is a secular country. A religious test violates the constitution. Even though the bill has been passed, it could go up to the supreme court which can strike it down.

This law has other potential ramifications as well, such as a stepping stone to denying Indian Muslims equal rights as other citizens.

In extreme example Muslims refugees are still being let in. But these are the people doing the persecuting even the sects and sometimes especially the sects. The Indians have drafted a law that has more basis in reality than in modern legal claims to "impartiality".

 

[adrianmonk]

But these are the people doing the persecuting even the sects and sometimes especially the sects

I assume you have proof that muslims coming in as refugees have been persecuting others ? Or is your sole basis the fact they are Muslim ? There are refugees coming in for better opportunity as well. Most are poor people.

The Indians have drafted a law that has more basis in reality than in modern legal claims to "impartiality"

More basis in reality ? How so ? This law violates freedom of religion. The law MUST be impartial to religious affiliation so as not to violate the constitution. If this is passed, what is to stop another law from stating that your citizenship is revoked if you are Muslim ? India has 200 million muslim citizens. What if they say you MUST be Hindu to be a citizen and starts persecuting Christians ? Would you be opposed to that law ? What if the current law only allowed Hindus and denies the same privileges to Christians ? Would you be against it then ?

This isn't to say that refugees should not be vetted. But a blanket ban based on religious affiliation is a terrible idea.

 

[dzheremi]

This seems like a very bad, poorly thought-out law. I can't speak for India, but Christians from the Middle East and North Africa -- where much persecution is happening -- tend to be against this kind of thing, precisely because they know what it is like to be excluded from society based on their religion, despite being citizens and builders of those societies. It isn't right. It isn't how we're supposed to treat each other.

In the words of HH Pope Shenouda III of thrice-blessed memory:

"We don't accept to be distinguished from other Egyptians. And also we don't accept the word 'minority' in such a meaning of claiming political rights or for foreign help. We are Egyptians, a part of Egypt, of the same nation, and not to be distinguished in any matter."

No doubt there are many Muslims in India or of Indian descent who could say similar things regarding their relationship to India. Are their persecutors among that same population? Yes, definitely. But there are persecutors in probably every population (India has so many ethnic groups I don't want to generalize, yet they are all still humans, and humans tend to like and be very good asserting their dominance over others), even those who are not specifically excluded by the law. If you start saying none of them can come because look at what some of them do or might do, you open up a rather big Pandora's box into which more and more populations may be put -- including some in Modi's own BJP party, as that is a Hindu nationalist party so there is a certain faction within it that seeks to persecute Christians under various anti-conversion laws. (See NCR story here.)

I find it hard to believe that this something a Christian would support just because it doesn't specifically exclude us.

 

[mindlight]

I assume you have proof that muslims coming in as refugees have been persecuting others ? Or is your sole basis the fact they are Muslim ? There are refugees coming in for better opportunity as well. Most are poor people.

Living in Germany I have experience of Muslim refugees. We welcomed them in as a matter of compassion. I have sat with them and listened to their stories initially with some sympathy and then later with frustration as only a few of these have become Christians. A great many are young men seeking to escape military service for one tin pot terrorist/ warlord or another, others are just looking for a better life. But their fears or aspirations are not real grounds for asylum whatever story they make up to justify that. The real asylum stories come from Christians or Yazidis who have been dispossessed of their properties by Muslims mobs, raped by gangs of Muslim youths and chased from here to Kingdom come by murderers and terrorists using the Quran to justify their actions.

Maybe you have never read the Quran or studied Muslim history, its expansion by violence its incessant threats of hell fire for those who contradict the prophet, Muhammads murdered opponents of his version of the truth! The book is there to pick up and read. In recent years most global terrorism is rooted in some form of Islam : Al Quaeda, the Taliban, Boko Haram, Hamas, Hezbollah... the list is long.

India has fought 4 wars against Muslim Pakistan and Pakistan started all of them. Despite that they have protected the rights of Indian Muslims and none of these are effected by this new law. They are being sensible in deciding not to import trouble from Muslim countries, while showing compassion for the victims of persecution from these countries.

More basis in reality ? How so ? This law violates freedom of religion. The law MUST be impartial to religious affiliation so as not to violate the constitution. If this is passed, what is to stop another law from stating that your citizenship is revoked if you are Muslim ? India has 200 million muslim citizens. What if they say you MUST be Hindu to be a citizen and starts persecuting Christians ? Would you be opposed to that law ? What if the current law only allowed Hindus and denies the same privileges to Christians ? Would you be against it then ?

This isn't to say that refugees should not be vetted. But a blanket ban based on religious affiliation is a terrible idea.

The law regarding citizens has to be impartial in a secular state, there is no requirement or rule that says how compassion for genuine victims of Muslim persecution cannot be picked out for asylum over Muslims who very often have been the perpetrators of that persecution.

The Indian law is not actually a blanket ban and it allows for some Muslim refugees when these are very clearly being persecuted

 

[mindlight]

This seems like a very bad, poorly thought-out law. I can't speak for India, but Christians from the Middle East and North Africa -- where much persecution is happening -- tend to be against this kind of thing, precisely because they know what it is like to be excluded from society based on their religion, despite being citizens and builders of those societies. It isn't right. It isn't how we're supposed to treat each other.

In the words of HH Pope Shenouda III of thrice-blessed memory:

"We don't accept to be distinguished from other Egyptians. And also we don't accept the word 'minority' in such a meaning of claiming political rights or for foreign help. We are Egyptians, a part of Egypt, of the same nation, and not to be distinguished in any matter."

No doubt there are many Muslims in India or of Indian descent who could say similar things regarding their relationship to India. Are their persecutors among that same population? Yes, definitely. But there are persecutors in probably every population (India has so many ethnic groups I don't want to generalize, yet they are all still humans, and humans tend to like and be very good asserting their dominance over others), even those who are not specifically excluded by the law. If you start saying none of them can come because look at what some of them do or might do, you open up a rather big Pandora's box into which more and more populations may be put -- including some in Modi's own BJP party, as that is a Hindu nationalist party so there is a certain faction within it that seeks to persecute Christians under various anti-conversion laws. (See NCR story here.)

I find it hard to believe that this something a Christian would support just because it doesn't specifically exclude us.

Hinduvata or Muslims both persecute Christians, but here we have an example of a law that might actually save Christian lives. True law is about obedience to God not weighing two lies and a truth and trying to find a neutral position to moderate between the three

 

[adrianmonk]

Living in Germany I have a lot of experience of Muslim refugees. We welcomed them in as a matter of compassion. I have sat with them and listened to their stories initially with some sympathy and then later with frustration as only a few of these have become Christians. A great many are young men seeking to escape military service for one tin pot terrorist/ warlord or another, others are just looking for a better life. But their fears or aspirations are not real grounds for asylum whatever story they make up to justify that. The real asylum stories come from Christians or Yazidis or have been dispossessed of their properties by Muslims mobs, raped by gangs of Muslim youths and chased from here to Kingdom come by murderers and terrorists using the Quran to justify their actions.

(text emphasized by me)

Why did you want them to convert ? Was them converting essential in maintaining your compassion ? I think being forced to fight for a warlord is a legitimate reason to escape.

Maybe you have never read the Quran or studied Muslim history, its expansion by violence its incessant threats of hell fire for those who contradict the prophet, Muhammads murdered opponents of his version of the truth! The book is there to pick up and read. In recent years most global terrorism is rooted in some form of Islam : Al Quaeda, the Taliban, Boko Haram, Hamas, Hezbollah... the list is long.

I have read both. I lived and grew up in a middle eastern country, and I know full well what it feels like to be discriminated because of religion.

Regarding those groups, they have killed just as many Muslims, if not more than other religions. Saying that Muslims refugees should be abandoned because they are Muslim and some other muslims persecute minorities is a terrible stance to take. Even more so, when I consider your statement about losing compassion for muslims who did not convert.

India has fought 4 wars against Muslim Pakistan and Pakistan started all of them. Despite that they have protected the rights of Indian Muslims and none of these are effected by this new law. They are being sensible in deciding not to import trouble from Muslim countries, while showing compassion for the victims of persecution from these countries.

Yes there have been 4 wars. As an individual of Indian origin, I am fully aware of the circumstances of those conflicts. This however does not change the fact that many muslims want to escape other muslim regimes. I mentioned Ahmadis in my previous post, who are being discriminated against in many Islamic countries including Pakistan and Bangladesh. This law does not have any protections for atheists either. Do you agree with that as well ?

Modi's party, the BJP has advocated discriminating and persecuting christians in the recent past. If they are allowed to discriminate against Muslims with this law, that creates a precedent for them to start discriminating against Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains and the many other religions that have a home in India.

India was founded as a Secular country. This means that the government MUST NOT be allowed to discriminate on religion. It is a short step from this to discrimination against Indian Muslim citizens.

 

[adrianmonk]

Hinduvata or Muslims both persecute Christians, but here we have an example of a law that might actually save Christian lives. True law is about obedience to God not weighing two lies and a truth and trying to find a neutral position to moderate between the three

Hindutva is is Hindu nationalist ideology practiced by the BJP. The same party that Modi belongs to. And the same party that wrote these laws. They are attempting to marginalize Muslims today, tomorrow it might be Christians who are much more of a minority than Muslims in India.

 

[adrianmonk]

The Indians have drafted a law that has more basis in reality than in modern legal claims to "impartiality".

You still have not answered my question.

If the law only allowed refugees who are Hindu, Sikh, Buddhists and Jains, but excluded Muslims and Christians, would you have a problem with it ?

 

[mindlight]

(text emphasized by me)

Why did you want them to convert ? Was them converting essential in maintaining your compassion ? I think being forced to fight for a warlord is a legitimate reason to escape.

Because I know where Muslims, Hindus and atheists are going and want to give them a chance to avoid that because it is far worse than any war zone any real soldier has ever been in. But notice I held no knife to a persons throat and I showed them no movies of headless Christian martyrs in my evangelism attempts which was simple presentation of Christs love, a cooked meal, a few games of chess. There are a great many converts from the Muslims that came from the Middle East , a great many more are de facto atheists sick to the back teeth of what they have seen and heard of religion. Maybe many of these will find the truth later who knows, that alone would justify that Germany opened its gates for a time. But as I said the church that fled from this hell are the ones who truly deserve the freedoms they now enjoy.

I have read both. I lived and grew up in a middle eastern country, and I know full well what it feels like to be discriminated because of religion.

Regarding those groups, they have killed just as many Muslims, if not more than other religions. Saying that Muslims refugees should be abandoned because they are Muslim and some other muslims persecute minorities is a terrible stance to take. Even more so, when I consider your statement about losing compassion for muslims who did not convert.

The integration of Muslims into Western society is one of the most pressing challenges we face. That the Indians are already familiar with these difficulties explains a lot. Muslims running to India are running from one kind of darkness to another but Christians bring the light with them.

Yes there have been 4 wars. As an individual of Indian origin, I am fully aware of the circumstances of those conflicts. This however does not change the fact that many muslims want to escape other muslim regimes. I mentioned Ahmadis in my previous post, who are being discriminated against in many Islamic countries including Pakistan and Bangladesh. This law does not state protections for Atheists either. Do you agree with that as well ?

My family were in India for 150 years as Christians in a dark society where I believe they did a lot of good as engineers and teachers and by staying true to waht they believed. I also believe in freedom of religion and this is the Indian law also. Muslims and atheists in India are not effected by this law about immigration. This is merely an immigration points system based on religion rather than money like the Australian one which the British want to adopt also. At least the Indians are prioritising the spiritual scores over the economic ones and the West could learn from that as it is these scores that matter most.

Modi's party, the BJP has advocated discriminating and persecuting christians in the recent past. If they are allowed to discriminate against Muslims with this law, that creates a precedent for them to start discriminating against Christians, Buddhists, Sikhs, Jains and the many other religions that have a home in India.

India was founded as a Secular country. This means that the government MUST NOT be allowed to discriminate on religion. It is a short step from this to discrimination against Indian Muslim citizens.

Hinduvata is a problem and I have run threads moaning about that in the past and their treatment of Christians. But it is a big step to make from an immigration law to changes to the constitution regarding freedom of religion and also given the sheer numbers of Muslims in INdia it is an impossibility that INdia could make such a change without open revolution occurring in the country.

In true secular fashion you present a list of religions as if they were equivalents but they are not, there are children of darkness and of light, of God and Satan. It sounds harsh to someone who does not know God but that does not alter the truth of it. Only the church and those who will be saved are worth saving the rest are going to hell to be burnt up like chaff.

 

[adrianmonk]

Because I know where Muslims, Hindus and atheists are going and want to give them a chance to avoid that because it is far worse than any war zone any real soldier has ever been in. But notice I held no knife to a persons throat and I showed them no movies of headless Christian martyrs in my evangelism attempts which was simple presentation of Christs love, a cooked meal, a few games of chess. There are a great many converts from the Muslims that came from the Middle East , a great many more are de facto atheists sick to the back teeth of what they have seen and heard of religion. Maybe many of these will find the truth later who knows, that alone would justify that Germany opened its gates for a time. But as I said the church that fled from this hell are the ones who truly deserve the freedoms they now enjoy.

Yet, according to you, your compassion faded when they did not convert. And where exactly are they going ? And how have you verified this ?

The integration of Muslims into Western society is one of the most pressing challenges we face. That the Indians are already familiar with these difficulties explains a lot. Muslims running to India are running from one kind of darkness to another but Christians bring the light with them.

Funny, here in the US, we don't seem to have a problem of integration. Most people tend to integrate here quite well. I would need more proof about this light and darkness you speak of.

My family were in India for 150 years as Christians in a dark society where I believe they did a lot of good as engineers and teachers and by staying true to waht they believed. I also believe in freedom of religion and this is the Indian law also. Muslims and atheists in India are not effected by this law about immigration. This is merely an immigration points system based on religion rather than money like the Australian one which the British want to adopt also. At least the Indians are prioritising the spiritual scores over the economic ones and the West could learn from that as it is these scores that matter most.

I assume you mean British in India due to your "Ein Englander in Deutschland" signature. What exactly do you mean by "Dark Society" ? Do you mean people practicing religions other than Christianity ? There are enough written accounts of persecution of non Christians by the British and Portuguese during the time they were in India. Granted the British did do a lot of good things, but they also did a lot of terrible things.

How can you say you believe in freedom of religion when you support discrimination based on religion ? Many Indian citizens in Assam have been denied recognition of their citizenship. Most of these are Muslims. An immigration points system based on religion is by its very nature a violation of the freedom to religion clause in the Indian constitution.

Hinduvata is a problem and I have run threads moaning about that in the past and their treatment of Christians. But it is a big step to make from an immigration law to changes to the constitution regarding freedom of religion and also given the sheer numbers of Muslims in INdia it is an impossibility that INdia could make such a change without open revolution occurring in the country.

In true secular fashion you present a list of religions as if they were equivalents but they are not, there are children of darkness and of light, of God and Satan. It sounds harsh to someone who does not know God but that does not alter the truth of it. Only the church and those who will be saved are worth saving the rest are going to hell to be burnt up like chaff.

In the eyes of the government they are equivalent. Always. In a secular society, no religion should be held higher or lower than others. Doing so is discrimination, and invites members of the 'approved religions' to discriminate against the others.

Just because something is near impossible to be done in one step, does not mean you can't do it in multiple smaller steps. Which is exactly what these laws are doing. It normalizes discrimination and sets a bad precedent.

 

[dzheremi]

Hinduvata or Muslims both persecute Christians, but here we have an example of a law that might actually save Christian lives. True law is about obedience to God not weighing two lies and a truth and trying to find a neutral position to moderate between the three

Plenty of things might save Christian lives, but that doesn't make them the right thing to do. It might save Christian lives to ban all Salafis from Egypt, but the government kinda already tried that once and all they got from it was a stronger underground movement that was suddenly the only organized opposition with the necessary numbers, connections, and financing to take over the country with the overthrow of Mubarak. Many bad things ensued, not just for Christians but for all Egyptians. (And many more bad things happened when the people and the army rose up to take the Salafis' puppet away, and this time much more to Christians than to others.)

And to make a law that governs a pluralistic society like India, you simply can't mandate that everyone follow your truth...and you certainly can't do that when you're something like 2.5% of the society. This isn't the west where a tiny minority gets to rule everything and force everyone to abide by their dictates because they're obviously morally right.

 

[FireDragon76]

This isn't primarily about Christian refugees, but for the substantial number of Hindus that live in Pakistan who are subject to persecution.

I agree that there are Muslims such as the Ahmadiyya that can legitimately claim to be persecuted for their religion. So I think ultimately this is just an anti-Muslim law.

 

[FireDragon76]

It sounds harsh to someone who does not know God but that does not alter the truth of it. Only the church and those who will be saved are worth saving the rest are going to hell to be burnt up like chaff.

This attitudes does nothing to commend your worldview to me. To have so little compassion for ones fellow human beings as to dismiss them as chaff for a fire is astounding.