Comments on: The Anti-Conversion Bill violates the freedom of Conscience and the freedom of expression http://www.groundviews.org/2009/01/25/the-anti-conversion-bill-violates-the-freedom-of-conscience-and-the-freedom-of-expression/ groundviews is an award winning Sri Lankan citizen journalism initiative Thu, 09 Sep 2010 17:51:29 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1 By: Just Someone http://www.groundviews.org/2009/01/25/the-anti-conversion-bill-violates-the-freedom-of-conscience-and-the-freedom-of-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-11317 Just Someone Fri, 27 Nov 2009 07:19:49 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1085#comment-11317 Perhaps a bill is necessary to control Christian Fundamentalism in Sri Lanka. Several Indian states already have such a bill (despite India claiming to be a secular country) and it seems to have worked in stemming Hindu-Christian conflict. I think we could learn from the Indians in this regard. Christian Fundamentalism is not amenable to reason and takes advantage of the poor and those who are desperate, as seen in the recent deaths of two women at Viharamadevi Park. It deserves to be challenged, I think. Perhaps a bill is necessary to control Christian Fundamentalism in Sri Lanka. Several Indian states already have such a bill (despite India claiming to be a secular country) and it seems to have worked in stemming Hindu-Christian conflict. I think we could learn from the Indians in this regard. Christian Fundamentalism is not amenable to reason and takes advantage of the poor and those who are desperate, as seen in the recent deaths of two women at Viharamadevi Park. It deserves to be challenged, I think.

]]> By: Heshan http://www.groundviews.org/2009/01/25/the-anti-conversion-bill-violates-the-freedom-of-conscience-and-the-freedom-of-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-11311 Heshan Fri, 27 Nov 2009 03:29:52 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1085#comment-11311 Yet another fine example of Sinhala-Buddhism in action. Yet another fine example of Sinhala-Buddhism in action.

]]> By: Off the Cuff http://www.groundviews.org/2009/01/25/the-anti-conversion-bill-violates-the-freedom-of-conscience-and-the-freedom-of-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-11296 Off the Cuff Thu, 26 Nov 2009 20:37:08 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1085#comment-11296 The PRIMARY law of the country cannot be over ridden by any secondary law. This fact is overlooked by most posters who allow emotions to override sanity. What is the Primary law regarding Religion? This is what it states Freedom of thought, conscience and religion. 10. Every person is entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice. If for any reason the above is interfered with the aggrieved person can and should obtain relief from the Supreme Court. The relief requested should include punitive damages (if such is allowed) All arguments that claim that the State is interfering with a person's religious belief fails due to this This is what the Supreme Court said of the Original bill in 2004 "In view of our findings that clause 3 arid Clause 4(b) of the bill violate Article 10 of the Constitution the bill in its present form has to be passed by not less than 2/3'd of the whole number of members (including those not present) and approved by the people at a referendum in terms of Article 83(a) of the Constitution." You will note that the Supreme Court makes a direct reference to the PRIMARY Law This bill is not an Anti Conversion bill but an Anti FORCIBLE conversion Bill Here is what the bill says 1. This Act may be cited as the Prohibition of Forcible Conversion of Religion Act, No. of 2004 2. No person shall convert or attempt to convert, either Forcible directly or otherwise, any person from one religion to another conversion by the use of force or by allurement or by any fraudulent legal, means nor shall any person aid or abet any such conversion. Omission of the word FORCIBLE in discussing this bill amounts to Deception and Dishonesty Being sanctimonious about freedoms and Democracy after such dishonesty would sound very hollow indeed. The PRIMARY law of the country cannot be over ridden by any secondary law. This fact is overlooked by most posters who allow emotions to override sanity.

What is the Primary law regarding Religion? This is what it states

Freedom of thought, conscience and religion.

10. Every person is entitled to freedom of thought, conscience and religion, including the freedom to have or to adopt a religion or belief of his choice.

If for any reason the above is interfered with the aggrieved person can and should obtain relief from the Supreme Court. The relief requested should include punitive damages (if such is allowed)

All arguments that claim that the State is interfering with a person’s religious belief fails due to this

This is what the Supreme Court said of the Original bill in 2004

“In view of our findings that clause 3 arid Clause 4(b) of the bill violate Article 10 of the Constitution the bill in its present form has to be passed by not less than 2/3′d of the whole number of members (including those not present) and approved by the people at a referendum in terms of Article 83(a) of the Constitution.”

You will note that the Supreme Court makes a direct reference to the PRIMARY Law

This bill is not an Anti Conversion bill but an Anti FORCIBLE conversion Bill

Here is what the bill says

1. This Act may be cited as the Prohibition of Forcible Conversion of Religion Act, No. of 2004

2. No person shall convert or attempt to convert, either Forcible directly or otherwise, any person from one religion to another conversion by the use of force or by allurement or by any fraudulent legal, means nor shall any person aid or abet any such conversion.

Omission of the word FORCIBLE in discussing this bill amounts to Deception and Dishonesty

Being sanctimonious about freedoms and Democracy after such dishonesty would sound very hollow indeed.

]]> By: aruna http://www.groundviews.org/2009/01/25/the-anti-conversion-bill-violates-the-freedom-of-conscience-and-the-freedom-of-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-11177 aruna Tue, 24 Nov 2009 05:16:41 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1085#comment-11177 Please find another country to convert and help the poor. Leave SriLanka alone as it is. Do no talk about the freedoms in Europe and other countries. Sri Lankan buddhists have always tolerated the acceptable activities all religions. Portugese, Dutch and the English spread christianity in the country and they have lived in harmony for centuries. With millions of dollard flooding in for convrting the majority buddhists to various denominations of christianity, we buddhists have to take actions; drastic actions. Let those actions be legal and peaceful. Please find another country to convert and help the poor. Leave SriLanka alone as it is. Do no talk about the freedoms in Europe and other countries. Sri Lankan buddhists have always tolerated the acceptable activities all religions. Portugese, Dutch and the English spread christianity in the country and they have lived in harmony for centuries. With millions of dollard flooding in for convrting the majority buddhists to various denominations of christianity, we buddhists have to take actions; drastic actions. Let those actions be legal and peaceful.

]]> By: A.S.Mathew http://www.groundviews.org/2009/01/25/the-anti-conversion-bill-violates-the-freedom-of-conscience-and-the-freedom-of-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-7034 A.S.Mathew Mon, 22 Jun 2009 03:41:11 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1085#comment-7034 How, people can be forced to convert? If any force is used, that must be illegal. On the other hand, if a person has taken the decision to follow a new faith according to his or her conviction, nobody can question it. And if a country is making any law to barricade conversion based on conscience, that is simply the violation of human right. The BJP and its allied parties were playing the card of "conversion" to alarm the Indian electorate, but the game plan did't work. As people are getting more educated, the political game of using religion as a bait will not work any more. How, people can be forced to convert? If any force is used, that must be
illegal. On the other hand, if a person has taken the decision to follow a new
faith according to his or her conviction, nobody can question it. And if a
country is making any law to barricade conversion based on conscience, that
is simply the violation of human right.

The BJP and its allied parties were playing the card of “conversion” to alarm
the Indian electorate, but the game plan did’t work. As people are getting
more educated, the political game of using religion as a bait will not work any
more.

]]> By: Shocked http://www.groundviews.org/2009/01/25/the-anti-conversion-bill-violates-the-freedom-of-conscience-and-the-freedom-of-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-6058 Shocked Fri, 15 May 2009 06:01:43 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1085#comment-6058 Why does the Government have to interfere in a person's religious belief. One has to be convinced to get converted and changing one's religious belief is an entirely personal decision. According to the constitution of Sri Lanka, can the Government stop a person from changing his/her religion? Before trying to stop conversion, the Buddhist Monks should try to gather their flock in the temples at least once a week and preach the good teachings of the Lord Buddha. If Buddhism has to be safeguarded, those who are following Buddhism should live the teachings of the Lord Buddha. Why does the Government have to interfere in a person’s religious belief. One has to be convinced to get converted and changing one’s religious belief is an entirely personal decision. According to the constitution of Sri Lanka, can the Government stop a person from changing his/her religion? Before trying to stop conversion, the Buddhist Monks should try to gather their flock in the temples at least once a week and preach the good teachings of the Lord Buddha. If Buddhism has to be safeguarded, those who are following Buddhism should live the teachings of the Lord Buddha.

]]> By: citizen http://www.groundviews.org/2009/01/25/the-anti-conversion-bill-violates-the-freedom-of-conscience-and-the-freedom-of-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-4727 citizen Sat, 07 Feb 2009 17:08:30 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1085#comment-4727 wijayapala, it is not my objective or job to correct you. i can present the fact and help you look at the matter from a different perspective - and it is up to you to make whatever use you can make out of it. The point i am trying to get across is that "Christian", "Tamil", "Sinhala" etc identify one common belief or language that many people share. The similarities end there. How meaningful do you think it is to assume what "Sinhala people" think? Each Christian person has a different view of "God", divergent values and biases... it does not make sense to group them all together as "Christians" and make assumptions about all of them as if they were all one single entity. it's too simplistic - and unfairly discriminative to do so. wijayapala,
it is not my objective or job to correct you. i can present the fact and help you look at the matter from a different perspective – and it is up to you to make whatever use you can make out of it.
The point i am trying to get across is that "Christian", "Tamil", "Sinhala" etc identify one common belief or language that many people share. The similarities end there. How meaningful do you think it is to assume
what "Sinhala people" think? Each Christian person has a different view of "God", divergent values and biases… it does not make sense to group them all together as "Christians" and make assumptions about all of them as if they were all one single entity. it's too simplistic – and unfairly discriminative to do so.

]]> By: raja_senanayake http://www.groundviews.org/2009/01/25/the-anti-conversion-bill-violates-the-freedom-of-conscience-and-the-freedom-of-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-4725 raja_senanayake Sat, 07 Feb 2009 14:02:20 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1085#comment-4725 How did Buddhism spread. Wasn't it the patronage of the king that led to it. In the feudal ages the religion of the ruler became the religion of the subjects. Was buddhism embraced by the peasantry ot of intellectual underrstanding? How did Buddhism spread. Wasn't it the patronage of the king that led to it. In the feudal ages the religion of the ruler became the religion of the subjects. Was buddhism embraced by the peasantry ot of intellectual underrstanding?

]]> By: wijayapala http://www.groundviews.org/2009/01/25/the-anti-conversion-bill-violates-the-freedom-of-conscience-and-the-freedom-of-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-4724 wijayapala Sat, 07 Feb 2009 02:45:22 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1085#comment-4724 "<i>It is pointless to presume “what Christians believe” or “what Tamils feel”.</i>" It is actually quite important to know what people feel if there is a motivation behind their <b>actions</b>. I am looking for the answer to the question why Christianity has had such a violent history, and unsurprisingly it traces back to essentially an extremely bigoted *fundamental* worldview. It makes relatively little difference whether some Christians were more or less violent than others when <b>we look at the phenomenon as a whole.</b> I see nothing wrong with restricting the activities of a belief system which preaches the inferiority of those who are different. If I have misrepresented your belief system, you are free to correct me. "It is pointless to presume “what Christians believe” or “what Tamils feel”."

It is actually quite important to know what people feel if there is a motivation behind their actions. I am looking for the answer to the question why Christianity has had such a violent history, and unsurprisingly it traces back to essentially an extremely bigoted *fundamental* worldview. It makes relatively little difference whether some Christians were more or less violent than others when we look at the phenomenon as a whole.

I see nothing wrong with restricting the activities of a belief system which preaches the inferiority of those who are different. If I have misrepresented your belief system, you are free to correct me.

]]> By: citizen http://www.groundviews.org/2009/01/25/the-anti-conversion-bill-violates-the-freedom-of-conscience-and-the-freedom-of-expression/comment-page-1/#comment-4697 citizen Thu, 05 Feb 2009 08:22:07 +0000 http://www.groundviews.org/?p=1085#comment-4697 wijayapala, Let me respectfully suggest the possibility that it may not be my 1st sentence or 2nd answer, but your own grasp of reality that is perhaps too simplistic and therefore not quite compatible with reason. I am sure that you have lived to a sufficiently mature age to realise that life and society and even individuals are full of contradictions and that those contradictions in themselves do not cause conflicts. It is meaningless to generalise that "Christians are such" and "Buddhists are such" because that’s not how it works. Generalisation can help us organise facts, but it does not lead to knowledge or understanding. For example, it helps to categorise living things into plants and animals, vertebrates and invertebrates, mammals, birds, reptiles and such. But despite similarities, all mammals are not the same. To say that Christians believe such a thing and therefore will behave in such a way is very much like saying that the parrot is a bird, and the parrot is green, the is a crow is also a bird so the crow must also be green. I am not drawing an analogy to the different denominations of christianity, but to the level of individual christians. It is pointless to presume “what Christians believe” or “what Tamils feel”. A certain batch of wine may have a common trait or a particular model of mobile phones may have a defining feature. But individual human beings say and do things because of who they are as individuals and not because they belong to a particular demographic. wijayapala,
Let me respectfully suggest the possibility that it may not be my 1st sentence or 2nd answer, but your own grasp of reality that is perhaps too simplistic and therefore not quite compatible with reason.
I am sure that you have lived to a sufficiently mature age to realise that life and society and even individuals are full of contradictions and that those contradictions in themselves do not cause conflicts.
It is meaningless to generalise that "Christians are such" and "Buddhists are such" because that’s not how it works. Generalisation can help us organise facts, but it does not lead to knowledge or understanding. For example, it helps to categorise living things into plants and animals, vertebrates and invertebrates, mammals, birds, reptiles and such. But despite similarities, all mammals are not the same. To say that Christians believe such a thing and therefore will behave in such a way is very much like saying that the parrot is a bird, and the parrot is green, the is a crow is also a bird so the crow must also be green. I am not drawing an analogy to the different denominations of christianity, but to the level of individual christians.
It is pointless to presume “what Christians believe” or “what Tamils feel”. A certain batch of wine may have a common trait or a particular model of mobile phones may have a defining feature. But individual human beings say and do things because of who they are as individuals and not because they belong to a particular demographic.

]]>