Christian Subversion And Missionary Activities - 6

[Husky]

On how cryptochristianism is getting legalised. This is pretty bad

While the cryptochristian govt of India allows islam to infiltrate into India from the borders, the same cryptochristian govt promotes *crypochristianism* so as to similarly silently increase the numbers of *christians* in India. They're both the same thing. Except the first will get noticed by many more Indians and Hindu nationalists, even when they will more often turn a blind eye to the latter.



www.dailypioneer.com/home/online-channel/360-todays-newspaper/92000-state-has-no-right-to-meddle-in-conversion-cases-hc.html

via bharatabharati.wordpress.com/2012/09/04/state-has-no-right-to-meddle-in-conversion-cases-says-himachal-pradesh-high-court-abraham-thomas/



(The copious interruptions in [color="#800080"]purple[/color] are by moi.)

State has no right to meddle in conversion cases: HC

Monday, 03 September 2012 13:50 Abraham Thomas | New Delhi Hits: 207





A new controversy is set to dog religious conversion and re-conversion with the Himachal Pradesh High Court ruling that changing religion is a matter of one’s personal belief and the State has no role to know whether it is a forced or free conversion.



If upheld by the Supreme Court, this order delivered on Thursday last, can have widespread ramifications on the raging debate on conversions and pave the way for people to change their religion at will without requiring them to give prior mandatory intimation to the local District Magistrate.

(The ruling only benefits christianism, note. After all, the majority of the natives are Hindus. I.e. it's *Hindus* on the menu: open season on Hindus waiting to be cannibalised by christianism preying on them.

These are laws implemented by cryptochristianism in India. These laws therefore "look" secular, but it's only ever a one-way street. And these 'secular' looking laws only hold while the majority is Hindu.

Because there will never be such a ruling in a "Nagaland For Christ": no one there will be allowed to convert people out of christianism back to Hindu religion there. Just like the NLFT in Tripura just kept killing Hindu Swamis back when the region was still significantly Hindu. Not to mention how in Orissa christians tried to kill a Hindu Swami 8 or 9 times for his reconversion efforts, and then got lucky the last time when they operated as christian "maoists".)



Holding that the Act was contrary to the right to practice any religion and the right to privacy linked to Article 21 of the Constitution, the bench of Justices Deepak Gupta and Rajiv Sharma held on Thursday, “A person’s belief or religion is something very personal to him. The State has no right to ask a person to disclose what his personal belief is.”

(I.e. the cryptochristians in charge insist the state cover for christianism: thus promoting cryptochristianism in broad daylight. Are Justices Gupta and Sharma cryptos themselves - which is the more obvious answer, I guess - or have they merely been bought out? Actually, there's no difference.)



The decision is expected to be challenged before the Supreme Court owing to its impact on the State’s effort to curb forced conversions.



The Court was dealing with Section 4 of the Himachal Pradesh Freedom of Religion Act 2006 that required any person changing his original religion to intimate the District Magistrate of his decision a month in advance. On receiving such notice, the Magistrate would satisfy whether the conversion was by force, fraud or inducement. If the case was found to be a forced conversion, the DM was free to initiate criminal action against the accused persons.



There was even a penalty clause of up to Rs 1,000 attached in case of failure to give notice. But interestingly, if the person re-converted to his original religion, he was not required to give such notice. Finding this dichotomy unconstitutional, two NGOs — Evangelical Fellowship of India and Act Now for Harmony and Democracy (ANHAD) — had approached High Court.

(Bad plan giving christoislamism equal rights in India. That has allowed them to demand more rights: the right to convert others. The right to take Hindu temple money and divert it to subsidise trips to jerusalem for christians and hajj subsidies for muslims.

The right for christoislamic dalits to get special rights. The rights of christoislamics to have quotas, even in the armed forces.

Then when they become the majority in any area - like in Nagaland or TSP - they wipe out the natives and, if the aggressors are christians, they even assume the identity of the ethnically cleansed native victims. E.g. in Nagaland the converted sheep even call themselves Nagas and pretend to still continue Naga "culture"...

India never got independence. The Brits and Portuguese etc left, but not christoislamism. Hindus' land was partitioned for islam into TSP and BD, but christoislamism didn't leave. And unlike christoislamism, Hindus have no country of their own. <- Because christoislamism insists on being Hindus constant companion/parasite until it's throttled Hindus: christoislamism wants all free people to be submitted to jeebusjehovallah after all. Or as the christians say more euphemistically: it wants all people to "accept" christ. Preferrably willingly. Else at the point of the sword.)



Janata Party president Subramanian Swamy had opposed the petitions on the ground that conversions were anti-Hinduism as the original religion of every person in the country is Hinduism.



The court held that every human being had a right to question and change his own belief. It dismissed Swamy’s argument as being “more philosophical in nature” but at the same time held, “this change must be an act of his own conscience — an act which has come from within himself, an act uninfluenced by force, fraud, or inducement”.

(They're saying this last only for lipservice, only for the record. In practice it will be different: the courts won't investigate whether force, fraud or inducement were involved in conversions to christianism or even islamism's. They'll only investigate if some christian gets love-jihaded by islam.)



The State argued that prior notice alone could ensure if it was a forced conversion. But the Court felt, “This may open a Pandora’s box and once notice is issued, this may lead to conflicts between rival religious outfits and groups.” Only one case had been registered since the Act came into force.



The Court further reasoned, “If a person of his own volition changes his religion, there is no way that one can measure or fix the date on which he has ceased to belong to religion A and converted to religion B this has to be an ongoing process and therefore, there can be no notice of 30 days as required under the Act.”



The petitioners represented by a team of lawyers including Manoj V George of the Supreme Court said that disclosure by a convertee could endanger his life. Going a step further, the bench was of the view, “…Chances of the convertee being subjected to physical and psychological torture cannot be ruled out.” In such an event, the remedy could become more harmful than the problem.

Note how the court keeps arguing in favour of christianism: in fact, I've never seen so many convenient arguments in favour of bringing in mass christian conversion drives. Himachal Pradesh is going to be *inundated* with christians missionising people and turning them into cryptochristian zombie armies.



Am I getting things mixed up or was it not in Himachal Pradesh where conversions by force and allurement was banned before? In any case, this latest step is exclusively for the benefit of christianism, and specifically for the enterprise of missionising. Basically, they want to prevent Hindu communities from becoming aware of cryptochristianism (and its anonymous growth) in their midst and expelling them from the society of Hindus. (Native converts are told to stay in their community and continue to try and convert people from the inside. They're told not to reveal their religion even to their unconverted family members, until they feel confident to convert these or at least have these accept them, which is the first step to conversion.)

Another reason why cryptochristianism ought to have been outed for the dangerous threat that it is.



I remember the lefty Kerala Kaumudi's love jihad report - reproduced at HK - was going on about how only an X number of Hindus had been converted to christianism in parts of Kerala, while X thousands of Hindus and christians had been abducted into love jihad. (Thus ignoring the number of cryptochristian converts.) Then the christists commenting on the Kerala Kaumudi article were telling Hindus at HK: "See, the only threat is islam. Our christianism has hardly converted anybody - and the small numbers means its all voluntary besides - so you Hindus should stop saying that christian conversions are a threat!"

And the above sorts of rulings are exactly what enables christians in India to pretend the numbers involved are small.



In reality, islam=christianism. And just like the Bangladeshi islamaniacs who had infiltrated into Bodo space in Assam are now comfortably permanently settled in Assam - oh they may be in refuge camps, but it's no Hindu victory: from my understanding, the illegal islamaniacs are in refuge camps in *India* not Bangladesh. So they're quite permanently settled. And in India, islamics will stay in the camps until the ever pro-islami cryptochristian parties appear on the scene, turn them into votebanks by giving them ration rights on native Hindus' resources, and then declaring to make the infiltrators into legal citizens if only they will vote the christian KKKongress into power. Which KKKongress will then use said power to further subvert India's law and order 1. to allow more infiltration and - of course - 2. to create such rulings as above promoting christianism by legalising the increase in christianism within the Hindu host body (hey, they've even essentially legalised the islamic infiltrators by declaring they're not really infiltrators/"prove it". So why wouldn't they legalise cryptochristianism, by insisting that converts needn't declare themselves? Much better for christianism that the Hindu host doesn't know the extent of the christian parasite in India, after all.

And christianism was all secret - crypto - in Rome while it was a minority too. In fact, Constantine was a practised crypto himself, and only started revealing his ideology by degrees since that event which would later get embellished with a story about his having a vision of the "labarum".)





Two of the comments at bharatabharati.wordpress.com/2012/09/04/state-has-no-right-to-meddle-in-conversion-cases-says-himachal-pradesh-high-court-abraham-thomas/

Swamy says it is a bogus story planted by missionaries. He says he is sending a rocket to Pioneer. Just read the following twitter converstaion between Swami and Aditya

Please see

http://twitter.com/Swamy39

[...]

@Swamy39 State has no right to meddle in conversion cases: Himachal Pradesh HC http://www.dailypioneer.com/home/online-...es-hc.html … @kalyan97

Expand

Reply Retweet Favorite

21h Subramanian Swamy ‏@Swamy39

IS, on September 4, 2012 at 7:55 PM said:

Interesting if true. When I checked the story this morning it was posted in detail on a legal news site. But it is gone now and I didn’t bookmark it.

(Note the article is still up at the Daily Pioneer, where I retrieved it from.)



I can't work out the logic of Swamy's reasoning: now why would missionaries "plant" this story, since it reveals to Hindu audiences the increased power accorded to christianism by the Indian law to spread its disease? That is, this story may actually wake some Hindus up to how this ruling is but very thinly veiled cryptochristianism (almost public)? Where's the advantage to christianism in the missionaries making this up?

The alternative explanation is that it looks like Subramaniam Swamy is more troubled by how the above news piece - by the christist at the Pioneer - reports his argument as being dismissed, than that Swamy wants this important news to get covered and reach as wide a Hindu audience as possible.