-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Nepal plans new criminal code forbidding conversion
- Thread starter Marble
- Start date
I think it is excellent news. I wish proseltysing was banned everywhere. But having said that, if a person can prove that he was acting totally on his own true volition, without any outside influence, having obtained all resources, etc. without any 'help', then he should be allowed to convert.
Sometimes its not really conversion, but more just an inner or introspective understanding of what you actually believe. But this only applies to a small percentage of people who think for themselves, not follow blindly without rationality, or just 'join a religious club'.
Sometimes its not really conversion, but more just an inner or introspective understanding of what you actually believe. But this only applies to a small percentage of people who think for themselves, not follow blindly without rationality, or just 'join a religious club'.
Oh... it makes proselytizing illegal. By the thread title, I thought you meant that it would be illegal for a person to change their mind.
Still, the law sounds to me like a bad response to a real problem.
Something else occurs to me about all this: when Christianity's "at home", religion is an important aspect of societal culture. When Christianity's exported, the religious aspect of the foreign culture is considered disposable.
Hmm.
I agree. Bad response to a real problem. This would make any information about any religion other than one's own illegal. It would be illegal to answer a question about your religion asked by a member of another. Even contact between religions would be illegal, as, conceivably, the dress, lifestyle or comportment of adherents could induce curiosity, as could the architecture of the 'foreign' churches, the ringing of church bells, &c.
Essentially, this bill would outlaw awareness of religious alternatives.
Essentially, this bill would outlaw awareness of religious alternatives.
Last edited by a moderator:
Reptillian
Hamburgler Extraordinaire
It limits freedom of speech for people in Nepal too. Believers won't be able to share their faith and opinions concerning belief. Does this law cover scientific discourse as well? Some good ol' reasonable rational science could cause people to lose faith in their traditional religion.
I'm not sure that I am... in principle, anyhow.
I think it's important to allow a free exchange of ideas. While I dislike most proselytizing, I realize that it's just one form of this free exchange.
If there's coercion involved in the proselytizing, that would be a different story, but I don't think it's a good idea to simply create a blanket ban on the exchange of a whole class of ideas.
The intent of the law might be noble, but law tends to become very literal, as history's shown, and this always entails unintended consequences.
Literally anything that could induce admiration, envy or even curiosity could eventually result in one leaving his 'religion or caste community'. This would make all social mobility evidence of a crime. It would essentially make the natural desire to better oneself a dangerous thing. It would require people to remain in the caste and religion they were born to.
If someone did move into a different social class, job or religion, then anyone they were associated with who was in the new class or religion, would immediately fall under suspicion of "inducement."
Literally anything that could induce admiration, envy or even curiosity could eventually result in one leaving his 'religion or caste community'. This would make all social mobility evidence of a crime. It would essentially make the natural desire to better oneself a dangerous thing. It would require people to remain in the caste and religion they were born to.
If someone did move into a different social class, job or religion, then anyone they were associated with who was in the new class or religion, would immediately fall under suspicion of "inducement."
I am against oppression...
gnomon
Well-Known Member
This is stupid. And let's get over this proselytization nonsense. Anytime I mention to people that a cultural concept such as female genital mutilation is not a good idea then guess what......I'm proselytizin'. I'm asking you to change your cultural belief. Big effin' deal.
People tryin' to convert people to other ideas. Real scary. It happens all the time. It's a staple of human history. Unless it's done with the threat of force it's not nearly as big a deal as people like to think it is.
People tryin' to convert people to other ideas. Real scary. It happens all the time. It's a staple of human history. Unless it's done with the threat of force it's not nearly as big a deal as people like to think it is.
linwood
Well-Known Member
Marble
Rolling Marble
Sorry, but could it be that you have posted this in the wrong thread?
Marble
Rolling Marble
You have to ask a moderator to move it to there.
You can do this in the sub-forum site feedback.
You can do this in the sub-forum site feedback.
DavyCrocket2003
Well-Known Member
When it comes to ideas, I'm for free trade. People should be free to try and convince people of whatever they want. As long as it is not exploitive, I don't see any problem with it. Why should teaching new ideas be considered a threat? In my opinion, this kind of thinking only discredits ones own ideas. I believe that any religion, culture, or philosophy should allow and encourage it's adherents to question its tenants and ideology and compare them to differing and opposing views. This allows people the chance to determine for themselves what makes the most sense.
It seems to me that people who don't want to allow this either don't believe that people are able to determine truth for themselves, or for some reason don't want people to learn truth. It is very possible that people are unable to obtain and discern truth for themselves. I really don't see stopping the free flow of ideas as helping correct this issue however... Perhaps promoting correct ideas would be a better use of energy.
It seems to me that people who don't want to allow this either don't believe that people are able to determine truth for themselves, or for some reason don't want people to learn truth. It is very possible that people are unable to obtain and discern truth for themselves. I really don't see stopping the free flow of ideas as helping correct this issue however... Perhaps promoting correct ideas would be a better use of energy.
Last edited: