In your seva...
I invite those members of the forum that are always advicing hindus on HDF on how we should be yet more tolerant and passive, to present their views.
Why the silence on this matter? I will take it that most have been away since it was such a beautiful weekend weather wise.
satay
New Member
Funny how these "moderates" (from both Islam and X) suddenly find their voice, when some priest or mullah is assaulted in India. Frankly, I don't believe that there are moderates in these two cults. Truth be told, these 'moderates' are doing the damage silently, covertly, whilst so-called extremist elements are doing it out in the open.Originally Posted by Agnideva
Member
Any reactions from the American President, who calls himself a "born again Christian", or the Catholic Pope at Vatican?
In your seva...
let's not get our hope so high...any reaction from HDF members who are always showing us how to 'love' and how love is the greatest problem solver would be a good start.
I find it very annoying that everyone and their dog feels compelled to give their opinion on anything that any hindu does yet the same people will not condemn this act or even say a single word. Perhaps they are signaling with their silence that this type of behaviour from christians is normal and thus acceptable?
satay
New Member
No, nor would I expect any. This event was in the Senate anyway. Then again, I think it's significant that Bush has been conspicuously absent the last two years when the White House held Diwali celebrations.
A.
New Member
Namaste Suresh,
As far Christian moderates (and apostates) go, there are many. Or at least that's my opinion living in a liberal part of the country. They do speak out, but generally their voices are not heard loudly because most don't engage in sensationalist talk and so don't make the news. The extremist voices are always heard because they like to make more noise and act out specifically so their voices are heard, imho.
A.
New Member
An article I read this morning. It is written by a pastor in Tennessee, in America's Bible Belt. He calls the protesters "a disgrace and an utter embarrassment to not only Christianity but to Christians everywhere."
A.
Protesters disrupt first Hindu prayer in Senate
By David W. Shelton
July 15, 2007
On Thursday, July 12, Rajan Zed became the first person to offer a Hindu prayer on the Senate floor. Sadly, the prayer was disrupted by “Christian patriots” who were eventually arrested on the misdemeanor charge of disrupting Congress. This “protest” was an utter disgrace to not only the Senate, but to Christianity as a whole.
Fox News reported:
Zed, who was born in India, was invited by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev. Speaking in the chamber shortly after the prayer, Reid defended the choice and linked it to the war debate.
“If people have any misunderstanding about Indians and Hindus,” Reid said, “all they have to do is think of Gandhi,” a man “who gave his life for peace.”
“I think it speaks well of our country that someone representing the faith of about a billion people comes here and can speak in communication with our heavenly Father regarding peace,” said Reid, a Mormon and sharp critic of President Bush’s Iraq policies.
Now, I don’t think Senator Reid really understands that the Hindu religion doesn’t worship “our heavenly father.” But that’s not the point. His invitation to bring Chaplain Zed to pray on the Senate floor was a first for the Senate. The invitation drew the ire of the American Family Association as well as other fundamentalist groups.
It’s not clear what group the protesters were associated with, but their disruptive shouts were a true embarrassment to Christians everywhere. They yelled from the visitors gallery, “This is an abomination!” and were eventually arrested.
MSNBC reported the content of the prayer as well:
Zed, the first Hindu to offer the Senate prayer, began: “We meditate on the transcendental glory of the Deity Supreme, who is inside the heart of the Earth, inside the life of the sky and inside the soul of the heaven. May He stimulate and illuminate our minds.”
As the Senate prepared for another day of debate over the Iraq war, Zed closed with, “Peace, peace, peace be unto all.”
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. As a Christian, I think that these three protesters are a disgrace and an utter embarrassment to not only Christianity but to Christians everywhere. They should be ashamed of themselves, and I’m glad they were arrested. Sadly, I’m not surprised that this happened.
Of course, the concept of “peace” is offensive to many fundamentalists, which is unfortunate. What concerns me more than anything is the notion that many of today’s Christians have that insists that the United States was founded to be a “Christian nation.”
If this were so, then why are the words “God” or “Bible” completely nonexistent in the Constitution?
Yes, many of the framers were Christian. John Adams and John Jay were both very passionate in their faith. They also understood that faith was a personal matter of the individual. And the individual expressions of faith (indeed forms of Christianity were the most prevalent) was meant to be exactly that: Individual.
When the first amendment was ratified, it clearly stated that “Congress would pass no law respecting the establishment of religion or prohibiting the free exercise thereof.” It would keep the federal government out of the religious affairs of the people. It would also prevent having one religion elevated above any others.
The modern idea of twisting this as a “Christians-only club” is as much a perversion as it would be to say that all of the framers were Christian. Clearly, they were not. More importantly, Christianity as most modern evangelicals understand it did not exist until the early 1800s with the rise of Charles Finney.
As I discussed this once, someone pointed out the final article of the Constitution:
Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America…
It seems that some Christians insist that the usage of the phrase “the Year of our Lord…” was indicative that this was intended to be a Christian nation. This is about as logical as insisting that because the sky is blue, this was intended to be a blue-skinned nation. Why is this? Quite simply, it was a tradition of the time. Just as this is the year 2007 A.D.
In fact, the Latin phrase anno domini translates to “the year of our Lord.” This was simply the calendar year—nothing more, and nothing less. It’s about as religious as saying, “God bless you” to a person who’s just sneezed.
Thomas Jefferson wasn’t in the country when the Constitution was written, but his clear approval of the hands-off approach to religion was an indication that he understood it enough to write to the Danbury Baptist association when he was president that the first amendment “erects a wall of separation between church and state.”
Faith was an important part in the lives of early Americans, and each faith was protected. We should be careful not to try to put words in the framers mouths by quoting them out of context and making them say that they intended to found America as a “Christian nation.” Clearly, they did not.
In fact, the Treaty of Tripoli, proudly signed by John Adams (who also co-wrote and signed the Declaration of Independence) in 1796 has a particular statement in article 11:
Art. 11. As the Government of the United States of America is not, in any sense, founded on the Christian religion; as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion, or tranquillity, of Mussulmen; and, as the said States never entered into any war, or act of hostility against any Mahometan nation, it is declared by the parties, that no pretext arising from religious opinions, shall ever produce an interruption of the harmony existing between the two countries.
There is, however, no question that the Christian faith was deeply rooted in the culture of the late eighteenth century. This was just a few decades after the Great Awakening, during which men like Jonathan Edwards and George Whitefield impacted the colonials through the power of the Holy Spirit in a profound way. Christian historians (including myself) believe that the Awakening prepared the hearts of the colonists for the long, bloody war that came with the Revolution.
One of the phrases I hear a lot is “original intent.” This is something that we have to be very careful of, especially since the “original intent” of the framers was clearly that only white men would have a say in what their country would look like. Radical ideas of women who vote, black men who vote and own property, and the end of slavery were far-reaching pipe dreams as far as the framers knew. Even Washington and Jefferson were slave owners.
The Constitution was written to allow some flexibility in several issues, and its interpretation clearly changes with time. During his 2000 Presidential campaign, Then-Vice President Al Gore spoke of it as a “living and breathing document” that changes with time. This is the opposite extreme. In reality, the constitution is neither rigid nor living. It’s deliberately specific in its language yet deliberately vague in its application.
Where the “original intent” interpretation fails in the relationship with Church and State is that there is little argument that the framers had a Christian worldview. We simply can not apply that same worldview to the multi-cultural society that is in the United States today.
Here in Clarksville, there are literally dozens of different countries represented in its residents. There are Hindu, Muslim, Buddhist, as well as Christian residents. Yes, most of Clarksville’s residents are Christian. But our city is best reflected when we celebrate the spiritual diversity of the region. Such is the same with the Senate.
This really isn’t all that different from last year’s brouhaha over Keith Elliston’s swearing-in ceremony where he placed his hand on a Quran instead of the Bible. Interestingly enough, the copy of the Quran that he used once belonged to Thomas Jefferson (By the way, such ceremonies are common, but are not the “official” swearing in, which is done on the Congress floor en masse).
Clearly, even if it was in the days of the Framers, the United States is clearly no longer a Christian nation. It’s important that we respect the intent of the framers and their flexibility by keeping faith where it belongs: in the churches and hearts of the American people, and out of government. They knew then just as we know now that when government meddles in religious affairs, it will only result in tyranny.
Just imagine what kind of a country those three protesters would have us live in. I sure wouldn’t want any part of it.
http://tinyurl.com/2f8lnl
David W. Shelton is a writer, speaker and activist in Clarksville. He is currently pastor of Christian Community Church of Clarksville, Chair of Clarksville Pride, Inc., and serves on the Clarksville Human Relations Commission.
here and now
Sitting in India I am finding this rather funny.
Why should American Senate call a Hindu to say prayers ?? Hindu's don't make up any significances portion of the population in any way I think ?? It doesn't serve politics as well from any direction.
And as a Hindu why should I expect a foreign country much of which has been traditionally founded on Christianity to show any respect at all to a faith which languishes in its own land ?? If not some strange publicity biz whose rationale I am failing to grasp, calling a Hindu priest to pray in Senate by itself is an immense broad mindedness, if you ask me, something from which Hindus can learn a bit.
Why are we getting heated on this, when in this land of 80 million hindus even singing a national prayer which mentions the land as goddess becomes a national sin ?? Where all prayers and connection to its own culture has been ruthlessly uprooted by the Hindus themselves from national and social life?? When parents line up behind the gates of a Christian missionary school to admit their children and take pride that their kids will no nothing about his/her own dharma.
We cannot blame Christians or their country for acting soundly just because we haven't done so for a thousand years.
What is Here, is Elsewhere. What is not Here, is Nowhere.
New Member
Namaskar Singhi,
Yes Singhi, it is rather funny compared to the larger problems in India. But, I guess I would say it is an important issue for Hindu Americans because it is a gesture of goodwill from the government. It is an acknowledgement (not that is really needed) that Hinduism is a real religion, and found on American soil (even if number of practicing Hindus is a small percentage of the population). America is a country where cultures, traditions and religions blend together, and while the Abrahamic religions are often mentioned as "great world religions", we see many times there is an absence in the mention of Dharma religions.Sitting in India I am finding this rather funny. Why should American Senate call a Hindu to say prayers ?? Hindu's don't make up any significances portion of the population in any way I think ?? It doesn't serve politics as well from any direction.
Well the real debate is much larger in this country between religious fundamentalists and the non-fundamentalists. There have been many issues over the last few years regarding separation of church and state, prayers in public schools, abortion rights, ten commandments in courtrooms, the list could go on and on. This is just another incident which just happens to involve Hinduism. The non-fundamentalists like to say/show that America is a pluralistic society and make gestures of goodwill towards minority religions like Buddhism, Hinduism, Islam, etc. The fundamentalists like to say that America was founded under Judeo-Christian principles and should remain so.And as a Hindu why should I expect a foreign country much of which has been traditionally founded on Christianity to show any respect at all to a faith which languishes in its own land ??
Yes, I agree with that.calling a Hindu priest to pray in Senate by itself is an immense broad mindedness, if you ask me, something from which Hindus can learn a bit.
Again the issue goes back to whether America is a Christian nation, or a nation of mostly Christians. According to our constitution, it is a secular democracy, but fundamentalists argue that mere mention of God indicates that the founding fathers stood for a nation under the Judeo-Christian God. The debate continues ...We cannot blame Christians or their country for acting soundly
OM Shanti,
A.
New Member
Is it any wonder that America currently (which represents the West) is locked in a mortal battle with Islam?
It is the result of karma which those who engage in desecrating sacred images, including this recent disruption in the Senate regarding these prayers, are sowing for themselves.
The Jews and the Muslims have been locked in bitter conflict for ages because of actions they have done againsts each other.
For the same reason, America and the West will have to reap the fruits of the negative karma they have accumulated throughout history. That is the universal law.
Om purnam adah, purnam idam, purnat purnam udacyate; purnasya purnam adaya purnam evavasisyate.Om Santih! Santih! Santih!
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks