In an article "Christian Awake", it is propounded that "when there is a conflict of loyalty between Christ and country, the true Christian has necessarily to choose obedience to Christ" (pg 158, National Christian Council Review, April 1955). Since Christ means Church in the present Christian dictionary, all loyalty has therefore to be given to the political empire of the Christian Church. This would automatically make Indian Christians traitors to their country.

The fear of segregating Indian Christians and training and using them for the purposes of political or religious blackmail on behalf of foreign interests from time to time in moments of crisis is not without foundation seeing that in 1857 the Christian Missionaries of Chhota Nagpur offered to the British 10,000 armed converted Kols, while Dr. Mason offered a battalion of converted Karens to put down the Mutiny of Indians. The hostile attitudes of the Nagas, Uraons, Baigas, Marias, Gonds and Karens points in the same direction.

Missionary activity and conversion is not about freedom of religion. The missionary wants to put an end to pluralism, choice and freedom of religion. He wants one religion, his own, for everyone and will sacrifice his life to that cause. True freedom of religion should involve freedom from conversion. The missionary is like a salesman targeting people in their homes or like an invader seeking to conquer. Such disruptive activity is not a right and it cannot promote social harmony or respect between different religious communities. In fact people should have the right not to be bothered by missionaries unless they seek them out.

Generally missionary efforts are stronger to the degree that the missionary is opposed to the religions that people already follow. The old dominant Christian strategy, which many Protestant groups still promote, is to denigrate non-Biblical beliefs as heathen, or the work of the devil. Evangelical missionaries still identify Hinduism with devil worship. Such a zealous missionary inevitably spreads misunderstanding, venom and hatred in society. 

Today it is illegal in most countries to promote racial hatred, to call a person of any race inferior or the product of the devil (which white Christians used to call the blacks until recently). But Hindus can still be denigrated as polytheists, idolaters and devil-worshippers. This is tolerated under freedom of religion, though it obviously breeds distrust, if not hatred and itself is prejudicial. Prejudicial statements that are not allowed about race are allowed about religion and missionaries commonly employ these derogatory remarks.

Conversion reflects a certain ideology. In fact it mainly involves getting people to change beliefs, ideas or ideology. Conversion demands that we follow a certain ideology and reject others. The dominant ideology behind organized conversion efforts is that of an exclusive monotheistic religion. There is only one God, one book, one savior, one final prophet and so on. Most Christian missionaries try to get people to accept Christ as their personal savior and Christianity in one form or another as the true faith for all humanity.

In today’s fast changing world the talk of changing belief of the people is puerile and religious conversions particularly are a serious violation of basic human rights. Those who support conversions are living in a delusory world and indulging in intellectual deception. Nobody has a right to cut any group from its ancient beliefs and traditions, which one holds dear to his heart. Viewed in this context, proselytising activities should be condemned and denounced by all those who value self-pride and rationalism.

Conversion by fraud or force or by tempting people is therefore not acceptable to a civilized society. One’s religious belief is essentially a private matter but conversion from one religion to another is not, particularly in today’s situation when competitive religions backed up with their massive resources fight out to rob their traditional belief.  

There is no doubt that Christian churches in rich western countries fund world-wide activities to “save” the souls of infidels, heathens and pagans. Since saving others from eternal damnation is more important than anything else, these churches believe that any means are acceptable as long as the results are satisfactory. The laws enacted by Gujrat and Tamil Nadu governments to prevent conversion by deceit, bribery and other forms of coercion has unsettled many foreign churches and even American media. An article appeared in New York Times on 17^th April, 2003 on the situation of religious conversions in India and explains the frustrations felt by the Christian evangelicals seeking converts.

A petition was filed by Rev. Stanley Lowes in the Supreme Court against the Conversion Prevention Acts of Madhya Pradesh and Orissa. A constitutional division bench under the chairmanship of justice Mr. Ray, was formed to hear the petition. The petitioner argued that the fundamental right to propagate one's religion under the provisions of article 25(1) of the Indian constitution includes the right of conversion. The state governments of Madhya Pradesh and Orissa stated that propagation of religion means that one can talk about one's religion and explain its tenets but nobody has the right to resort to conversion.

In 1977, the Supreme Court gave the judgement that the right to propagate religion in article 25(1) gives to each member of every religion the right to spread or disseminate the tenets of his religion (say by advocacy or preaching), but it would not include the right to convert another, because each man has the same freedom of "conscience" guaranteed by that very provision in article 25(1).

Christian missionaries claim that by eradicating the caste system they are helping people and raising them up socially. They could do this easier by helping reform Hindu society rather than by trying to destroy or change the religion. Clearly they are using, if not promoting caste-differences as a conversion strategy. Christian cultures still have their class and other social inequalities, particularly in Central and South America, but Christians don't see that the religion has to be changed in order to get rid of these.

There is a beauty to non-Biblical beliefs like Hinduism, Buddhism, Jainism, Sikhism, Shinto and the many native beliefs. The old pagan religions of Europe had their beauty and profundity. This is lost on the missionary mind that only sees potential converts held in the clutches of false beliefs.

Followers of the missionary religion must recognize that their religion is hostile to other religions like Hinduism, even if it has good feelings for the people following that religion. Yet other religions also represent people and their sincere beliefs. To target religions is to attack people as well. To attack Hinduism as a religion is to insult and attack Hindus as human beings.

The style of functioning of Christian Missionaries in India indicates that:

1. they are opposed to secularism, as they do not believe in respect for all religions, the cardinal principle of secularism;
2. they demand extra-constitutional rights in matters of religion;
3. they are a threat to democracy and peace as they believe in violent revolts and revolutions;
4. they subvert national loyalties and destroy cultural roots leading to secessionist movements;
5. they are tools of Western imperialism in the guise of religious preaching and social work; and
6. they are a threat to our internal security under the smoke-screen of liberation theology.