Once again the nation of India has proven that it has little tolerance for some of the fundamental tenants of a democratic state, thus reject the principle of individual liberty.

Recently, the Indian government took steps to block access to certain websites and now the Indian state of Madhya Pradesh has taken steps to suppress freedom of religion.

There, state authorities have passed a new law that would shame even the likes of George III. This law seeks to inhibit the ability of citizens to convert from Hinduism to another religion (though Christians are the principle target. If someone wants to convert, that person (and the officiating clergyman) must notify the state in advance. This law is clearly designed to hamper the free exercise of religion and in so doing raises other serious questions.

If one is convicted of violating the new law, they face up to a year in prison and an untold amount in fines. This law clearly has but one purpose, to intimidate and cajole citizens in a effort to prevent converts to Christianity or other faiths. With passage of this law, it is also clear that freedom has a long way to go in what is billed as the world’s largest democracy.

In many cultures it is assumed upon birth that a child is of the same religious faith as that of their parents, it is for this reason that demographic studies can show that over 80% of Americans are Christian, when clearly they are not. Does the Indian government therefore assume that if a person’s parents are Hindu, then they by extension are Hindu as well? Since infants have no ability to express a preference for a particular belief system can the government make such an assumption. Could not a person simply claim that they never were Hindu in the first place? This also begs the question of what happens if a person simply declares themselves to be a Christian. Christianity does not require a formal ceremony or ritual to be recognized as a Christian, simply a profession of faith in Christ is sufficient. In such a case would the convert serve two sentences?

One could expect such behavior from a so-called representative government like Russia, where freedom is a four letter word, but not from a nation with a 60 year track record democratic governance, but then again one needn’t look any further than to the US where individual freedoms are constantly under assault from the left and right.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/5215696.stm