The Freedom of Religion Bills in India – Dr. Deborah Suparna

 “The Freedom of Religion Bills in India” – Dr. Deborah Suparna

Antipathy toward proselytizing in India has given rise to legislation in several Indian states that severely restrict religious conversion. The so-called Freedom of Religion Bill is ostensibly designed to prevent conversion by force, fraud, or inducement. But as many have remarked, the Acts are effectively if not openly discriminatory, imposing disproportionate hardships on non-Hindus and low castes. Although proponents argue that the Acts safeguard religious freedom by prohibiting coercive means of proselytizing, the legislation’s vague definitions of force and fraud make it impossible to ascertain when the conversion will be legitimate in the eyes of the state.

On the one hand, there are Christians and secularists who insist that conversion is a fundamental right, which is part of the universal freedom of conscience. While on the other hand, there are Hindus who say that conversion is an act of violence, which violates religious traditions and disrupts families, communities, and society in general. The majority of Indian philosophers view diverse religions not as rivals concerning gaining converts or competitors with respect to truth. For them, Religion does not revolve around the belief in a system of doctrines, which is either true or false. Hence the idea of one single religion for humankind becomes illogical or even inconceivable to the majority of the Hindu mind. 

Though the dharmic rationale appears noble to applaud, a fair assessment of anti-conversion laws unmasks the Hindutva fear of the majority dwindling into a fading minority by the intensifying activity of Christian missionaries, who offer marginalized Hindus the possibility of freedom from the oppressive caste system and the ability to become dignified and equal members of society (Mosse, 2012; Viswanathan, 1998). These laws solidify existing social categories by making it harder for people to change their identities. They tend to construct women and Dalits as victims, vulnerable passive dupes of the machinations of active converters with no ability for decision-making or spiritual discernment.

The primary accusation of conversion based on force, fraudulence, and allurement, Bauman argues, that among other motivating factors, conversion represents the pursuit of “primordial” interests that are a mixture of material and more elusive, often subconscious ideological and emotional interests that have to do with basic and universal human needs such as security, health, and meaning (Bauman 2018a, p. 17). Nonetheless, the perplexing question surfaces as to how one determines whether converts have been “forced, lured, or tricked”, without being able to see directly into another person’s mind. Indeed, these laws place government bureaucrats in the illegitimate, impossible, and unenviable position of needing to determine what constitutes “valid” conversion (Jenkins 2008, p. 120). Moreover, these laws elevate the Hindu view of dharma over individual freedom of conscience. They sacrifice individual discretion at the altar of community consent and prioritize community over the individual, where s(he) has to strive for the larger good of the community. The expectation of social conformity on the part of the individual can be extremely tyrannical for those seeking conversion.

In a similar vein, the Supreme Court’s interpretation of “public order,” in the Article not only poses a serious threat to freedom of religion but also empowers activists to resist conversion and provide a pretext for attacks against religious minorities, sometimes leading to violent conflict spirals. It aids the state police in preventing individual conversions rather than protecting the freedom of individuals who genuinely seek to change their faith.

I think that the Freedom of Religion Bills passed by the States facilitate intimidating experiences for individuals to convert. It is a privacy breach on the part of the government under the banner of Hindu Nationalism. The nature of laws that the bill mandates deprive its citizens of personal dignity and self-worth, confining them to social and economic bondage. Though conversion is not completely banned in the country, the twisted meanings attached make religious conversion a troublesome choice. The Freedoms of Religion legislation tends to erode the freedoms protected by Article 25, which are essential freedoms within a liberal democracy, especially in a society that is fundamentally multi-religious in nature. Ironically, the explication of conversion laws for Indian Christians regarding the propagation of their faith does not warrant any religious conversion. And, no matter how promising these laws sound, tacitly, their implementation deprives the spirit of freedom and equality among the citizens of India, setting up a dreadful example for future generations to emulate.

For Christians, anti-conversion laws hold no true power. History demonstrates that the Christian faith has not only survived but flourished in the face of persecution. After all, genuine conversion is a deeply personal experience, a transformation wrought by the Holy Spirit, and ultimately beyond the control of mere human laws. No human agency can truly hinder this divine process of conversion.

However, this doesn’t make us passive bystanders. We, as disciples of Christ, are called to challenge the ambiguity of these laws and advocate for justice and religious freedom. We can continue to faithfully fulfil the Great Commission by inviting others to encounter the love of God, guided and empowered by the Holy Spirit.