What would "God" do?

BBC NEWS | South Asia | Hindu sites 'only for Hinduism'

In the last two weeks there have been a few interesting controversies on Hinduism and its practices. First it was Vayalar Ravi's (a politician from Kerala) turn make huge noise about practices at the Guruvayoor temple. Then, came this ordinance from the Andhra governor.

Let us take Ravi's drama first - He went to Guruvayoor for a ceremony for his new grandchild and the priest asked them to do cleanising rites since Ravi is married to a Christian and hence his son (father of the child) is not "100% certified Hindu" (or shuudh Hindu). Ravi made a huge noise about this claiming he has been demeaned etc... Keep in mind this bloke was asked to do the same thing a few years back when he had been to the temple for something. At least he should appreciate that the temple and its priests are consistent in their policies and its implementation than the politicians.

Now, the people in power in Kerala - the commies (that is the Communists of India - the scum of the earth) smelling blood decided it is time to do away with the prehistoric/ barbaric/blah...blah practices of Hinduism. And, that brought the self proclaimed keepers of Hinduism out screaming bloody murder. They did have a valid point though - "Why only Hinduism?."

I have to agree with them. Why not take on the Muslim marriage and alimony - the Shah Bano case? Or, government subsidy for Haj (which, I believe goes against the Islamic norms of making a "valid" Haj). Or, the Christian marketing? The commies find it interesting to needle the majority from outside but they have no solution for anything - either economic, social or political.

I think the tantri (head priest) at Guruvayoor made some interesting comments and observations during an interview he gave on rediff.com. He is obligated to follow both the religious rules and legal rules so why not change it if it is draconian. And, if non-Hindus want to visit temples in Kerala they can convert to Hinduism. I guess that is no different from the fact that you need to be a Catholic for communion.

Then, came this piece from Andhra (see the first link). I tend to agree that marketing a religion (prosthelitizing) cannot be considered as an expression of religious freedom in a secular nation. In a secular nation where all religions are equal how can a practice that is aimed at promoting a religion as a better alternative (New! Improved formula. Beats the heck out of the competition) and the related conversions (On Sale! Buy one, get three. No interest, No payments) be considered an act of religious expression?

Finally, I think government and the politicians should get out of religion. Secularism should be based on separation of religion and state and not creating new rules for every single religion and related sects. That would mean a single civil code, equal opportunities to all, and we can extend that to mean equal access to all religious places. I wonder if we created God in our image not the other way around.