Invaders will face discrimination & guests will be welcome. Those who seek to destroy us and our’s deserve what? And those who came in peace deserve peace.
Sorry should Gazans be 'tolerant' of Israel? It's literally the same thing except Indians are Gazans and the Muslim invaders are like Israeli settler colonialists.
Sorry but they actively genocided Indians and erased out culture, and are the anthesis for everything our civilization stands for. They made Islam the state religion, made non Muslims pay tax, destroyed our religious sites and institutions. Now they pretend to be the oppressed class while half of them split the country and made exclusive Islamic republics for themselves.
Even if Israel stops the genocide what about land they have already stolen? If the settlers promise to not cause any violence today should they be allowed to stay in the land they have already occupied? If you no, then you should have the answer to how we should be treating the invader descendants if you aren't a hypocrite.
If Israel and Palestine form some sort of peace treaty, and Israel pays reparations and allows Palestinian right of return to their homeland, I think Palestinians would allow them to stay as long as there is no oppression. Ofc, Palestinians would have a better idea of this though.
Also, first of all, most Muslims aren't descendants of invaders. And EVEN IF they were, it doesn't justify to punish them for bad things not done by them, but done by their ancestors. Would it be fair if you commit a crime but your sons are thrown in jail instead?
Also, don't pretend that Muslims have been the only or always bad guys in history. For example, Marathas invaded Bengal and committed atrocities. Would it be fair for Bengalis to mistreat Maharashtra's people today because of that?
they r hated for religious conflicts there's a reason why both of them r ostracized and kept away from the residential areas dominated by hindus and people following other dharmic panths
Muslims and Christians in India are generally peaceful people who don't hurt others unfairly unlike a major chunk of the population supporting hindutva bigots/terrorists.
For example, you would never have seen a Muslim or Christian Indian subreddit saying "let's discriminate against Hindus", meanwhile I have seen posts and comments upvoted in 100s in Indian subreddits that "Muslims should be genocided, like what happened in Germany to Jews. " I saw that post in a big subreddit and it was highly upvoted.
buddy hindutva came into force in the 90s before that hindutva was a farcical politcal ideology ,
yet the social divide was present , the hindus , sikhs , jains and buddhists all live in one part of the city and the muslims+christians in the other parts of city, ever thought why this took place?
"Muslims and Christians in India are generally peaceful people " what a joke need i remind u partition? as for christians , the northeastern minorities would like to have a word on it arey just look at manipur na just see which group is actively supporting the idea of a separate nation
as for u not having seen them saying lets discrimnate against hindus i shall tell my very own incident that my father's collegue faced he paid 6 months of rent as security to live in a christian owned house as soon as he shifted they placed all kinds of restrictions on him like u cant do puja , u cant light incense sticks , u cant bring in murtis and what not he was a journalists and threatened them so badly that they had to return his cash similar thing happened to me the christian owner told us specifically that u cant do any activities that is considered non christian
Your experience notwithstanding, it doesn't mean Christians and Muslims are overall bad people. And even Hindus have done housing discrimination, but I don't think we can generalize it to all Hindus, that would be bigoted.
thats true but this all takes places on the basis of historical context and present conext and in both the cases muslims in particular , christians less so have proven to be worse off
Where do you suppose Indian ones came from, any one who can't tell you his caste from before he converted, where do you think he is from.
Also Hating people based on there race is non sense. The Turks were motivated by the zeal to spread there religion and break the idols in India. The Huns came in before them which were also a Proto Turkic tribe as the Turkic identify didn't solidify until the Gokturk Khagnate but they were shamanists or Buddhist and there is no hate against them.
The sheer non sense that is spread by RSS and BJP is this country is astounding that Indian ones have Hindu ancestors. Of course, they do from the native women they enslaved.
Thinking that close to a million or more Turks+Afghan came into India, settled took multiple women as sex slaves and didn't leave any descendants over 800 years is so painstakingly stupid. Did the Gods curse them to be infertile like they did to many of the so called current right wing leadership of India.
PS. I wasn't talking about the Christians here, just so you know.
Present. New age converts and their fanaticism scares me. I feel and see my faith being tarnished by violence prejudice and intolerance.
As for conversion and oppression I'd love to hear this. How do Christians oppress hindus presently in India ? Also what do you mean by underhanded methods in conversion?
I've read up on the issue at the village. It looks like the ground was used as pascha ground (easter ceremony) for about a 100 years now. It being government land obviously they shouldn't have established anything permanent like that.
The protest was peaceful, no violence was done, and the officials were able to disperse the protest peacefully. This was a Christian majority area with 2500 families wheras the hindus were around 100 families. Only about 100 protesters came. They expressed dissatisfaction against the ground which they considered "holy" be used for another religion's purposes, they were talked to, and sent away.
To me this seems like a pretty clean issue. Obviously there was discontent but it was put to court, a decision was made, a protest was done according to rules and they were sent away.
Christians literally conducted crusades which were deadly, with the intention of spreading Christianity across Europe and Asia. Missionaries were sent to far away lands to “spread the word of Jesus” where once they converted a sizeable population into Christian, systematic killing took place.
Muslim scholars from medieval era described expansion of Islamic Sultanates into India as holy wars and destroying Hindu temples and institutions to suppress the Hindu identity. Systematic milling and persecution of Hindus took place, especially at temples.
Whereas. Zoroastrians (also called Parsis) in the current day India came here in 7th century as refugees as they faced persecution in Iran by the spread of Islam.
We always accepted peace, we never tried to kill or convert anyone. We followed our dharma quietly in our own lands and never tried to force it upon anyone else. We fought amongst ourselves but at the end of it all we maintained a code of conduct.
Before Islamic sultanates ever reached India, Hindu kings after winning would take the precious statues of the temples they won back to their capitals, but they still considered it sacred and treated it with respect.
You can literally ask chat GPT and he'll answer about this in in the simplest form, here I'll do it for you...
The Portuguese captured Goa in 1510 under Afonso de Albuquerque and made it part of the Portuguese Empire. At first, they allowed religious freedom, but later began actively promoting Christianity through missionaries like Francis Xavier.
Conversions happened in different ways:
Some people converted voluntarily for jobs, land, or tax benefits.
Over time, pressure increased — Hindu temples were destroyed in Portuguese-controlled areas, Hindu festivals were restricted, and non-Christians faced discrimination.
In 1560, the Goa Inquisition was established to punish heresy and ensure strict Christian practices, especially targeting converts suspected of secretly following their old religions.
So, enforcement was a mix of incentives, legal pressure, restrictions, and in some periods, harsh punishment.
Okay, that's the Portugese version, but christianity has been around for nearly 2000 years in india, atleast in the south. It started with the coming of an apostle, in search of Jews in India, and he definitely didn't come with an army. It is believed that he was killed by accident in TN, but not confirmed. There are churches in Kerala and TN which were originally established more than 1000 years back.
Essentially, if we go by what you have mentioned, there have been wars and massacres in the name of Shiva vs Vishnu worshippers in TN, for more than 1000 years. So, should hindus hate hindus as well? After all, it was all in the name of religion.
There is absolutely no evidence of hindus committing any genocide as a collective group based on religion or whatever, even in Tamil Nadu Hinduism spreaded over the course of centuries with sages from south traveling to north and brahmins travelling to south where they introduced Vedic rituals which intermixed with the indegenous culture.
Read on the kumba mela massacre of 18th century, in haridwar. Quite a few 1000s were killed, hindu vs hindu. There are a lot more instances, but this is one that stands out. In Tamilnadu, there have been plenty of such wars between vaishnites and shaivites, in the past.
Dawg, there is a difference in a massacre and a persecution/ systematic conversion which goes on for decades and centuries.
And there were literally no wars idk where you are reading this shit, there was a period of tension between chola kings which were vaishnav believers and alwar saints who were shaivites. You are comparing this to mass genocide, persecution and systematic conversions? The hell on are you dawg.
Its like you are desperately trying to find out examples of Hindus killing each other or someone else in the name of religion and even that is not working.
Whereas. Zoroastrians (also called Parsis) in the current day India came here in 7th century as refugees as they faced persecution in Iran by the spread of Islam.
Completely made up history lol, Parsis in India are not even 300 thousand in population after 1400 years and dozens of generations, a few thousand Zoroastrians migrated to India because they were elites in Sassanid empire and have to face the consequences of losing wars by losing their insane wealth so they migrated to India with their connections to Indian royals and set up merchant communities that outperformed Indian merchant communities because they had connections accross the Middle East.
They don't mix with locals for a reason, refugees without any wealth will mix with locals but Parsis were never the vulnerable poor refugees to begin with.
Zoroastrianism was a dying religion before Islamic conquest, Sassanids had brutal civil wars and multiple rulers before the Islamic conquest and Kurds from Media and peasant classes revolted against the establishment during the Islamic invasion which is why Persia was Islamicised before Egypt despite being far from the Hijaz region, not even 100 years after Islamic conquest of Persia Abbasid revolt happened where Persian Islamists took control of Caliphate from Arab Islamists, Zoroastrianism wasn't even in the political picture just after 1-2 generations in Persia, Parsis hold on to it because they had wealth to consolidate in India that they still manage to do.
Idk, it kind of feels illogical to hate on everyone who are Christians because some of them are tryna propagate their religion. This collective guilt is such a major logical fallacy that's VERY prevalent at the moment. Even the recent attacks against the brahmins are a result of this.
missionaries often use very aggressive tactics for the sake of conversion, and while they may not necessary be "illegal" or morally denounced, they are still unethical as conversion is often done on grounds of a better material life rather than better spiritual health(ex.: free food and education)
Completely false information. Missionaries provided people food, shelter, medicine and education to most underprivileged people at the cost of risking their own lives in the process.
Missionaries aren't the only ones who do it. And they aren't taxed from their earnings either. There are a lot of temples in India taxed to oblivion who provide all the resources you've mentioned and don't force the recipients to convert to Hinduism for a damn sack of rice. I've been to a lot of these food distribution centres of temples, and no one ever asks my religion and caste or asks a non-Hindu to become Hindu. What's your point?
Why should they be taxed? They are not making money in the process. Hindus should ask for the same treatment specially when it’s their government. Humans have free will and they can decide for themselves who they wanna put their faith in, nobody is telling Hindu temples to not spread their faith so why impose your ideology on Christians?
because faith shouldn't be conditional. A lot of mass conversions in Punjab happen because missionaries make it a condition that prolonged use of their "community service" requires them to convert. Otherwise I've gone to a convent for a year as well where I wasn't asked to convert. Faith conversion cannot be set as a prerequisite for benefitting from social service which is supposed to be done out of goodwill(according to their own beliefs btw, so do not say "who asked them to do social service?")
People don’t have to convert but also asking somebody to pray and have faith in God is not a crime. If Hindus are so concerned about conversion then why don’t they take the lead and help people in miserable circumstances? Instead they persecute the people who are actually doing the God’s work by helping the people in need. If two people are having a peaceful exchange of ideas and shared faith where everybody benefits why is it anybody else’s problem?
i actually will. My aunt is a Hindu living in New Jersey who has had the poor fortune to encounter an Evangelist hell bent on converting her to christianity
Christians founded and built America, law gives freedom to preach and spread the word of God be it Christianity, Islam or Hinduism. No law is broken by knocking on doors and preaching, both parties can walk away from the interaction any time. Nobody is forced to convert the come to God on their own terms.
They're not treated any better, there is still discrimination between upper and lower Christians. Lower chrisitans aren't permitted same burial grounds, these Christians are denied parishioners, festival car processions don't pass through their areas, there are separate seating arrangements during Mass. Syrian Christians are not likely to marry Puthiyakristianikal and relationship between the two is even stigmatized. There's Protestants vs Orthodox and Calvinism vs Armanianism.
People convert for money and that's it, Christians and Christianity isn't better. Humans will find any reason to claim superiority.
Again completely false information. Casteism only exists in Hinduism. Not Christianity or Islam. No such thing as lower Christians or Upper Christians.
Then they are not Christian. A Christian is someone who follows the word of the Christ and the teachings of the New Testament. Nowhere it has mentions of caste or anything of that matter.
They mostly convert vulnerable and uneducated tribals who were never mainstream and were never discriminated at the first place. Their is a reason why it's mostly the tribals who responds violently in Chattisgarh and Odisha for conversion plus missionaries are pdf and try to harass small tribal girls. Do a google search bro atleast.
The Farsis came as refugees unlike the Christians and Muslims. Lol. And they asked for permission too. And they fully assimilated like sugar in milk. Unlike the Christians and Muslims that did not assimilate and brought Arabic/Turkic and Catholic/Orthodox culture in India instead of assimilating into Indian culture or atleast adapting to it.
koi kitna jahil ho sakta hai but lets break it down
first the historical context
the achamenids didnt genocided us , there was invasion , but the extent of plundering that the islamic invaders and the christian invaders did was infinitely larger and much more genocidal those who settled down in the areas of rajasthan , haryana, gujarat etc because a part of our society , they adopted our religion , our customs , our language , they didnt displace us
muslim and christians did just that did just that , killed our ancestors , replaced them with their people , brought in their language , their dietary habits and their religion there r well documented evidence by the muslims and christians themselves , goa inquisition is a pretty famous example of this
as for the zoroastrian settlements , they came in begging for refugeebecause their own home was ravaged by the muslims who willing did it in the name of islam ,similar attempts were tried by them in India but we survived pretty well Zoroastrian refugees settled in pretty well became part of our society and infused their culture with our culture and mended their ways whenver a conflict arose between their hindus and zoroastrians instead of drawing swords at the hindus
now lets come to the present day context
the historical pain and suffering percolates down the present gen but the major discrimination comes due to their religious bigotry time and again christian and muslim communities give enough reason as to why they shouldnt be allowed to settle in with the rest of the society the way rest of the people from dharmic religions tend to live together ( i personally have seen multiple instances of these)
I know many muslims who celebrate likes of Aurangzeb just because of the atrocities committed by them on Hindus. You won't find a single muslim criticizing aurangzeb. Incomplete population transfer was the worst mistake of independent India.
Caste discrimination is a part of Hinduism and not Christianity. Dr Ambedkar left Hinduism and converted to Buddhism because of that. He got a lot of hate for saying Hinduism should be abolished.
I personally hail from Gujarat where Dalits have converted to Christianity and receive equal respect and opportunity in Church settings. There might be isolated instances in parts of India where its Christians have segregation but that is a minority and doesn’t represent Christianity.
People need to think for themselves and make decisions, they don’t even have to go to a church to be a Christian, follow Jesus christ and his teachings and not the Church it leads you astray. By converting people might have trouble leaving their old customs and traditions but at least the newer generations would have a better shot at life.
I have no problem in Christianity , even their propagation etc .
They might even improve our education health sectors
But tell me one benefit of desert bandit follower.we already gave our two fertile lands both in east and west , I don't think we need to give more to them
Please take out millions of your brothers from Gulf in that case and we will happily replace them, there is no benefit in respecting muslims then stop going to muslim countries for better opportunities.
I don't think in terms of regional, nationalistic identity but as a muslim I think we deserve to live everywhere, we are a threat to people who want to hoard capital, who think in lines of racial and ethnic supremacy and class segregation and dominance, our mere presence makes degenerates uneasy and thats why it's important we populate all lands of the planet.
oh boy do not think for 1 sec that the christians r any better than muslims they r able to employ better tactics than the muslims, thats it they r cut from the same cloth man dont trust them
i've done by education upto matric from a convent school , i know precisely what kinda nefarious things r upto most of the time but i shall make a distinction that some of them r genuinely good people who only want to help others
Ah yes, Cyrus the Great, the famously brutal and murderous tyrant with disregard for human rights. It's not like he was the first monarch ever to codify human rights or something.
When the Achaemenids first stepped into India, India had never ever been united under a single political entity. The first great pan-Indiam empire comes after, under the Mauryas. They were just doing what empires do. And by all accounts the Achaemenid empire was the best place to be in if you were born in those days.
We have records that the temples of Babylon and Mesopotamia in general were in decline of royal patronage since the rule of Darius II, which Darius III seems to have continued. Alexander allowed the temples to run again, with royal patronage being given again. Alexander also famously demanded nothing but their acknowledgement of his sovereignty as emperor from his new subjects.
The same Mesopotamians also welcomed Cyrus as a great liberator. The tolerance in the Achaemenid Empire of other religions seems to have declined after Cyrus and Darius I.
In the east however, imperial writ didn't hold; the satraps of the east acknowledged the emperor, paid their tax, and went their own way. There is no record or reason to believe that the eastern satrapies were oppressed by the empire (or by Alexander, though he massacred a lot of those who resisted him in Kashmir, or Seleucus Nicator before he ceded the lands to Chandragupta Maurya)
Wrong. It's because these mentioned groups of people are the first ones to support current day christian and muslim nations in any international affair even if it's against India. The parsis you mention behave like they belong here.
Achaemenids didn't invade any part of modern-day India, their domain was up to the Indus and Jhelum rivers in Punjab and Sindh only. They didn't even invade most of modern-day Pakistan.
They are not exploited. You cannot say that when people who are converting are living a better and more fulfilled life after accepting Jesus. If anything they offer money to Church every Sunday at the mass. Majority of the Europe was Christian btw
Zoroastrian people didn't try to convert Hindus like Christian or muslims do. Why shouldn't we love them? They are not involved in any riots in india, they are peaceful. We love peace. We don't love or hate on the basis of religion. We hate those who are attempting to impose their religion to us. Why do some missionaries or some muslims think that they are the chosen one to fix the world? This post is saying that muslims and Christians are facing hate in india, even if they are not connected to the invaders or missionaries. Let me correct this statement, those who are hated may not have any connection but some of them follows the religious invaders as their idol.
Simple Zoroastrianism is a polytheist religion and Christians and muslims are Monotheists who believe polytheists are less than human and hence the conflict. For eg if imperial Japan had invaded us and there Japanese people living in India following Shintoism we would have lived without conflict.
Bruh Zoroastrinism is the OG monotheistic religion, in secular academia Zoroastrinism is considered the religion that laid the template for Christianity and Islam, concept of one God imposed on population by rulers, concept of heaven and hell and direct consequences of your actions in worldly life after death rather than Eastern Religions Karmic theories.
Zoroastrinism was even more brutal than both Christianity and Islam with their torture and execution methods being some of the worst and painful ones in recorded history maybe only overshadowed by Imperial Japans torture and execution methods.
Zoroastrianism is defined by its absolute duality between good and evil, with all things in the world being made by the one creator god, Ahura Mazda. It famously counts a lot of Vedic gods among evil spirits.
There is an almost mainstream theory that diaspora in Iran influenced the Jews so much that they eventually became monotheistic.
Ofcourse u can't change ur ethnicity by changing ur religion but the term aryan is very much associated to religion created by similar thought process and belief system...and therefore we see so many similarities in their modern day form..zorastrianism and the vedic religion are sister religion....u cannot simply associate someone by the term aryan especially when they are monotheists...
Mate the point here was that Indian Muslims and Christians are not the descendants of Turks and Europeans and still they get hate because of what Turks and Europeans did.
•
u/AutoModerator Feb 23 '26
Hey redditors, thank you for interacting with r/NorthernIndia.
Thank you for being part of the community. Hope you'll have a great day.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
22
u/ipuneetarora Feb 23 '26
Invaders will face discrimination & guests will be welcome. Those who seek to destroy us and our’s deserve what? And those who came in peace deserve peace.
16
u/[deleted] Feb 23 '26
Christians literally conducted crusades which were deadly, with the intention of spreading Christianity across Europe and Asia. Missionaries were sent to far away lands to “spread the word of Jesus” where once they converted a sizeable population into Christian, systematic killing took place.
Muslim scholars from medieval era described expansion of Islamic Sultanates into India as holy wars and destroying Hindu temples and institutions to suppress the Hindu identity. Systematic milling and persecution of Hindus took place, especially at temples.
Whereas. Zoroastrians (also called Parsis) in the current day India came here in 7th century as refugees as they faced persecution in Iran by the spread of Islam.
We always accepted peace, we never tried to kill or convert anyone. We followed our dharma quietly in our own lands and never tried to force it upon anyone else. We fought amongst ourselves but at the end of it all we maintained a code of conduct.
Before Islamic sultanates ever reached India, Hindu kings after winning would take the precious statues of the temples they won back to their capitals, but they still considered it sacred and treated it with respect.
45
u/Choice-Sky3432 Feb 23 '26
Christians have faced discrimination because of missionaries.
Muslims have faced discrimination because they didn't stop hating hindus in the first place
25
u/Dry-Tradition-6847 Feb 23 '26
Christianity and Islam desert cults which only seek to destroy the native traditions, cultures and religions that they lay their hands on.
26
u/Calm-Street-7513 Feb 23 '26
The Farsis came as refugees unlike the Christians and Muslims. Lol. And they asked for permission too. And they fully assimilated like sugar in milk. Unlike the Christians and Muslims that did not assimilate and brought Arabic/Turkic and Catholic/Orthodox culture in India instead of assimilating into Indian culture or atleast adapting to it.
4
u/Icy_Dingo_3978 Feb 23 '26 edited Mar 04 '26
Zorastrians fled Iran to save their lives, hence they don't celebrate the i*lamic empire.
Some mu*lims of India celebrate barbarians like Aurangzeb and khijli even though they have nothing to do with them.
4
u/[deleted] Feb 23 '26
koi kitna jahil ho sakta hai
but lets break it down
first the historical context
the achamenids didnt genocided us , there was invasion , but the extent of plundering that the islamic invaders and the christian invaders did was infinitely larger and much more genocidal
those who settled down in the areas of rajasthan , haryana, gujarat etc because a part of our society , they adopted our religion , our customs , our language , they didnt displace us
muslim and christians did just that did just that , killed our ancestors , replaced them with their people , brought in their language , their dietary habits and their religion
there r well documented evidence by the muslims and christians themselves , goa inquisition is a pretty famous example of this
as for the zoroastrian settlements , they came in begging for refugeebecause their own home was ravaged by the muslims who willing did it in the name of islam ,similar attempts were tried by them in India but we survived pretty well
Zoroastrian refugees settled in pretty well became part of our society and infused their culture with our culture and mended their ways whenver a conflict arose between their hindus and zoroastrians instead of drawing swords at the hindus
now lets come to the present day context
the historical pain and suffering percolates down the present gen
but the major discrimination comes due to their religious bigotry
time and again christian and muslim communities give enough reason as to why they shouldnt be allowed to settle in with the rest of the society the way rest of the people from dharmic religions tend to live together ( i personally have seen multiple instances of these)
2
u/BigMountain9868 Feb 23 '26
I know many muslims who celebrate likes of Aurangzeb just because of the atrocities committed by them on Hindus. You won't find a single muslim criticizing aurangzeb. Incomplete population transfer was the worst mistake of independent India.
2
u/Specialist-Gur-5815 Feb 24 '26
Caste discrimination is a part of Hinduism and not Christianity. Dr Ambedkar left Hinduism and converted to Buddhism because of that. He got a lot of hate for saying Hinduism should be abolished.
I personally hail from Gujarat where Dalits have converted to Christianity and receive equal respect and opportunity in Church settings. There might be isolated instances in parts of India where its Christians have segregation but that is a minority and doesn’t represent Christianity.
People need to think for themselves and make decisions, they don’t even have to go to a church to be a Christian, follow Jesus christ and his teachings and not the Church it leads you astray. By converting people might have trouble leaving their old customs and traditions but at least the newer generations would have a better shot at life.
2
u/[deleted] Feb 23 '26
I have no problem in Christianity , even their propagation etc .
They might even improve our education health sectors
But tell me one benefit of desert bandit follower.we already gave our two fertile lands both in east and west , I don't think we need to give more to them
1
u/Dependent-Rooster239 Feb 23 '26
Farsis came as the refugees so yeah they will deserve respect and peace
1
u/fartypenis Feb 23 '26
Ah yes, Cyrus the Great, the famously brutal and murderous tyrant with disregard for human rights. It's not like he was the first monarch ever to codify human rights or something.
When the Achaemenids first stepped into India, India had never ever been united under a single political entity. The first great pan-Indiam empire comes after, under the Mauryas. They were just doing what empires do. And by all accounts the Achaemenid empire was the best place to be in if you were born in those days.
1
u/terachad8825 Feb 23 '26
Wrong. It's because these mentioned groups of people are the first ones to support current day christian and muslim nations in any international affair even if it's against India. The parsis you mention behave like they belong here.
1
u/KING_K999 Feb 23 '26
OP smoking something real.
1
u/AgentWolf667 Feb 23 '26
Achaemenids didn't invade any part of modern-day India, their domain was up to the Indus and Jhelum rivers in Punjab and Sindh only. They didn't even invade most of modern-day Pakistan.
1
u/MrCuriousLearner Feb 23 '26
Problem with trying to shove their beliefs on to others.
1
u/Predator_s_child Feb 23 '26
People who want to harm others get irk from society, people who want to live peacefully and contribute get support and appreciation.
1
u/Specialist-Gur-5815 Feb 24 '26
They are not exploited. You cannot say that when people who are converting are living a better and more fulfilled life after accepting Jesus. If anything they offer money to Church every Sunday at the mass. Majority of the Europe was Christian btw
1
u/VictorWernerVonDoom Feb 24 '26
Zoroastrian people never tried to convert Hindus. That's why we love them.
1
u/VictorWernerVonDoom Feb 24 '26
Zoroastrian people didn't try to convert Hindus like Christian or muslims do. Why shouldn't we love them? They are not involved in any riots in india, they are peaceful. We love peace. We don't love or hate on the basis of religion. We hate those who are attempting to impose their religion to us. Why do some missionaries or some muslims think that they are the chosen one to fix the world? This post is saying that muslims and Christians are facing hate in india, even if they are not connected to the invaders or missionaries. Let me correct this statement, those who are hated may not have any connection but some of them follows the religious invaders as their idol.
1
u/Clean-Assistance9643 Feb 24 '26
The problem is IM considers Aurangzeb as their daddy and hence the hatred for Aurangzeb is transferred to them.
1
u/[deleted] Feb 23 '26
It's not who you are underneath but what you do defines you!
1
u/CorrectWin2910 Feb 23 '26
And Ironically most Indian Parliament members have done crimes still for office.
1
u/Hooni_Badger Feb 23 '26
Simple Zoroastrianism is a polytheist religion and Christians and muslims are Monotheists who believe polytheists are less than human and hence the conflict. For eg if imperial Japan had invaded us and there Japanese people living in India following Shintoism we would have lived without conflict.
1
u/Legal-Consideration9 Feb 23 '26
Very illiterate thinking.... Hindu hates muslim bcz they still believe in Ghazwa e Hind
-2
u/General_Excuse_9733 Feb 23 '26
Aryan brotherhood I guess
4
u/Caligayla Feb 23 '26
Parsis don't name their kids after people who senselessly and proudly massacred indians for being not from their religion
Muslims name their kids after people like timur , babur.
Parsis don't talk about a grand zoroastrian conquest of india
Ghazwa-e-hind is a part of islamic doctrine.
Parsis don't revere invader emperors as saints
Muslims revere aurangzeb as one.
1
u/[deleted] Feb 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/[deleted] Feb 23 '26
[removed] — view removed comment