While I do not propose to take valuable space to re-state my position which should be amply clear to anyone who has read my article in full, I cannot help pointing out that RMB has made a deft manoeuvre to divert our attention to media freedom (a subject which I have not touched on) by putting forward the skewed proposition that "the right to propagate religious teachings is part of the freedom of expression" and "this right when exercised by the media is called the right to media freedom"! I shall not fall pray to RMB’s diversionary tactic to take me away from the primary focus of my presentation, and shall leave his proposition to be addressed by others as part of the ongoing debate on media freedom, if need be!

The solution that RMB offers to the problem of unethical conversions is very simple, and that is for the convert to "accept the material benefit and pretend – yes pretend, to be a convert and also practice his religion after receiving the benefit". Even baptism, he says, is no bar to this. This way, I guess, you can pay back the unethical converters (evangelists or whoever they are) in the same coin, damn all considerations of morality!

My good friend reminds people who bear names like mine ("Perera, Fernando, Silva, Dias etc.") that they are descendants of such converts though many of them are no longer Christians, but Buddhists. "So" he says "false conversions secured by unethical practices are not going to last." The obvious message that RMB wants to convey is why all this fuss about unethical conversions, leave it to the free play of market forces!

Speaking on behalf of Pereras, Fernandos, Silvas (which include de Silvas like me), Diases etc., and in lighter vein, I think its time they got together and did some anthropological research to find out as to when and why their ancestors embraced the Christian faith, if at all, and why some of them renounced it later!