O

ct. 19

An Australian couple has said they were harassed at a restaurant in southern India by people who objected to a tattoo of a Hindu goddess on the man'€™s leg.

A crowd gathered around Matt Keith and his girlfriend while they were having lunch Saturday in Bangalore, saying the tattoo on the man'€™s shin offended their religion.

Keith said in a Facebook post that police took them to a police station where he was forced to write a letter of apology before they were allowed to leave.

Keith said he had studied in a school in southern India some years ago. '€œI love India, which is why we came back to visit,'€ he said.

'€œWe have heard about the growing Hindu nationalism, but nothing justifies the way we were treated. I love Hinduism,'€ he said.

India has seen a rise in incidents of religious intolerance over the past year, with Hindu nationalists trying to create a more Hindu-centric country.

Keith said he also had a tattoo of the elephant-headed Hindu god Ganesha on his back.

Your comments:

Wherever you go, you should know what is forbidden there. The couple should respect Indian people'€™s beliefs.

In fact, this Australian guy got off lightly, compared with the racist attacks and abuse experienced by many foreigners, including Indians, in Australia.

Henning

I have a Ganesha on my arm. Guess I won'€™t be traveling to India.

Kampungblac

Right, so it'€™s ok for Indians (or Asians) to have tattoos from Hinduism but when an Aussie Hindu does it it'€™s '€œoffensive'€? Yet another moral capitulation to a religious culture that is becoming more extreme. I read and watch many Hindu scholars who are quite amazed and saddened by the new wave of nationalism. Hinduism is (or was) unique among religions in that it did not condemn or recognize heresy.

Those here who say we should just capitulate to the whims of idiots betray the education they have. It is like the argument that if you draw a picture of the prophet in Islam then you deserve what'€™s coming, only much worse as this guy didn'€™t mean to offend anyone.

L. Millar

It has nothing to do with morality. It'€™s more like you walk into someone'€™s house and decide in your infinite naivety that it is a good idea to urinate in her garden. Don'€™t get me wrong '€” it'€™s probably morally ok, it'€™s just utterly stupid.

Sudarshana

Show me the part in Indian customs or religion stating that you aren'€™t allowed to have a tattoo with a Hindu symbol.

Also nobody mentioned what faith Keith belongs to. He may well be a Hindu himself.

Boneng

In this case the tourist is guilty of having a little knowledge (which is dangerous) and not taking due care. Tattoos are like billboards in that they convey a message. Travel means never drawing attention to yourself, which this idiot did.

Jagera