Jump to content

Supreme Court pronounces gay sex illegal


Stuge

Recommended Posts

Which countries are these ? I guess their dynamics would very similar to India' date=' right ?[/quote'] Some things are so in black and white that arguments of dynamics, culture, etc fall extremely hollow. The right thing should be done and as soon as possible
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some things are so in black and white that arguments of dynamics' date=' culture, etc fall extremely hollow. The right thing should be done and as soon as possible[/quote'] But laws are not made in a void. It evolves from a society. Right now I think the country is still at a stage where the jury is still out on if a person could be "gay". And I am talking about India here which little beyond Middle class and urban elite.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody has any number on how many consenting adults have been punished under section 377 which SC has refused to dump? I would say none in a decade or so. Whenever I hear 377 it is about the cases like Raghavji's in Madhya pradesh. That's justified use of 377. If you remove 377 how victims.s of such cases will get justice? Can all supporters of abolishment of 377 name one law which will provide relief to male victims of sexual assaults? Or all such supporters believe a man cannot be sexually aassaulted? Hypocrisy of highest order. First you oppose rape law to be gender neutral and then want only law that protects male victims to be abolished.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

But laws are not made in a void. It evolves from a society. Right now I think the country is still at a stage where the jury is still out on if a person could be "gay". And I am talking about India here which little beyond Middle class and urban elite.
But if you question an average villager about things like dowries, women rights, preference for sons,Inter caste/religion marriages etc. you might hear a very different answer than what is morally right. Would you go with their opinions even of they are morally and ethically wrong?A large part of India is still very ignorant about homosexuals. Many has not even met one (atleast one who are out of the closest). But it doesnt mean that they do not exist. Every human being deserves the same rights. We shouldnt use western countries as example of how long they took to legalize stuff. In this age, we expect to progress faster. Remove homesexuals and replace with lower caste or women. The people you talk about had problems with giving lower caste and womens equal right (some still do).
Link to comment
Share on other sites

But laws are not made in a void. It evolves from a society. Right now I think the country is still at a stage where the jury is still out on if a person could be "gay". And I am talking about India here which little beyond Middle class and urban elite.
You could make similar arguments for any regressive law. When untouchability was abolished, society had by and large not evolved to accept that it is a horrible practice. Over time things did improve, even though it is still practiced. There is plenty of evidence that homosexuality is not a matter of choice, neither is it unnatural. Discriminating against them is plain bigotry
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody has any number on how many consenting adults have been punished under section 377 which SC has refused to dump? I would say none in a decade or so. Whenever I hear 377 it is about the cases like Raghavji's in Madhya pradesh. That's justified use of 377. If you remove 377 how victims.s of such cases will get justice? Can all supporters of abolishment of 377 name one law which will provide relief to male victims of sexual assaults? Or all such supporters believe a man cannot be sexually aassaulted? Hypocrisy of highest order. First you oppose rape law to be gender neutral and then want only law that protects male victims to be abolished.
Just when I thought you couldnt top your last ridiculous post, you raise the benchmark. :hatsoff: The HC 2009 order decriminalized sex between consenting adults of the same gender. It didnt say anything about the other provisions of the act. The entire debate here has been about consensual sex, not the poor helpless men in India who are living constantly in fear from false cases lodged by scheming women or being sexually assaulted in this cruel matriarchal society.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could make similar arguments for any regressive law. When untouchability was abolished, society had by and large not evolved to accept that it is a horrible practice. Over time things did improve, even though it is still practiced. There is plenty of evidence that homosexuality is not a matter of choice, neither is it unnatural. Discriminating against them is plain bigotry
Untouchability was abolished by the Parliament which consisted of people's representatives, not by the Supreme Court. The same should happen in this case.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody has any number on how many consenting adults have been punished under section 377 which SC has refused to dump? I would say none in a decade or so. Whenever I hear 377 it is about the cases like Raghavji's in Madhya pradesh. That's justified use of 377. If you remove 377 how victims.s of such cases will get justice? Can all supporters of abolishment of 377 name one law which will provide relief to male victims of sexual assaults? Or all such supporters believe a man cannot be sexually aassaulted? Hypocrisy of highest order. First you oppose rape law to be gender neutral and then want only law that protects male victims to be abolished.
Sexual assault should be dealt under rape laws.Using 377 is like saying all sex is rape.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

What is the stance of the chaddi parties on this :hmmm: 2/3rd majority is required to move an amendment IIRC
They are still fighting cultural issues like Valentine's day and women drinking in bars, still cannot fathom people of the male variety indulging in consensual sex. They even forbid consenting heterosexuals before marriage, let alone homosexuals. Constitutional amendment should come from legislature and not from within courts. Political parties will not touch this in the election year. Maybe there are some progressives in AAP who can put this in their election manifesto to get young gay votes.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are still fighting cultural issues like Valentine's day and women drinking in bars, still cannot fathom people of the male variety indulging in consensual sex. They even forbid consenting heterosexuals before marriage, let alone homosexuals. Constitutional amendment should come from legislature and not from within courts. Political parties will not touch this in the election year. Maybe there are some progressives in AAP who can put this in their election manifesto to get young gay votes.
What about the argument that this law is discriminatory in nature and as such goes against the fundamental rights given to every citizen by the constitution. Therefore it can be struck down by the supreme court which has already set a precedence of striking down laws without the need for legislative amendment.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

They are still fighting cultural issues like Valentine's day and women drinking in bars, still cannot fathom people of the male variety indulging in consensual sex. They even forbid consenting heterosexuals before marriage, let alone homosexuals. Constitutional amendment should come from legislature and not from within courts. Political parties will not touch this in the election year. Maybe there are some progressives in AAP who can put this in their election manifesto to get young gay votes.
Is India ready to accept gays ? answer is no. Even AAP wont dare .
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I still don't understand how is anyone going to prove that two guys or two girls are having sex ?
Section 377 is not applicable on girls
377. Unnatural offences: Whoever voluntarily has carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal, shall be punished with imprisonment for life, or with imprisonment of either description for term which may extend to ten years, and shall also be liable to fine. Explanation: Penetration is sufficient to constitute the carnal intercourse necessary to the offense described in this section.[1][2] The ambit of Section 377, which was devised to criminalize and prevent homosexual sex[citation needed] extends to any sexual union involving penile insertion. Thus, even consensual heterosexual acts such as fellatio and **** penetration may be a punishable offense under this law. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_377_of_the_Indian_Penal_Code
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Anybody has any number on how many consenting adults have been punished under section 377 which SC has refused to dump? I would say none in a decade or so. Whenever I hear 377 it is about the cases like Raghavji's in Madhya pradesh. That's justified use of 377. If you remove 377 how victims.s of such cases will get justice? Can all supporters of abolishment of 377 name one law which will provide relief to male victims of sexual assaults? Or all such supporters believe a man cannot be sexually aassaulted? Hypocrisy of highest order. First you oppose rape law to be gender neutral and then want only law that protects male victims to be abolished.
Yukta mookhey charged her husband that he forced her into unnatural sex , so this law can be easily misused as it is applicable only on menit does not define homosexual or heteroosexual relation. It is just against **** sex whether it is done with man, woman or even animal
Link to comment
Share on other sites

no party is going to touch this' date='the obvious one to fight for it is Congress but they are afraid of losing the minority vote.[/quote'] The fact is the Indian society in general is far from accepting homosexuality as normal and acceptable. Indians are still largely religious and every single religion opposes homosexuality.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...