seedhi Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Doesn't matter. Article 370 is an integral part of the constitution and Section 377 is not.Article 370 is not "integral" .. it can be amended as well. What matters for a party like BJP while suggesting a course of action is whether it results in benefit for India's national interests, and how much public support is there for it. IMO, amending Section 377 is irrelevant to India's national interest and an utterly overwhelming majority of the population is against de-criminalizing homosexuality.
seedhi Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 LOL! Constitution is not integral but IPC is!I said that Article 370 is not an integral part of the Constitution. Learn to at least read what you wrote. And what do you mean by the Constitution is integral ? Integral to what ? To itself ? For heaven's sake, Indira Gandhi even amended the Preamble to the Constitution. So why cannot Article 370 be removed ? Its removal will not harm the rest of the Constitution in any way.
bulbul Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 So why cannot IPC 377 be removed? It's time is not yet came..when time comes it will also be removed.
The Outsider Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 It's time is not yet came..when time comes it will also be removed. Your time came and you were removed from ICF, and yet you are still festering.
bulbul Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Your time came and you were removed from ICF' date=' and yet you are still festering.[/quote'] Typical
seedhi Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 So why cannot IPC 377 be removed?Sure it can. Congress could have done so easily, if it believes so. My submission is that a particular law or statute needs to be amended/removed or kept intact based on its merits rather than whether it is part of the Constitution or the IPC. In other words, does the proposed course of action help Indian interests and does it have substantial public support. Removing Section 377 fails on both counts IMO, and so I don't see any logic for BJP proposing to do anything about it. Let me add a caveat that I am talking from the perspective of the executive/legislature. The judiciary can of course decide on the legality of the law itself irrespective of any other concern (pubic support etc).
The Outsider Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Merit is decided by people who want to kill babies feeding off umbilical cords?
seedhi Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 Merit is decided by people who want to kill babies feeding off umbilical cords?At least not by those like you who fantasize about slaughter of Indian Muslim wombs.
someone Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 What is wrong with BJP agreeing with the law of the land is that the law of land criminalizing homosexuality violates basic human rights. Article 370 is also a law of the land enshrined in the constitution. BJP is fine, the position is similar to other parties. But what about Muslims, what is their opinion about homosexuality? (The answer is well-known) So why are you afraid on this question? So one call now Muslims communal, against basic human rights, correct?
randomGuy Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 This is not just about land by the way. The central laws are not applicable to Kashmir. The Jan Lok Pal bill that AAP talks about would not be applicable in Kashmir even if it passes the Parliament. Such is the case with all other laws - CVC Act, RTI Act etc, as well. They will have to be approved by the Kashmir legislature. This duality simply cannot be sustained if Kashmir has to be integrated into India. 1. I suppose IPC is applicable in Kashmir. 2. There was been no lokayukt in Guj. for 8 yrs under Modi. In 2013, Modi weakened Guj. lokayukt law such that now the lokayukt has to take CM's permission before investigating. So, the state govt. can do all sorts of deals with Adani, Ambani etc and lokayukt can't do anything even though there's RTI or CAG. So, I trust central govt. led by Modi no more than the kashmir state govt. to make laws in favor of kashmiri population The game of BJP/congress is not to solve issues but to make and sustain the divide along communal lines. Its upto educated youth like yourself, bulbul, someone and Number to understand their game and vote for one party which can solve problems. If a non-Himachali stays in the state for 20 years' date=' he/she is entitled to a domicile status. No such provision exists for Kashmir. In Kashmir it is a complete segregation from the rest of India.[/quote'] You haven't given a source but supposing that its true - 20 yrs is an awfully long time. If there's arrangement for something like a lease for 99 yrs with power of attorney which is quite common across India, then it doesn't leave much to complain. perhaps only voting rights, Kashmir govt. jobs and college admissions for non-locals which are minor issue which can be worked out.
bulbul Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 [/quote=randomGuy;2868993] Its upto educated youth like yourself, bulbul, someone and Number to understand their game and vote for one party which can solve problems. QUOTE] AAP's time is not yet came,plz wait for few more years , first people has to change.
seedhi Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 1. I suppose IPC is applicable in Kashmir.Only if they are extended by the state government. 2. There was been no lokayukt in Guj. for 8 yrs under Modi. In 2013, Modi weakened Guj. lokayukt law such that now the lokayukt has to take CM's permission before investigating. So, the state govt. can do all sorts of deals with Adani, Ambani etc and lokayukt can't do anything even though there's RTI or CAG. So, I trust central govt. led by Modi no more than the kashmir state govt. to make laws in favor of kashmiri population The game of BJP/congress is not to solve issues but to make and sustain the divide along communal lines. Its upto educated youth like yourself, bulbul, someone and Number to understand their game and vote for one party which can solve problems.This is completely orthogonal discussion. I was talking of the segregation of Kashmir from rest of India. Even RTI, CVC Act, anti-rape laws - anything not pertaining to defence or foreign relations - are not directly applicable to Kashmir. This needs a solution as such a system cannot be sustained. The last 60 years have amply shown this. You haven't given a source but supposing that its true - 20 yrs is an awfully long time. If there's arrangement for something like a lease for 99 yrs with power of attorney which is quite common across India, then it doesn't leave much to complain. perhaps only voting rights, Kashmir govt. jobs and college admissions for non-locals which are minor issue which can be worked out.Here is the link http://www.hindu.com/2009/07/28/stories/2009072859640300.htm . 20 years is a long time for one generation, but then once a person becomes domicile - his downward family tree will also be domicile. If there were such a law in Kashmir, in a few generations it would be integrated to a large extent with India. Unfortunately, in the current legal setup any "progress" is akin to building a house of wax. A small fire and we are back to square one. And leasing land is not a solution for the problem. This has to be coupled with voting rights which means the grant of domicile status to outsiders who have been living for long in the state. Voting right and domicile status for outsiders and is THE solution.
urbestfriend Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 BJP's manifesto is good read, more like selling dreams of everything good, but no specifics how they are implemented. Also I am not sure whether NDA's manifesto is same as BJP's manifesto, if they are going to be different, whats the point of this manifesto?
seedhi Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 BJP's manifesto is good read' date=' more like selling dreams of everything good, but no specifics how they are implemented. Also I am not sure whether NDA's manifesto is same as BJP's manifesto, if they are going to be different, whats the point of this manifesto?[/quote']Don't think NDA is going to have a separate manifesto.
Precambrian Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 They did. A few months back their party president went on record to say that they agree with Supreme Court's decision to keep homosexuality as a criminal offense and consider homosexuality as unnatural. So no answer on the question to reform Muslim community? Always running away as usual.
Precambrian Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 They did. A few months back their party president went on record to say that they agree with Supreme Court's decision to keep homosexuality as a criminal offense and consider homosexuality as unnatural. So it's a crime to agree with the supreme Court, the laws of the land and the Constitution? Interesting.
someone Posted April 8, 2014 Posted April 8, 2014 So no answer on the question to reform Muslim community? Always running away as usual. Exactly. Runs away each time.
Recommended Posts