Jump to content

Supreme Court pronounces gay sex illegal

Stuge

By Stuge
in Chit Chat

 Share

Recommended Posts

hhunaeh Newbie

hhunaeh

Posted
Posted

Nepal is worried about India's regressive influence. Cause for concern

India’s banning of gay sex Last week was a time to forget for the global gay community. First, on Wednesday, the Indian Supreme Court declared illegal all forms of gay sex. Then on Thursday the Australian High Court imposed a complete ban on same-sex marriage. The community is visibly spooked, dismayed and dejected at the twin setbacks after years of fighting discrimination and painstakingly slow positive changes in their favor. The mood among the gay rights activists in Nepal is no different. Following a pair of landmark Supreme Court decisions in 2007 and 2008, Nepal has become one of the most gay-friendly destinations in the world. The 2007 verdict decriminalized same sex sexual activities; the 2008 decision removed many other discriminations against the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) community, most notably laying the ground for legalization of same-sex marriage. It had instructed the government to institute a committee to explore the feasibility of same-sex marriage based on international precedents. Perhaps the first CA, if it had been able to produce a constitution, would have enacted a legislation legalizing same sex marriage. That wasn’t meant to be. The community now fears that in the wake of the recent setbacks abroad, Nepal might backtrack on its commitments to protecting their rights. Their alarm is warranted. Nepal is still a very conservative society and there are many who are not happy with what they see as the legitimization of ‘immoral’ and ‘unnatural’ practices. The Indian Supreme Court’s decision in particular would give social and religious conservatives new ammunition against LGBT community and the impetus to try to roll back gay-friendly provisions. The good news is that LGBT rights are only a small part of the progressive changes witnessed in the aftermath of the 2006 popular movement. Although some conservative forces are in the ascendency, they will find it hard to take the country to status quo ante. All the major parties have consistently stood in favor of minority rights, including LGBT rights. Even UCPN (Maoist), which used to ridicule the community during the insurgency days, now champions their cause. Yet there is a need for vigilance against cheap imitation of the Indian precedent. The Nepali judiciary in particular can be proud of its bold stands in favor equal rights for all Nepalis irrespective of their caste, cast and gender. There is no reason to follow on the path of its Indian counterpart whose recent decision is clearly motivated by age-old bias against the gay community that is reflected in the Indian penal code which prohibits “carnal intercourse against the order of natureâ€. It is easy to get bogged down in the debate over the nebulous concept of morality (in the eyes of most religious conservatives even pre-marital sex is immoral). It is also extremely hard for those of us who have grown up with bold depictions of ancient female gods making love among themselves in our most holy places of worship to believe that gay sex is somehow unnatural. The hallmark of a true democracy isn’t universal consensus in favor of a certain course of action. It is the state’s ability to ensure that the basic rights of each and every member of the society is protected, even by going against the wishes of certain constituencies.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Muloghonto Mentor

Muloghonto

Posted
Posted
Worst case of generalisation and ignorance. One carving in a temple and it's representative of all Hinduism. Get a clue.
Nobody said it is representative of all hinduism. But it is representative OF hinduism as well, so the BJP has no business claiming that it is upholding our cultural or religious morals by taking its stance.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Muloghonto Mentor

Muloghonto

Posted
Posted
I didn't even bother to argue with him...No disrespect....The guy does make good points usually but on this topic he totally lost me when he said Liberal Indian families will accept when one of their own family member is Gay.
If you think that in a nation of 1 billion people, with estimates of over 3-5 million gay people, all the gay folks are either living a secret double life or have serious acceptance issues from their families, then you have no clue. Ofcourse, 'acceptance from their family' is a red herring- most of us who are old enough know that there are very few things all members of your family will approve of- including your heterosexual spouse. But if you mean in terms of mother/father/siblings, i can say with perfect conviction that there are gay people in India who've found acceptance from their 'family' and given their families are not overtly religious or illiterate, a 'liberal' tag would be more appropriate. Incase you are blithly unaware, most Indian families have a 'dont ask, dont tell' policies to people outside of family about 'abnormal family practices'. That does not equate to 'dont accept' either.
The examples of most extreme scenarios when an Indian family is considered a Liberal indian family are-Say for eg; A girl divorces her opressive Husband or a young widow re-marries,the family(rightfully) will back her....that is as liberal an Indian family will get even that would be a large enough minority-Sad but True.
That is nothing more than your narrow vision and lack of awareness of Indian culture.
Unbeleivable that this topic which is a tabboo in every Indian Household is given so much importance
Irrelevant. Sex is a taboo topic too and I highly doubt there are 12-15 year old Indian girls running around asking their dads what really is rape and what to do about rape, so lets not talk about rape as a issue in Indian society either, right ??
......Infact arguments will only be made on a forum...No one in India will even care about this and by this I mean even the gays.......WHo the hell is going to come out in the open and dispute his 'fundamental' right to bang a person of the same-sex. I think either the liberal posters here live in a different country or live in a bubble.
'Who will really care about it, so therefore not do it' is the mark of an argument lacking complete understanding or an innate appreciation of legal process and the legal implications and necessities of it. Maybe one day, when you grow up and start to own property or have a bit more personal stake at anything legal related, you would appreciate the levity of a situation involving rights and legal letter of the law. But if your perspective is directly related to practicalities that only affect the normal demographics, then you really should refrain from commenting on a judicial issue, as the prime perogative of the judicial system is to cater to an abnormal scenario involving two or more parties requiring resolution. Abnormal because, in the history of the justice system, everywhere, the total # of people requiring its use is far lesser than the total # of people who don't require its use.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Precambrian Newbie

Precambrian

Posted
Posted
Nobody said it is representative of all hinduism. But it is representative OF hinduism as well' date=' so the BJP has no business claiming that it is upholding our cultural or religious morals by taking its stance.[/quote'] Nope it isn't. And sorry BJP isn't representative of hinduism as you guys would like to believe. Btw, am not sure BJP anywhere stated they are against it because it is against Hindu religion. Glad to be proved wrong
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Muloghonto Mentor

Muloghonto

Posted
Posted
Nope it isn't. And sorry BJP isn't representative of hinduism as you guys would like to believe. Btw, am not sure BJP anywhere stated they are against it because it is against Hindu religion. Glad to be proved wrong
Nope it isnt what ? The carnal side of hinduism as depicted in Khajuraho is also hinduism. That is a fact, so when BJP says they are anti-gay because gayness is against hindu/indian culture, they are flat out wrong, as proven by the khajuraho temples.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Muloghonto Mentor

Muloghonto

Posted
Posted
Hitler used swastika sign. Which is a Hindu symbol so everything that he did is representative of hinduism. Dear god, people talking about societies in the past based on ****ing carvings in a monument..
Swastika is not ONLY a hindu symbol, its a symbol that has existed not just in Indo-aryans but also in many other cultures. Nobody said Hitler represented hinduism- he himself didnt say so. But khajuraho temples and kama sutra are part of hindu heritage, so when modern hindus choose to depict hinduism as only the 'sati-savitri' stuff of psuedo-islamic/christian values of chastity, i choose to remind them that once upon a time, long long ago, many of our hindu ancestors had no problem with sexually promiscuous behaviour and being hindu does not mean re-packaging arabic style laws of chastity under shiva/vishnu commandments. Infact, i see NO EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER that hinduism valued chastity and sexually conservative behaviour before its takkar with Islam. Those are distinct features of the desert God and desert religion, not polytheism from a land of plenty.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...