This is regarding the debate on section 377 of IPC, between the HOME ministry and the HEALTH ministry in INDIA .
India is a country plagued with misplaced zeal, but when it hits ministers, the zeal gets into cabinet meetings and statistics is made the bedrock of pushing thru opinions, which are imbalanced. The Health Minister’s call for elimination of section 377, is one of those imbalanced propositions which shud be thrown out, without a thought (ironic?) and without a debate.
The reasons are there for any sane person to see:-
societies have been built on trial and error method, and the methods that encouraged LIFE , GROWTH and HAPPINESS have been promoted thru the ages. We stand on this tradition. We have collectively understood that the right fitting for a BOLT is to be found in a NUT. Not anything that resembles or cud function as a NUT, but a NUT that is meant to fit the BOLT. There is pleasure, progeny and propriety in the scheme of things as they exist.
Section 377 is firstly gender neutral, secondly if there is no penetration there is no offence, thirdly the act shud be UNNATURAL. With these basic ingredients to this offence, it is possible to bring a host of sexual activities perpetrated by perverse adults on innocent children/boys/girls/women/men/animals. The punishment prescribed is max life and with fine. Which is stringent.
Merely because this section cud be invoked i.r.o sex between consenting adults also, it does not mean that this section is to be scrapped. An exception i.r.o consenting adults, cud be made with suitable amendments. Mr. Ramadoss is known for throwing the child along with the water in the bath-tub. He did not consult the TOURISM minister, when he proposed the banning of smoking in restaurants and hotels, but when he gets sympathetic with the gay community, he wants the only enabling section- i.r.o many other offences- to be thrown out of the statute book!
Gays have a right to practice their beliefs and indulge in sex with consenting adults of the same sex or in unnatural methods with persons of the opposite sex, the problem arises when their problems spill over to the public domain and do not fall within the paradigm already familiar to the society. The problems such as, when persons bring complaints in matters which relate to domestic violence relating to cohabiting consenting adults of the same sex , how shud the police react? it is a new terrain and it shud be dealt with discretely, with laws specific to such persons and conditions. The laws that have certain POSTULATES like marriage is between a male and female, should not be disturbed.
This TRENCHING of gays rights brings division which is no good for the society and the rights shud be separated and dealt with on the principles of good conscience, reasonableness and fairness(like the circuit judges of yore in the UK), as to codify laws for this new breed cannot be allowed, much less encouraged, to taint the precedents of the law well established.
LAWS are meant to organize society into active, healthy and productive units. We shud not and cannot be silent when efforts are made by policy makers to override the very principles on which the society rests.
MAY MEN REMAIN MEN AND WOMEN, WOMEN,
AND TO EACH HIS/HER FUNCTIONS REMAIN!
BUT LET THE IN-BETWEENS CHOOSE
THEIR PATH AND COOK THEIR OWN GOOSE!