This is love: to fly toward a secret sky, to cause a hundred veils to fall each moment. First to let go of life. Finally, to take a step without feet.
-
-1500540546.png){kind=icon}
Receive regular push notifications on your device about new Articles/Stories from QuoteUnquote.
Opinion in India is divided as Section 377 has only managed to unite religious leaders and oppressed members of the LGBT community to feel like second-class citizens. There are plenty of reasons why 377 is harmful to Indian society.
The law places an unreasonable burden on homosexuals. So, they are the violators of the law. This creates opportunities for the law enforcers on the ground to oppress these helpless people. Homosexuals are made to shell out hefty bribes, face police brutality, blackmailing and live in eternal fear of being harassed by any sadistic Tom, Dick and Harry who wishes to have fun at their cost. Since the law of the land outlaws them and makes their sexual identity illegal, they are forced to silently bear this oppression.
Having an alternate sexuality does not make people inferior and it definitely shouldn't make them feel like they are doing something wrong. Nobody likes to be victimised just because of who they are.
The law seeks to paint certain sex as unnatural. This classification of some sex as unnatural is deeply irrational. From time immemorial, humans, as well as different species of animals, have engaged in homosexual sex. The natural world is replete with acts of homosexual sex.
Even modern science recognises homosexuality as a natural behaviour that is an essential trait in some individuals. So if both science and examples from the natural world prove that the act is natural, isn’t the law unnatural to be guided by prejudice rather than any sound logic or fact?
The dignity of an individual is the most basic right that a liberal democracy ensures for its citizens. But by criminalising the act of homosexuality, the law deprives homosexuals of the right to be who they are. What can be a worse assault on the dignity of individual than the criminalisation of their very own individuality?
Equality is another core ethos that the Indian democracy tries to promote. But if a significant minority – homosexuals – are so brutally discriminated against, to the extent of outlawing them, how can this quest for equality be realised.
Liberal democracy is not a government where two wolves and a lamb sit together to decide what to have for dinner. Protection of rights and interests of minorities is an essential requisite in a liberal democracy.
But in our treatment of homosexuals who constitute a minority with regard to their sexual behaviour, the nation is far from protecting their interests, illegalising their core nature. Such persistent daily and legalised oppression of this minority are one of the worst examples of majoritarian tyranny.
Ironically, those who defend Section 377 in the name of defending Indian culture are relying on a Victorian-era vintage law that India imported from our colonial masters. Indian tradition, on the other hand, has for long depicted and celebrated homosexuality, be it in Khajuraho or in the famous Kamasutra.
Thus, defending Section 377 in the name of Indian culture is a plain travesty of facts. And the West from where we borrowed the Act has long discarded it, we too will be better off by doing away with it.
Since we have become so conscious of our global image, we must realise that internal criticism which is scoffed at, has the potential to undermine India’s image, we can well do away with this law. It puts India in the bad company of despots and illiberal regimes in the world. This law, much more than any criticism by free citizens, harms India’s image abroad and this is one more reason why we should do away with it. Sooner the better.
By Pritam Mondal
Jul 30, 2018
-1496569270.png){kind=small}
Opinion in India is divided as Section 377 has only managed to unite religious leaders and oppressed members of the LGBT community to feel like second-class citizens. There are plenty of reasons why 377 is harmful to Indian society.
The law places an unreasonable burden on homosexuals. So, they are the violators of the law. This creates opportunities for the law enforcers on the ground to oppress these helpless people. Homosexuals are made to shell out hefty bribes, face police brutality, blackmailing and live in eternal fear of being harassed by any sadistic Tom, Dick and Harry who wishes to have fun at their cost. Since the law of the land outlaws them and makes their sexual identity illegal, they are forced to silently bear this oppression.
Having an alternate sexuality does not make people inferior and it definitely shouldn't make them feel like they are doing something wrong. Nobody likes to be victimised just because of who they are.
The law seeks to paint certain sex as unnatural. This classification of some sex as unnatural is deeply irrational. From time immemorial, humans, as well as different species of animals, have engaged in homosexual sex. The natural world is replete with acts of homosexual sex.
Even modern science recognises homosexuality as a natural behaviour that is an essential trait in some individuals. So if both science and examples from the natural world prove that the act is natural, isn’t the law unnatural to be guided by prejudice rather than any sound logic or fact?
The dignity of an individual is the most basic right that a liberal democracy ensures for its citizens. But by criminalising the act of homosexuality, the law deprives homosexuals of the right to be who they are. What can be a worse assault on the dignity of individual than the criminalisation of their very own individuality?
Equality is another core ethos that the Indian democracy tries to promote. But if a significant minority – homosexuals – are so brutally discriminated against, to the extent of outlawing them, how can this quest for equality be realised.
Liberal democracy is not a government where two wolves and a lamb sit together to decide what to have for dinner. Protection of rights and interests of minorities is an essential requisite in a liberal democracy.
But in our treatment of homosexuals who constitute a minority with regard to their sexual behaviour, the nation is far from protecting their interests, illegalising their core nature. Such persistent daily and legalised oppression of this minority are one of the worst examples of majoritarian tyranny.
Ironically, those who defend Section 377 in the name of defending Indian culture are relying on a Victorian-era vintage law that India imported from our colonial masters. Indian tradition, on the other hand, has for long depicted and celebrated homosexuality, be it in Khajuraho or in the famous Kamasutra.
Thus, defending Section 377 in the name of Indian culture is a plain travesty of facts. And the West from where we borrowed the Act has long discarded it, we too will be better off by doing away with it.
Since we have become so conscious of our global image, we must realise that internal criticism which is scoffed at, has the potential to undermine India’s image, we can well do away with this law. It puts India in the bad company of despots and illiberal regimes in the world. This law, much more than any criticism by free citizens, harms India’s image abroad and this is one more reason why we should do away with it. Sooner the better.
-1502874017.png)
Quotes By Jhansi ki Rani
10 Bengali Novels Everybody Must Read
Quotes By Madan Mohan Malaviya
5 Interesting Facts About Vietnamese Culture
Quotes By Mughal Badshahs
Unakoti - The Mythical Legend of the Shaivite Statues
India's UNESCO World Heritage Caves: Ajanta & Ellora
Folk Music from Uttar Pradesh.
More from
© 2017 QuoteUnquote All Right Reserved
Home-1501594602.png)
Spirituality
Culture
Short Story
Kama
420-1501594602.png)
QuickDope
Honest News-1501594602.png)
Sports
Travel-1501595131.png)
Quotes
