Court in India criminalizes homosexuality

page: 1
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join
+1 more 
posted on Dec, 11 2013 @ 10:58 PM
link   


NEW DELHI — India’s Supreme Court overturned a historic lower-court decision on homosexuality Wednesday, making gay sex a crime in the world’s most populous democracy, with violators facing up to 10 years in prison.

The court ruled that a British colonial-era statute outlawing “carnal intercourse against the order of nature” was constitutional. Changing it should be left to Parliament, not the courts, the judges ruled.The ruling was a striking sign of how the gay rights movement has been met with a fierce backlash in some parts of the world, even as it has made dramatic gains in the United States, Europe and Latin America.

Court in India criminalizes homosexuality

India has a population of over 1.23 billion people and is the world's largest democracy. The lowest credible estimates I could find of the percentage of homosexuals in ANY country was a bit over 4%. That means somewhere north of 50 million people were just made criminals. I'm neither Indian nor gay, but I think whenever 50 million people become criminals, not for harming anyone, but for simply being who they are, it's a sad day for all of humanity.




posted on Dec, 11 2013 @ 11:16 PM
link   
reply to post by theantediluvian
 


Not that I'm very pro gay... which I'm not... but, its kinda stupid. But tell me... hows the rape issue going there? And sharing the milk with the rats while only 20% of the country has sewage treatment.

Seems to me that india has a lot more pressing issues than the gay menace.

... just makes me ... well I dont like india so... I'm biased. Cant just China take care of it? They're just waiting for an excuse for ages...

I mean... really? "Criminalizing gays?" How stupid can you be? Not liking their choice is one thing... I dont for one but... as long they dont interfere with my life thats ok (and that means NO PARADES) but... criminalizing? Ignorant people...
edit on 11-12-2013 by FraternitasSaturni because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 11 2013 @ 11:52 PM
link   
reply to post by theantediluvian
 

I'm not sure, but doesn't your article say that the court simply reaffirmed a law which might have been 200 years old? A lower court attempted to say it's really not the law, and the Supreme Court said "Oh, yes it is." This doesn't seem like it was either a sudden move, or an act of the Court which just now criminalized gays.



posted on Dec, 11 2013 @ 11:57 PM
link   
Its an absolute sin and crime against all souls that this perpetual abuse and torture of human rights goes on , ad nauseum, day after day, musical chairs, one region to the next, with this and with many other laws.

They are not laws, they are crimes and the politicians and judges are absolute slimy criminals who owe all their victims in enormous ways and will go through all the suffering they've ever caused anyone many times over.

But what I want done now is for people to rise up and nard them, bounce them, refuse their presence in any position other than washing the streets.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 12:17 AM
link   
the homosexuals are part of the untouchable class & they pollute Indian society




posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 12:24 AM
link   
So many people are pro intervention for "Humanitarian Reasons" when it comes to promoting more senseless attacks on other countries when it comes to "Dictatorships" etc, but is this not a crime against equality and humanity?

i can't understand the amount of hatred people have against others because we are not "Straight" or a certain colour, or religion

speaking personally the amount of discrimination i have faced in my 23 years existing for being Gay is absurd. we must walk together as equals, as humans existing to thrive whilst we have our time here, Love is Love, but there isn't enough going around



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 12:27 AM
link   
India Schmindia, they're just saying that they're keeping an ignorant law on the books.

but us in Aus?

www.abc.net.au...

We're saying "Go for it... Yes go on, marry you little scally wags. Go on, oh no wait, nawww, you gays are still single.. haha fooled yas."

pfft. we live in an ice age full of idiots...


After being married for less than a week, same-sex couples who wed in the ACT will have their unions annulled after the High Court ruled against the laws.

The High Court unanimously ruled that the ACT's laws were inconsistent with the Federal Marriage Act, and were therefore unconstitutional.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 12:30 AM
link   
I just noticed from the article, that the law against gay sex still stands. There is apparently no law against being homosexual. A distinction without a difference? I don't know.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 12:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Blowback
 


Untouchables pollute ? I'd say any system that is a class system to begin with, and that allows any group to be considered untouchable is polluted and demolished in spirit, regressed in consciousness. Its all about Equality and Freedom. The energy of Mother and Father wedded, and unconditional love and understanding of others. Peace and Love and Higher Mind. Thats how pass earth test.
edit on 12-12-2013 by Unity_99 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 12:59 AM
link   
reply to post by Darth_Prime
 

Dear Darth_Prime,


So many people are pro intervention for "Humanitarian Reasons" when it comes to promoting more senseless attacks on other countries when it comes to "Dictatorships" etc, but is this not a crime against equality and humanity?
This is an honest question with no element of snark or trap involved. I wish I could say this face to face to show my sincerity.

Given your quote, what should we do about Islam? It sounds as though you're saying that an attack against a country outlawing homosexual activities would be more justifiable than against a dictator. Have I got that right?

With respect,
Charles1952



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 02:21 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 


i don't think any attack on people is justified, but for "Humanitarian" reasons is this different?

those who are pro intervention in countries for the people who are "Suffering" would they be pro intervention for this? would they be pro overthrowing their country? what is the difference, people are suffering in both



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 02:34 AM
link   

charles1952
reply to post by theantediluvian
 

I'm not sure, but doesn't your article say that the court simply reaffirmed a law which might have been 200 years old? A lower court attempted to say it's really not the law, and the Supreme Court said "Oh, yes it is." This doesn't seem like it was either a sudden move, or an act of the Court which just now criminalized gays.

They reversed a decision made in 2009 in 2013 that suddenly criminalizes people that may have started to live openly in that time. That is kind of sudden and shocking really. It doesn't criminalize gay people exactly, but criminalises gay sexual practices.

What purpose does the observation serve though? Does it make it okay because it's 200 year old stupidity as opposed to fresh stupidity? Not trying to be a jerk, I just don't understand the purpose of the distinction.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 03:12 AM
link   
Seems strange they want to continue this outdated colonial law, meanwhile the former colonial power is probably the most liberal country in the world when it comes to gay rights. India wants to be more oppressive than their former colonial masters.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 03:33 AM
link   
reply to post by charles1952
 



I just noticed from the article, that the law against gay sex still stands. There is apparently no law against being homosexual. A distinction without a difference? I don't know.


You don't know?

A distinction with no difference?

Okay.

Imagine. Truly imagine friend. With all your heart and being.

Imagine a world were you are allowed to be heterosexual, but not allowed to act it out in an observable way like sex. Seriously. Think about that Charles.

Now. Do you feel there is a distinction between the two?

We have our orientations. However they come, they are little to no choice. Sexual orientation is defined by the underlying drives and desires for romantic or sexual attraction towards said gender. It just happens. It happens internally. Regardless of whether we act them out.

The question is. Should we be allowed to act them out? That's what everyone should be asking. Personally I support the freedom for anyone of any orientation to act our their natural inclinations so long as there isn't a victim involved.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 03:46 AM
link   
reply to post by theantediluvian
 


One step forwards and two steps backwards.

India WAS showing the world they are an emerging model of 21st century progress...a successful space programme, high technology ability and so on.

Now though, they are just showing the world that they are still in fact, as backward a people as the world used to think they were.

Well done India, way to go. You're all officially mindless idiots mired in stone age thinking once again, congratulations!

Male on female rape is OK in India...child sex and marrying off children of 10 years of age is OK in India..but being gay will land you in prison.

It ought to be the dumb policy makers spending time in prison, under the charge of being incredibly dumb in charge of policy!



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 04:23 AM
link   
You would think that a country who invented Bollywood
woud be the most gay tollerant people on Earth.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 04:27 AM
link   

woodwardjnr
Seems strange they want to continue this outdated colonial law, meanwhile the former colonial power is probably the most liberal country in the world when it comes to gay rights. India wants to be more oppressive than their former colonial masters.



they just don't want a bunch of panty wearing fags corrupting their society.Who can blame them?exile the fags and forbid them to dwell in a normal society would be the best.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 04:58 AM
link   
reply to post by dellmonty
 


Gay people run the spectrum of personalities, temperaments, body types, demeanors, mannerism, whatever. Just like heterosexuals.

You can't put gay people into your narrow box. It's just not representative of reality.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 05:36 AM
link   

Lucid Lunacy
reply to post by dellmonty
 


Gay people run the spectrum of personalities, temperaments, body types, demeanors, mannerism, whatever. Just like heterosexuals.

You can't put gay people into your narrow box. It's just not representative of reality.


Ignorant people can and do put people, including themselves, into narrow mental boxes..probably not their fault though, they can't help but be narrow minded i suppose.

I'd suggest just treating them with the indifference they deserve.



posted on Dec, 12 2013 @ 05:50 AM
link   
So, apparently... your sexual orientation makes you a criminal...?

seriously? what next?...

it's just sad





top topics
 
10
<<   2  3  4 >>

log in

join