712
Reads
Homosexuality no longer a crime in india
submitted 8 months 21 days 14 hours ago by: befair : 48 commentsThey still dont have all the rights that western countries accord them, but good start nevertheless
http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/Homosexuality-no-crime-Delhi-High-court/articleshow/4726608.cms
Comments
It never should have been a crime; it is merely a psycho sexual dysfunction and should be treated as such.
The world is just headed in the wrong direction with this "acceptance" slogan. This sexual perversity is a simple case of psychological dysfuntion and should not be a cause celebre. Do we or should we respect a persons right for self immolation? How about suicide? In either case there is an underlying psycological and (usually) a medically treatable issue but since the individual is not harming others shouldn't he have the right to do as he pleases?
Congratulations India for moving into 21st century. Pakistan is still stuck somewhere in between 6th and 20th.
Not sure of Khalifah's theory though. Sounds quite silly in light of following scientific research:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio3/nightwaves/pip/5ufx6/
New research indicates similarities between the brains of gay men and straight women, and similar parallels between those of lesbians and straight men. It reopens the debate about the extent to which homosexuality is hardwired, as opposed to culturally or environmentally determined, or even as some would have it, a lifestyle choice.
The psychologist and author of Born Gay, Glenn Wilson, and author of Anti-Queer, Mark Simpson, discuss what it would mean for gay people and for wider society if it were ever to be conclusively proved that gayness is determined from birth.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/3735668.stm
But then again, science and religion are incompatible from there very inception. Why would a person so obsessed with specific belief set be so willing to surrender to logic?
Plant a tree
Self Immolation? Are you kidding me Khalifah? You draw an analogy with suicide? In suicide the person is harming himself/herself. In which way gays harm themselves by being gay? Talk about absurdity of analogy.
I wonder often how sex is so overrated in the realms of 'morality'. It is pathetic that society is so so much more obsessed into directing one's sexual matters (which is entirely one's personal business) than noticing the obscenity of social injustice, inequality, intolerance, corruption to name a few... I should be killed if I have sex before marriage but let it be if a kid in the vicinity dies out of hunger!?! Pathetic!
Babar, there's no use presenting those to Khalifah. He will not see it even if it stands there right on his face. He is blinded by his 'wisdom' that he so often talks about.
Homosexuality should not be a crime in ANY country. Go India!
Shame on Indians.Where are indian Pandits and Maulvis and Christan Priests.
@Babarzm
Congratulations India for moving into 21st century. Pakistan is still stuck somewhere in between 6th and 20th.
What non sense babarzm where the hell India is moving what do you call 21st century. We don't want to move in the direction of all those who r disobeying ALLAH and thats why we seprated ourselves 60 years ago from them.
Would u like to explain that movement towards 21st century what do you mean by that is 21st century a century of gays , lesbians , adulterers and those like you who want homo relations in heaven like Babarzm and want to make heaven a Kanjar Khana . Lahoolay walaqooot.
@ E
I wonder often how sex is so overrated in the realms of 'morality'. It is pathetic that society is so so much more obsessed into directing one's sexual matters (which is entirely one's personal business) than noticing the obscenity of social injustice, inequality, intolerance, corruption to name a few... I should be killed if I have sex before marriage but let it be if a kid in the vicinity dies out of hunger!?! Pathetic!
Sex is not entirly one's personal matter in any muslim society as any sex other then one's wife is forbidden and fornication (zina) is a sin which opens doors to other sins and all those problems increase in the society like social injustice ,inequality ,intolerance ,corruption and many others.
Time for the NWFP Assembly to also pass a similar Law to regulate what they have been doing for generations :-)
@Doc
doc ur joking but on a serious note .
All of them are not gays in NWFP just one area where homosexuality is more common .Banu so if that type of law is passed in Pakistan it would be a good news for banursis.(Some one from Bannu) but the constution of Pakistan says that there will be no law in Islamic Repulic of Pakistan which is against Quran and Sunnah and this all is against Quran and Sunnah and can not be accepted in Pakistan or any muslim country.
Babar and E, please read my post once again. I am not denying that homosexuals are "born" this way at all. Homosexuality is just as natural as retardation, disease, inherited traits, etc. It is an anomaly, a dysfunction and probably a medically treatable one.
again people belive homosexuality is genetic or herditery.Who is father of all human being ADAM (peace be upon him) and he was a messanger of ALLAH and first man on earth and he can never ever be a homo coz messanger of God is totally submitted to one god and does not do what is against the command of god.So where did they inherit all that .
A QUESTION FOR THOSE WHO SAY HOMOSEXUALITY IS GENTIC.
Taimur77
"Sex is not entirly one's personal matter in any muslim society as any sex other then one's wife is forbidden and fornication (zina) is a sin which opens doors to other sins and all those problems increase in the society like social injustice ,inequality ,intolerance ,corruption and many others."
When, how and with whom one choses to have sex with is absolutely their personal matter as long as it is consensual and not harmful to anyone. You or the state has no business there to poke their noses into. Don't you already believe that they will suffer the 'consequences' in 'afterlife'? If a Muslim is ready to face that 'consequence', it is their choice. Nobody has asked you or gave you the right to be the 'moral police'.
Another thing you fail to understand is that not everyone beliefs in, adheres to or interpret Islam the way you do. To you Adam is the first man, not to everyone. To you gay sex or sex before marriage is a sin, not to everyone. You can't ask for a universal rationale based on YOUR belief to begin with. You have every right to follow your religious/moral path as long as it doesn't usurp others' right to do the same. You are absolutely free not to engage into those 'sins' since your religion doesn't permit it. But you have no right to force, stigmatize or subjugate anyone else for following their path which is different than yours. Pakistan belongs to her Hindus, Christians, Sikhs, Parsis, pagans, atheists, gays, lesbians, cross-dressers... as much as she does to you. You don't have to agree with everyone, but learn to respect the diversity of opinion and lifestyle.
So by that argument E, if a person likes to have sex with animals (loads of such perverts out there)then lets accept that too? Allow such relationships to be sanctified as marriages? Let these guys take out their "rights parade"? Where do we draw a line in this "ultra liberal" anything goes philosophy?
Bestiality isn't consensual, thus tantamount to rape. It doesn't fall under my argument.
Humanity is tied together by almost a mesh network; actions by one person can have unforeseen consequences for totally unrelated people. By pretending to be ultra liberal and opining that "sex is a personal matter as long as it is consensual" you are not taking into account consequence of this "consensual sex" (whether between hetero or homo sexuals), which have an impact on the entire community with std's and social fallout representing just a subset of the problems
Don't start with butterfly effect... by that argument then NOTHING can be personal matter as everything effects everything in the long run.
STDs have always been there and will be. It is part of our biological life cycle. These are just some diseases (among the myriad of all other diseases) which find their ways through venereal transmissions. Lets stop breathing then since it would give me diseases. Just like every other case, you can simply take precautions and get on with your life.
And it has always been my point of wonder that how you people tend to put sex as the root of all vices in the society. May be it is just easier that way, I guess; helps the innate escapism from other hypocrisies.
I often wonder that why there is so similarity between E and Babar...is he his contra-ethenic cousin???? I always saw E patronizing babar in any case wthr political or social. It is my conspiracy theory:)
India economically getting stronger but morally getting defaulter. A psychological disorder is accepted as a right.
Known history shows that sexually free societies doomed because of wrong directional use of human abilities and powers.
An unatural way of pleasure is going to decrease the number of eligible bechlors. We already know that men are lesser in percentage than women.
Being a democratic country india should have gone to parliament in order to know the opinion of hindu, muslim. Christian and sikhaz.
Babar: is being psychologically or morally disordrous, an entry key to 21st centuery????
Wud you like your son standing at ur door with a guy, saying"dad, meet my husband"...
I willnt find it good so I prefer to stay in bwteen 6th and 20th century.
If my son (or daughter) is a gay, I will be happy to accept them the way they are. No sir I don't maintain the same double standards of my conservative Muslim brothern.
E, me, Befair and all other liberals are bonded in relationship of shared values where freedom and liberty is there for all. Same as you, MSEhsan, Taimur and Khalifah along with other religious rightists are are bonded in relationship of shared values of hypocrisy, where freedom and liberty are applied selectively.
Plant a tree
Well, some people will even find it strange and against their moral values if their son comes with a girl telling their parents meet your daughter in law.
Different people with different ideologies exist everywhere and its about time that we learn to accept and respect them because it is their absolute right AND they are not harming you or anyone. Passing this legislation doesn't or shouldn't bother anyone if they are not homosexuals anyway. Why are straight people getting so worked up on that? Its a right for homosexuals to be free and accepted in the society exactly the same way as straight couples are. There were and have always been gays and lesbians around the world, hidden or open. Why do we like to hide things behind close doors and pretend things as things are not there. Lets accept it guys...they are as much part of our society as you and me. Chemical locha in mind or by choice, it is their life.
"Well, some people will even find it strange and against their moral values if their son comes with a girl telling their parents meet your daughter in law."
Nicely put Kanwal.
Mianjee, add Kanwal to my cousin list too :) also befair and PostMan (yes we differ in many opinions but I find him a liberal too in many respect)
No, seriously, why stop at that? Let's remove the taboo of father, daughter or mother, son or brother, sister marriage, too. If they are adults and consenting adults at that when they decide to get married then society should have no issue with that as well. Now let's assume society is ok with this, then anyone got a problem with thier sibling 'marrying' one of their parents?
Like I said, ...."devoid of all wisdom", the whole bunch of you
Khalifah,
That kind of CONSENSUAL incest is not something I have heard or read about. If and when that becomes a common phenomenon like homosexuality, society will deal with it then. We dont need to discuss pure hypothetical situations
Egyptian royalty did it Befair. Nothing far fetched.
Incest is extremely harmful for future generations including the immediate next one. It doesn't qualify my argument either.
Well Mr E. , then by that reasoning the gays are committing a graver crime in that they are preventing future generations from even coming into existence! You really don't ponder the issue before pitching your emotional rant, do you?
And as for your claim of "incest or inbreeding being harmful to future generations" ; it is nothing but pure mythology. There have been numerous studies conducted to test the validity of this claim and to date no empirically significant conclusion has been drawn to suggest that incest or consanguineous marriages compromise the physical or mental characteristics of the offspring.
Befair, incest is very common, in fact a couple (brother and sister they have kids too) in Germany tried to get married last year, but seeing how ill informed you are on almost all issues, it comes as no surprise that "this is not something you have heard or read about"
Khalifah, at times I find myself in awe reading your convoluted analogies. If you have failed to notice, what is not in existence DOES NOT EXIST. There is no being involved that is to be harmed at the first place. Are you one those who find contraception a crime? In that sense our biological being is a criminal entity by default as zillions of sperms that our bodies produce in entire lifetime are never culminating into a human child save a few.
Sigh, passing the harmful effects of inbreeding as 'pure mythology' is the epitome of your botched 'wisdom'. You'd say anything just to make your case. I've never seen you agreeing with anyone in this forum unless they regurgitate exactly what you say. Leave people of the likes of me aside, within your confined world you've even understood Islam better than any other Muslim on this planet. No wonder you call yourself Khalifah cause indeed that is what you think of yourself. One hardly comes by such bumptious individual, yet we are here. I rest my case with you.
Babar: see your standard of liberty, freedom of speech and acceptance that you have given futwa on me, khalifah, taimur and ehsan because we are rightist. You are not better than that insane molvi who puts futwa every day .
If a person has a certain limits, taboos. boundries around him, it is neither hypocratic nor anti-modernization. Liberalism has nothign to do with this all because it is a state of mind,not a state of physical relations.
Now after touching the peak of sex free phenomenon, you can see the UK sarkar and US think tanks putting pressure on society to evolve soem certain rules so that social system can be protected.
we had discussed it all in a sperate buzz.
E:cousin list is matter of Babarz, he has cousin in every ethenic group. you forgot that you were using E's identity :)
in the US the 'abstinence program' being taught in high schools have faild miserably and cost the taxpayers billions of dollars.. the teens are just humping like rabbits and more earlier.
the society and family may definetly have its 'moral boundaries' but such boundaries should not be sponsored by the state.
Mianjee, if you call me Babarzm's cousin that makes him my cousin too. Works both ways. Kya yaar, aap to sirf Babarzm ko hee pucchte ho, meri taraf se bhi to duniya ko dekho :) by the way, conspiracy theory change ho gayi kya? Are you now suggesting that I am Babarzm? Whose identity would I use other than mine that is 'E'
I think both camps should state their opinion and agree to disagree. No one is better here.
firstly if 2 grown adult men want to have anal sex in the privacy of the bedrooms, then its obviously not the concern of the STATE to police them.
so whats the point of making it a CRIME in the first place?
yes its haram.
yes it may be a perversion according to you. and guess what? you have a RIGHT to consider it as a perversion. you have the right to express your personal dislike about homosexuality. so much for POLITICAL CORRECTNESS.
western society has become so politically correct that even if a heterosexual male expresses his personal dislike of kissing/fcuking another man, he is branded a homosexual...
recently an actor was asked in an interview about his gay kissing scene and he replied "well, this is just a job-hazard for a heterosexual male actor!!" this was met by outcries from the politically correct elements calling him a homophobe when he was merely expressing his personal dislike of it.
i mean gay people can consider heterosexual sex as disgusting and i wont be bothered a bit!!
Agreed.
HOMOSEXUALITY MAY WELL BE HARDWIRED.
i too have heard that its actually hardwired in the brain and that there is a similarity b/w the brains of gay men and straight women and vice versa. and looking at the makeup artistes, designers, hairstylist lot you can see how they act like women. similarly look at lesbian butch dyke women ....they talk like a man, walk like a man, dress like a man but aint one....so these people often consider trapped in the body of the wrong sex... thats why they even go for sex change operations!
so the question arises should we think of it as an anomaly just like any other defect? should it be treated at birth when the child is born, lets say if we develop a technology that can detect at birth if a childs brain has this defect that will make him trapped in the WRONG BODY, then would it be ok to treat and correct this anomaly?
dont get me wrong, i dont mean homosexuality should be a crime. it should be allowed even if its a lifestyle choice because the state just cannot regulate these things. but just for the sake of discussion im raising these points.
apart from these BORN GAYS there are also gays who practice homosexuality as a lifestyle choice. specially the bi-sexual ones.
furthermore sexual frustration and non availablity of 'pussy' can also lead men to adopt a gay lifestyle. truck drivers in pakistan and rural men in interior sindh and northern areas (specially) practive this a lot.
lastly if homosexuality and thus GENDER is hardwired by birth and not LEARNED and not a SOCIAL CONSTRUCT then do we realize that the GENDER FEMINISTS who claim that gender is purely a social construct and that they want boys and girls to be raised in a gender neutral environment to achieve a genderless society, may well be speaking out of their asses?
Yes, Homosexuality is genetic but at the same time it can be learned as well due to various factors mostly covered by you here. In any case, it is their choice to be what they are or what they feel to be. None of our business.
BESTIALITY
a truely liberal STATE would not be able to PROSECUTE bestiality, as a matter of principle ie.
the reason is that the question of CONSENT of the animal does not come in. because we dont take the animals consent when we cut their throats, take their babies away, and milk them !!
secondly one cannot oppose bestiality on the grounds of compaasion for animals and 'rape'. how can a person who is ok with killing animals suddenly becomes concerned with compassion when one is having sex with the animal. this doesnt make any rational sense.
tell me...whats more preferable to a goat...honestly and objectively tell me...being beheaded? or being shoved in the butt by a penis? oh yes, but we need to kill them for food...as if the goat gives a shit about your food and your justifications for killing it!! face it from the animals point of view bestiality is better than being slaughtered.
so the only thing that can stop BESTIALITY is your morals, or your dislike for it etc.
the question of STATE laws and COMPASSION is irrelevent. if you oppose bestiality on grounds of compassion, oppose meat first.
You are right about the innate hypocrisies that dwells in us including me when it comes to animal rights (and some other issues too). But it is a botched notion that if one is engaged in one wrong, they can't state another wrong as wrong or work to prevent it. Yes, we do eat animals, but that shouldn't stop us from preventing other cruelties to animals. I myself may not be the person, but there are indeed enough compassionate individuals who completely work to protect animal rights including not putting them on to the dinner plates.
"Sigh, passing the harmful effects of inbreeding as 'pure mythology' is the epitome of your botched 'wisdom"
E, ever ponder the fact that desirable genes are passed on as well? Seriously, you need to think before you speak :)
So? It always increases the likelihood of the presence of more deleterious genes be it recessive or dominant, and that is gonna effect one generation or another. Ever heard of inbreeding depression?
Are you seriously arguing that inbreeding isn't detrimental? You not only need think but also learn before you speak. Don't give an advice to someone that you don't even know how to apply onto yourself.
There is no "conclusive" evidence to suggest that inbreeding is detrimental to the offspring,, especially in Human communities. Anecdotal evidence exists but existence of such anomalies in offspring of unrelated parents makes such arguments mute.
Man, you need to stop making wikipedia your sole source of knowledge (heck you copied their opening lines verbatim!)
The opposite can also be very true that you can introduce a disease that never was in your gene pool. For example if you have a history of heart disease in your family and have a child with someone who has a history of diabetes, then the child can end up with both.
Please do think before you speak :)
???? There is something called reading a book. Please consider it.
???? There is something called reading a book. Please consider it.
"Firstly if 2 grown adult men want to have anal sex in the privacy of
the bedrooms, then its obviously not the concern of the STATE to police
them."
Umar, when, according to the center for desease control and prevention(CDC):
" MSM (men who have sex with men) accounted for 71% of all HIV infections
among male adults and adolescents in 2005 (based on data from 33 states with
long-term, confidential name-based HIV reporting), even though only about 5% to
7% of male adults and adolescents in the United States identify themselves as MSM"
Then I think it becomes not only the state's concern but its right and its obligation to "police them". Cost of providing healthcare aside, the ability of these people to transmit this disease to larger segments of the population especially by bisexual men cannot be ignored in the name of liberalism.
Couldn't agree with you more on these two observations:
"..so the question arises should we think of it as an anomaly just like
any other defect? should it be treated at birth when the child is born.."
"...secondly one cannot oppose bestiality on the grounds of compaasion for animals and 'rape'..."
prevention of disease, yes. but at what level?
the best way to ensure you dont get mugged is to never leave your house. modern societies tend to prevent societal problems at the level giving greatest freedom to people...not at the lowest level.
Yes by punishing the criminal or putting him under treatment. Homosexuality is a medical issue not a social issue and should be treated as such
Khalifah,
It isnt homosexuality, but promiscuity that leads to spread of veneral diseases. If you look at the hooker population, you will probably see similar results as well. What does that have to do with legalizing the right of gay people to live their lives together
Once again man, why are you so ill informed?Please try to finish high school; you should not have dropped out in the first place It is NOT just their inclination towards promiscuity but unprotected homosexual act that is responsible for the transmission of disease. The anal lining is extremely sensitive and tears easily allowing fro easy transmission of pathogens
Forget about me attending or dropping out of high school - you dont have the morality to even be a part of humanity on this planet - you are a hypocrite living amongst people that you dont even deem worthy of being friends with, just putting on an act of friendship when in reality, you hate every non muslim around you
unprotected homosexual acts are as dangerous as unprotected heterosexual acts. I dont know about the percentage biological chances of hererosexual vs homosexual acts in transmission of diseases, but the point is still the same - how is this related to legalizing homosexuality ? it is still promiscuity that is the problem vs being homosexual
You have totally stopped making any sense what so ever. Heterosexual sex generally entails insertion of a penis into a vagina (in case you were unaware of this as well - quite possible). The vagina lining is not as sensitive or as prone to tearing (and hence transmission of pathogens) as the anus.
In heterosexual sex std's are typically a result of promiscuity which makes religions injunctions against adultery and fornication all the more relevan.
This is quite typical of Khalifah. Once running dry on knowledge (which he quite frequently does) he starts with these personal attacks. E, Befair, these assaults are not unusual of him (shows frustration).
Best to avoid responding to these attacks and stick to your original point in the discussion. At this level of frustration Khalifah soon topples, especially when he is not allowed to detract the debate into another direction.
Plant a tree