You are on page 1of 4

1.

Sexuality is not something that should be legislated


against
In the context of Indian culture, sexuality was considered fluid with
references to alternate sexualities being part of the storylines of the
Mahabharata and Ramayana. Myths of gods becoming goddesses and
homoerotic sculptures on the temples of Khajuraho suggest that Ancient
India wasn't so homophobic.
For those of you who do not understand, let's say India criminalises sex
between straight people (And why not? Considering the number of rape
cases and overpopulation). How would you feel if judges were deciding
whether your private life was legal or not? It's time for the constitution to
get the hell out of people's bedrooms and stop targeting the love lives of
a minority.

2. Important members of the Commonwealth have


decriminalised it ages ago
Sec 377 of the IPC was introduced by the British government, which
subsequently introduced it to other colonies around the world. Currently,
32 members of the Commonwealth do not criminalise homosexuality,
but a majority still does.
It's the more developed nations like Canada, the UK and New Zealand
that do not criminalise it and have legalised same sex marriage.
Wouldn't it show India in a more progressive light if Sec 377 was
dropped? It would reaffirm the Commonwealth's commitment to
guaranteeing all its citizens basic human rights.
Hanging on to the archaic law is just a reaffirmation that we aren't quite
done with our post colonial hangover.

3. It labels innocent citizens as criminals


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.
4. It won't end discrimination but it is definitely a step
in the right direction
There are no laws protecting gays and lesbians from discrimination at
the work place or laws that allow them to marry their partner of choice. If
Sec 377 is abolished, it opens a window of acceptance and achievement
for the LGBT community. Developed nations were fighting for their right
to sexual freedom in the '50s, 60s and 70s before legalising same sex
marriage all together. Decriminalisation would provide a stepping stone
for a better life and more rights for a community that has been
oppressed for so long.

Bollywood centres itself around love and sensuality, Indian culture is


literally obsessed with marriage, and hey let's not forget that we are the
land of the Kamasutra. So why is it all a bad thing in a country that
prides itself in being the world's largest democracy?
According to the University of Oslo, homosexuality exists in over 1500
animal species, so why is it so "unnatural" for humans?

9. It might just end unhappy marriages that never get


consummated
Due to the stigma that surrounds homosexuality many gays and
lesbians marry members of the opposite sex to appease their family
members. This often leads to unhappy marriages where the
unsuspecting spouse is the one who is affected the most.
Legalisation of homosexuality would not make people come out of the
closet but it would prevent them from being part of unhappy arranged
marriages and exploring their sexuality further.

10. India should not be in the same league as


dictatorships and theocracies
Dictatorships and theocracies around the world, starting with Nazi
Germany during the Second World War, and ISIS controlled Syria today,
have committed crimes against humanity by persecuting the LGBT
community. In Uganda, people were encouraged to report homosexual
behaviour to the police so that people with alternate sexualities would
be wiped out from the face of society.
As a global player and a developing country, does India really want to
associate itself with such Third World countries? If we aspire to be like
Europe or the US, shouldn't we share similar values?

11. Our Asian neighbours are making progress.


Where are we?
Nepal, Japan, China, Taiwan, Thailand and Vietnam have legalised
homosexuality while some of them even protect members of the LGBT
community from discrimination.
Does India want to keep up and be a more liberal society or does it want
to continue being the land of bigoted hypocrisy?
 1
 A lot of things have changed from past

 Dictatorial rule by kings and emperors


 Lack of any legally recognized human rights
 Prohibition on land ownership by people without royal blood
 Ritual human sacrifice
 Curing medical ailments with spells and magic

 Common Argument #3: The purpose of marriage is to procreate, and same-sex


couples can’t have children.

 Your Response: So should we also prohibit straight couples from getting married if
they’re biologically incapable of having kids? What about if they simply don’t want
kids?

 The percentage of married couples with children has been declining over the last 25
years, but couples who don't want kids can still get married. And does adoption count?
Because around 19 percent of same-sex couples adopt kids.

 In addition, there are plenty of legal benefits — like hospital visitation rights, joint tax
returns, welfare benefits for spouses, and estate inheritance — that married couples
enjoy regardless of whether or not they choose to have children. Should the
government prevent straight couples from receiving those benefits until they have
kids?