Is The Unelected Indian Supreme Court Acting as a Government And Destroying India?

You may also like: Disturbing stats on black-white inequality Now girls are a THIRD more likely to go to university than boys Sound effect: Bhajans (Hindu faith songs) helping Autism Lessening productivity 50% of Americans have worked with a hangover Scientists say fist bump is healthier than handshake ?Hug & kiss Meet Darknet, the hidden underbelly of the searchable Web

Click here for more unique views on South Asia (Modi, AAP, terrorism and Pakistan)

SC's bad decisions: Almost parallel to the disarray mentioned above, SC's decisions have not been good for India either. 1. On the Karnataka state government: Having a federal structure, the governor of each state has certain rights and privileges that he/she is entitled to use. As argued here, the SC not only interfered in that privilege but almost acted as a government. Apart from making the government just a spectator, it opened the floodgates of future complaints to the already tired courts. 2. On the Urban Naxals issue: While the Congress PM Mr Singh's 'Moist terrorism is the biggest threat to India' should sound scary, the threat to the life of the much loved PM of India, Mr Modi, should have given shivers in the judges' spines. With the constitution guaranteeing rights of all, while denying rights to the tribals become illegal and hence a police issue, denying local progress by the Urban Naxals to keep the tribals agitated denies the villagers those rights. With opposition even freely calling Modi a thief & seized ones being only five - that too previously punished - and issue being as grave as a threat to the life of previously bombed PM of India, SC should have disregarded the, 'emergency like', 'absence of free speech' and 'threat to democracy' associated appeal. In fact, giving credence to this but not to the rest can easily air, 'some are more equal', 'victim of media talks', 'insensitive to the gravity' or even 'biased'. 3. On gay sex and the family: Though, seeing family disunion the West delayed women's franchise for 10 years, used to women deities, India honoured women and gave them rights earlier. Family is important for humanity because in addition to sex, we desire to have progeny too, and that ideally needs a family. Also, unlike the animals, our babies take a much longer time to mature and need protection during that period. Family, therefore, becomes necessary for a society, and civilization asks for it. In tune with that India even boasts an extended family, with all members doing their duties to make it work. Though it offers a no to sexual desires to God seekers (except for tantrics) and a no to student sex, it uneasily accepts prostitution in society. However, as if seeing women's sexual power to destabilise family and society, it chooses to see purity in the fairer sex. Thus, while it deifies virgins, and offers powers and even salvation to married women who do not think of other men, it enlists 7 respected women, who actually did so. No wonder, British men dancing with other men's wives made 'immoral British' to the eyes of the Indians - during the Raj. Possibly being less heard of (no gay right movements then), while holy books are rather silent on them and some smrities ask for small punishments, the gay sex in sculptures could be a product of poetic imagination - like the depicted bestiality. Or just an ancient porn in the wrong place! Indian ethos frowns both pre and extra marital sex, and preservation of family as a unit is paramount for the country. The sudden surge in extramarital sex in the last few decades has even made a frequently proposed Australian married to an Indian write 'Indians are immoral'. Yes, this has been a feast for guys and for some girls but it has brought sadness to many women through the ongoing rape epidemic, unwanted proposals and loneliness. Wise Indians fear the trend of destruction of family unit. NEXT

1 2 3