Debate on Section 377 and sexuality
The debate on Section 377 should be framed within the context of dharma, a global ethic which is inviolate in Indian tradition. A rashtram has to be a dharma saapeksha rashtram to promote and protect dharma.
Is our Constitution and the rule of law in consonance with this imperative of dharma?
As Prof. Kapil Kapoor notes: “niyama, sayama, shradhaनियमसयमश्रद्ध– Right way of deciding things, restraint, reverence/sanctity” are given importance in Indian society which restricts sex within the institution of marriage (ek pati/patni) for procreation.
The institution of marriage is central to the institution of family which is the bedrock of Indian polity. Family in the Indian tradition is a paramount economic institution which also finds expression in an extended family of caste (jaati) in social organization.
If attitudes of sexuality go berserk threatening this fundamental institution, the whole social edifice collapses.
Prof. Kapil Kapoor calls for sex education in the context of Indian traditions which have stood the test of time for millennia.
In matters related to sex, Indian traditions have established the frontiers of dharma.
http://bharatkalyan97.blogspot.in/2013/12/sec-377-hindu-view-of-alternate.htmlSec. 377: A Hindu view of alternate sexuality -- Sandhya Jain
“Srimad Bhagvatam (4.28.61) says, “Sometimes you think yourself a man, sometimes a chaste woman and sometimes a neutral eunuch. This is all because of the body, which is created by the illusory energy. This illusory energy is My potency, and actually both of us – you and I – are pure spiritual identities. Now just try to understand this. I am trying to explain our factual position.” This verse has generally been understood as recognition of three genders and sexual orientations. Several texts, including the Kama Sastra and Narada smriti, and medical texts like the Caraka Samhita (4.2), Sushruta Samhita (3.2) and Smriti Ratnavali, and Sanskrit dictionaries and lexicons like Amarakosa and Sabda-Kalpa-Druma include references to tritiya Prakriti (eunuchs, or persons who cannot be exclusively categorised as male or female). This third gender has generally been held to include bisexuals, homosexuals, intersexuals, transexuals and asexuals. Patanjali takes notice of the third sex, as do some medieval era Jaina Acharyas who note that third-sex desire can be very intense. The overall attitude has been one of accommodation. The Dharma sastra and dharma sutra texts maintain that the third gender should be minimally maintained by their family members as they usually do not have children (Manu smriti 9.202, Arthasastra 3.5.30-32), and do not inherit property. The Vasista Dharmasutra advises the king (State) to maintain third-gender citizens with no family members and the Arthasastra forbids vilification of third-gender men or women (3.18.4-5). In the Mahabharata, king Virata shelters Arjun as the eunuch Brihannala; he teaches dance to the royal princess who later becomes his daughter-in-law.”
Thoughts on High Court Legalizing Animal Instincts (Delhi High Court’s 2009 judgment on Section 377 of IPC):
India is a hot country. Our customs and our practices accordingly require people living in an ordered society to regulate sex. Our shastras, Vedas and other holy books guide us to restrain sexual indulgence up to the age of 25. But it is very strange that high court has legalized homosexuality. Unnatural sex and unrestrained indulgence in sex destroy civilizations.
Go back to the Bible. In the Old Testament, we are told that the cities of Sodom and Gomorhea – note the names – were destroyed by the wrath of God on account of immoral ways of the people. And the ancient Persians hated the Greeks because they practiced homosexuality and lesbianism – there was an island Lesbos – and through successive invasions were instrumental in ending the high Greek civilization.
Our society for the last 5000 years has survived because it is founded on values. Three cardinal values are – niyama, a preferred way of doing things, sanyama, individual and social restriant and shraddha, respect for things/people/values/society.
It is unfortunate that the country’s official policy since 1950 has promoted the opposite of these values – freedom to do what you want to do, indulgence and an absence of respect for age, knowledge and values. Our society will undergo a cataclysmic conflict between the India governed by English knowing westernized, urban elite and the mass of people – what form it takes and when, we don’t know but an ancient civilization that has faced so many challenges will not give up.
How can a judge say that moral values of a society are not the basis of law. Then what is the basis? A borrowed constitution? Animal instincts?
This philosophy has inbuilt destruction. Open display of vulgar sexuality on the roads, media and official support for all this – this is the road to ruin.
The best way is to let unnatural practices be just as we let gutters be. But we do not open up the gutters and glamorize them.
We are in trouble because all the rulers – politicians, officials, media persons – have been educated in an educational system that as a matter of policy excludes the intellectual texts of our civilization and feeds them on the diet of an alien culture with the result that those who come out of this system are at best ignorant and at worst have contempt for their own culture. They are driving this society.
Last week I was watching the debate on India TV on this issue. One of the debaters , a doctor said to Baba Ramdev that he does not know about science and human psychology. Is the doctor aware of what India has over thousands of years explicitly said about sexuality, normal and deviant? Or is he wiser than all the thinkers and texts that are till today object of deep study in major western universities?
Are we animals? Will we go on to legalize all animal instincts – violence, revenge? But I think we are not in an age where thinking is popular or respected.
2.4.13 Dr. Kapil Kapoor while drawing attention of the Committee to the fallout of sex education in the western countries, was of the view that the cultural attitude to sexuality in our country which had produced magnum opus like Kama Sutra is different from the western country. As per our culture, sex had been considered as sacred union and tempered through self-imposed restraint and abstinence through societal regulation. The Indians socially, therefore, restrict sex within the institution of marriage (ek pati/patni) for procreation. Indian society gives importance to niyama(the right way of deciding things), sayama(restraint) and shradha (reverence/sanctity). Sex (Kama) had been prescribed to be exercised within the boundary of dharma (righteousness). According to him the unbridled sexuality prevalent in the Northern Hemisphere would corrupt our society which had attempted to uphold highest ethical standards and it might end up in ethical vacuum, as had happened in the western society. He emphasised that our children should be taught self-restraint, character-building, reverence for people and wisdom, in place of ... sex-education. (Source: C.S.II. -135RAJYA SABHA COMMITTEE ON PETITIONS Hundred and Thirty-fifth Report on Petition praying for national debate and evolving consensus on the implementation of the policy for introduction of sex education in the Schools and holding back its introduction until then(Presented to Hon'ble Chairman, Rajya Sabha on 2nd April, 2009)