Same-sex marriage may never qualify legitimacy to centuries-old settled ethos....by Nirmal Singh Keerka

 Supreme Court Bench on Thursday 10th May 2023 reserved judgment on various petitions about marriage equality rights for the LGBTQIA+ community. The Centre had told that any constitutional declaration made by it on pleas seeking legal validation for same-sex marriage may not be a "correct course of action" as the court will not be able to foresee, envisage, comprehend, and deal with its fallout. 

Hence, a constitutional declaration "may not be a correct course of action," further stated, "Your lordships' declaration would be a law within the meaning of Article 141, binding all, not just all courts, binding the whole nation." Any declaration of law will bind every individual in the country who is not before the apex court, hence a comprehensive introspective road map.

India post-British has been trying to move on many bullet train category imaginative western social life models, abandoning disregarding many hard-earned, old ethical conventions and now trying to copy-paste certain modern developments shaped in other global country nations. 

The issue of same-sex union demand to be legally sanctioned & asking for benefits of marriage as that enjoyed by naturally married numbering above 99% of the population.Supreme Court is being seen considering this demand under Constitutional rights but has assumed its role of getting it routed through the Parliament. 

The referral directions without settling fundamental ethical parameters have their fault catch in the catch, but a prima facie foundation is laid for legitimacy. The political system need not shy away and refer to medically psychological investigations before considering or legitimizing unnatural behavioral actions of those suffering in the illness category. Absolute sanction or limited legitimacy may not a part of a permanent solution unless a response through research laboratories to establish the reasons for such unnatural ills growing & existing in India.

The tragedy of thought for proposed legitimacy has identical symptoms with ideas for giving certain free facilities to the poorest or poor without planning to make use of the manpower for national productivity, without creating adequate Job opportunities for them. The absence of certain basics, also contributes creation & growth of uncivilized habitual designs fulfilling the gaps in social life at a particular time slot in a country, otherwise bounded in collective living agreements on borrowed cut-paste constitutional frames.

Getting back directly to the most sensitive nature issue on the "Mind & Heart" is the question of mechanical legality to the living of two adults two women or two men in an identical model of life for married couples. 99% is being pushed to approve and accept abnormal- unnatural demands of its 1% co-citizens believed to be on a complex critical platform? 

Generally, no individualistic like/dislikes could be enforced on others by misuse of the name for fundamental rights presented by less than ONE% with misinterpretations for constitutional rights, despite those to be known as special category man-made demands & believed in violation of natural laws.

The absence of certain opportunities invariably contributes production of wrong actions- the wrong path by certain individuals in society, such as the absence of jobs, creates & contributes to production for thieves, and the degree of theft gets increased - multiplied proportionately in the absence for the basic requirement reach of them. 

The young age energies after certain level biological developments in human bodies go in the needs for its hunger. There were times when marriage for boys at the age of 15 and girls even less than this age was solemnized but the Western European influences along with modern industrialization pushed the age limits to higher levels without taking into consideration that the energy flow in younger age in boy/girl may get in for new options & especially when being away from parents and in competitive race for more money and comforts. 

Two boys or two girlfriends living together or regularly spending time together as students or in jobs but missing opportunities for release out natural sex-related activities & get in extra relationships by default, initially for experimentation but repeat making them dependent on each other for unnatural conduct. 

The wisdom of the Supreme Court stood reserved but appears to be focussed on the temporary first aid solution for the mentally, psychologically- medically "ill" subjects, who stood created with certain amended /none amended rules and those not readjusted based on their natural needs today. The system operators are not looking in for the cause behind situations developed. British ruled over multi-cultural societies of Indian states for over 3 centuries and are remembered for many good policy frames and actions brought out by their wisdom. 

The debates on the topic anchored between well-literate, well-read, or understanding between less than 2-3% of Indian civilization but projected as a national cause debated in the interest of majority civilization but not true. Before directional concurrence on this issue, being a fundamental constitutional right, it may be sensible to decide the subject first to be in the category approval for being on "Ethical or Unethical" benchmarks of Indian cultural state civilizations. 

The learned Sikh institutions unfortunately continue observing mystical silence on this subject but they must formally address this complexity. The SGPC and Sri Akal Takhat generally reached out on no follow-up for settled religious protocols & practices defined and inherited from Sikh Guru Times but are sleeping over highly sensitive ethical issues under reference.  

The one namely Navtej Singh Johar was a person in 2018 who was challenged for striking down 377 IPC criminality in same-sex relationships. Johar has Sikh family connections and also uses the suffix Singh with his name but his publically made declarations have not been taken into account for those being unethical to Sikh values and the known religious history, the act is unethical and in absolute violation of inherited SIKH ways of life.   

The superior Judiciary may in the heart of heart in a limited job tenure like to bring in great historical judgments as a road map for the future but getting pushed away from ethical parameters, generally create more complications than solving those on hand for minor numbers (less than 1%), believed to be the result of certain decisions of the society, like increase in the age for marriage of Girl & Boy. 

The Judicially Executive top managers, and the Members of Parliament have yet not deliberated on the absence and need for "legal sex windows" and further increase made in age for marriage was helpful in production for fewer number children, controlling the population but lawmakers were unaware that their certain actions may have contributed in the creation for multiple other side ills, including creation for another new same-sex group of people falling into unnatural conduct which is not preferred even by animals. 

Those getting in such an act initially may have done it for loneliness/Western trends but timely none corrections made them habitual, but the larger part of society may find it impossible to accept them as natural co-citizens. Had such a situation been developed during the rule of British Indian times, they may have secretly decided to take down the opinion of their subjects at ground level and then debated this idea on a public platform for confirmation of the need-based social sanctions. 

The media news appeared conveys that the wisdom in Supreme Court has referred to same-sex marriage demand subject to the Parliament but left out other directly co-related, such as; the law for Sex Shops, living in by Women & Men with/without marriage, etc to be debated together laying the path for needs today or settling validation afresh the continuity old ethical norms earned over centuries. 

A group of people referred that when those being not male or female could be given legitimacy as respectable citizen rights then why not legitimacy to same-sex marriage but both cannot be grouped because the non-gender are due to natural birth fault lines and is not their fault, hence the case is different from same-sex marriage who is a group of people going in default by error for unnatural actions and cannot be made part of society being out of 99% member civilization. 

During the British Era, the Red Light areas were legally created for certain human objectives and those stood created throughout the world but new India- post-British has been indecisive and hanging on this subject. Ancient India has been a practitioner of certain ethos although varied from state to state and does not allow outlets for free sex shops although mystically shut its eyes on the exploitation of girl children/women on the tradition for dassies in certain Indian states Today we need to take a complete picture for realistic repositioning.

Therefore, the issue earlier brought out was limited to live-in relationship idea seeking legitimacy when an adult aged 18 or above is a girl/boy wish to be staying together without formal marriage and no formal regulatory law procedures were adopted neither made it illegal but the proposed legalisation for same sex marriage may turn out to be an act of psychological bleeding of ethos of Indian civilization after an idea on board for live-in partial mystical legitimacy. 

The legal legitimacy may never get them social recognition in near futures but India needs to discuss ideas in a comprehensive model; organising review & repositioning all sex connected factors; Impact on increased marriageable age- its suspected role for same-sex closeness opportunities in India, options for over flowing youth energies with alternative natural windows-as legalised sex shops, which could be outside normal society civilization zones etc. may be useful alternative. 

After that similar may be the reason creating special zone areas for same sex marriage if to be legalized and located in special zone areas for their Life. But India may have to discourage but not encourage unnatural behaviors.

The Parliament approval must be required from at least 2/3 numbers if favouring the act and decided by collective sensibility consciousness. Ld Supreme court having reserved its judgement and may further avoid unhealthy anti nature -anti ethical idea enforcement by direct/ indirect directions to system operators, who are mandated for governance of only 5 years term but not mandated being Judicially executive super managers of India for change in ethical practices settled over a period of centuries and neither qualified changing with throw of hat values.

For kind consideration of the Lordships, Members Indian Parliament & state Assemblies 2023? May connect with old view point brought before Republic on web page http://www.punjabkbank.com/live-in-relationship-legalized-prostitution-legitimacy-for-gay-sex-all-such-issues-need-to-be-addressed-by-parliament-in-collective-conscious-than-to-piecemeal.