In the philosophy of Sanatan Dharma, multiple pathways exist towards spiritual progress. In the matter of civil unions as well, following an inclusivist path is the way to go.
The Supreme Court of India has left it to Parliament to determine the legal contours of civil union between individuals who belong to the same gender. At the same time, the court has signalled that the present situation need not be regarded as permanent, or even long-lasting, and has welcomed the proposal to have a committee under the Cabinet Secretary go into the issue of legalisation of same-sex civil unions. Given the fact that the 2024 Lok Sabha election cycle has effectively begun to operate, the odds are either that the status quo will be maintained for now, or that the conclusions of the committee will be completed and revealed only after the national polls take place. Where legal recognition in the form of laws recognizing the rights of same-sex couples to be the same as heterosexual couples in civil unions, countries differ. In Afghanistan, for example, forget about civil union, the very cohabitation of same-sex couples is treated as a capital offence. In contrast, countries such as Sweden have much more liberal laws, which remove discrimination based on sexual orientation. In the US, including through the US Supreme Court, such a permissive attitude is being sought to be rolled back, thereby causing significant societal tremors. Even longstanding rights (such as abortion rights that had been granted by the now defunct Roe v Wade judgment of the US Supreme Court in 1973) have been removed or diluted by the Court, ironically in the name of freedom and rights. If the Democratic Party once again emerges as the victor in the 2024 US Presidential polls, such rollbacks would be among the primary reasons for such a victory.
Whatever be the combination of political parties that assumes power after the 2024 Lok Sabha polls in India, it would serve the national interest were our laws to be aligned more closely with the right of individual citizens to decide for themselves what their orientation ought to be. They need to be given the freedom to practice that without penal consequences. In that context, it was welcome that the central government did not challenge a Supreme Court ruling that struck down a colonial-era law that punished those who indulged in same-sex relationships. There are other laws reeking of colonial-era mindsets and practices, such as that relating to criminal defamation, that should similarly go into the dustbin.
Colonial-era laws that remain on the statute books have a tendency to bite back at those who use them, given the vagaries of politics in India. Among those who experienced such blowback is Rahul Gandhi, who was found guilty of criminal defamation and sentenced to two years in prison. This was as a consequence of a colonial-era law that remained on the statute books during the many years of Congress rule at the centre, including during 2004-14. The sooner such colonial-era constructs are removed by the government or the courts, the better will the future of India be. The 2024-29 Parliament will need to put in place the 21st century legislative and policy matrix that is essential for India to take advantages of the opportunities that are opening up, while avoiding the risks. Which is why voters will need to exercise their right to the franchise with reflection and caution in 2024.
Each individual has her or his preferences and lifestyle practices. There are many in India who are vegetarian, including the present columnist, and who believe that such a diet is the most appropriate . What would be wrong is to use the bludgeon of the law and the police to enforce such preferences on the rest of the population. Chief Minister Nitish Kumar enforced Prohibition in Bihar. Certainly the consumption of alcohol is usually harmful to health, and in many families, there are example of relatives who have had their futures destroyed by addiction to the bottle. That being said, Prohibition has not succeeded anywhere in the world, and neither has it in Bihar, where there is now a flourishing trade in illicit liquor, including adulterated versions that can sometimes have fatal consequences when consumed. The principal beneficiary of Bihar’s liquor policy has been the mafia, which very soon controlled the illicit liquor trade in that state. Returning to the matter of same-sex civil unions, unlike in its stance on Section 377 of the IPC, which it declared illegal without referring the matter back to the government, the majority opinion in the Supreme Court in the matter of the rights of same-sex civil unions as compared to heterosexual unions saw merit in handing that particular matter back to the government for decision rather than acting on its own in ensuring equality of treatment. An argument used against granting such equality of status is that adopted children may be at higher risk of abuse in same-sex unions. No data has been presented to establish such a conclusion as a fact. The unpleasant reality is that there are all too many instances of abuse even where heterosexual parents are concerned. The individual and not the orientation is the critical factor.
What is natural to one individual may not be so to another, and so long as harm is not done to themselves or to others, individual choices in dress, diet and lifestyle need to be respected. There is of course a strong case for blocking the preaching and dissemination of views that demonise other faiths and believers in them. In the philosophy of Sanatan Dharma, multiple pathways exist towards spiritual progress, not just an exclusive route. By all means talk about the good qualities of your own faith, but avoid demonising those of others. In the matter of civil unions as well, following the inclusivist path is the way to go. Someday, the restrictions now in force where civil unions of different shades are concerned will go the way of Section 377 of the IPC, and land in the same dustbin that colonial rule in India was consigned to in 1947.