ISF Logo   IS Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics
 


Welcome to the International Skeptics Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.
Tags court decisions , gay rights , India issues

Reply
Old 11th December 2013, 09:25 AM   #1
IMST
If Charlie Parker Was a Gunslinger, There'd Be a Whole Lot of Dead Copycats
 
IMST's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,326
WTF India? Gay relations recriminalized

India's supreme court decided that a previously struck down colonial era law criminalizing sodomy and such is still the law of the land (thanks for that dead Britons, btw). Surprising move given their recent rulings that were generally more progressive.

Wonder how long its gonna take to fix this one.

(Ads in link may be NSFW)
http://www.joemygod.blogspot.com/201...minalizes.html
__________________
Creativity is more than just being different. Anybody can plan weird; that's easy. What's hard is to be as simple as Bach. Making the simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity. - Charles Mingus
IMST is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2013, 09:32 AM   #2
GlennB
Loggerheaded, earth-vexing fustilarian
 
GlennB's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Usk, Wales
Posts: 26,112
Yep, breathtaking.

I have a sneaking fear that some might also see it as an excuse for vigilantism.
__________________
"Even a broken clock is right twice a day. 9/11 truth is a clock with no hands." - Beachnut
GlennB is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2013, 02:07 PM   #3
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
I actually see this rather differently, and think this decision may be sensible. Wait.........hear me out.......

This decision wasn't about the content, but about how it was arrived at. Homosexuality had been decriminalised by a lower court..........not by parliament, but by the judiciary. In my own personal view, this isn't the right way to make that sort of decision, and the highest court has simply asked the parliament to have a look at this.

Hopefully, parliament will come to the right decision, quickly, and the ridiculous notion of criminalising sex will be consigned to history. But parliament must do it, not a court.

Mike
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2013, 02:29 PM   #4
IMST
If Charlie Parker Was a Gunslinger, There'd Be a Whole Lot of Dead Copycats
 
IMST's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,326
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
I actually see this rather differently, and think this decision may be sensible. Wait.........hear me out.......

This decision wasn't about the content, but about how it was arrived at. Homosexuality had been decriminalised by a lower court..........not by parliament, but by the judiciary. In my own personal view, this isn't the right way to make that sort of decision, and the highest court has simply asked the parliament to have a look at this.

Hopefully, parliament will come to the right decision, quickly, and the ridiculous notion of criminalising sex will be consigned to history. But parliament must do it, not a court.

Mike
You feel human rights violations in the law shouldn't be resolved by courts even when legislatures aren't willing to take care of it. Thanks for contributing.
__________________
Creativity is more than just being different. Anybody can plan weird; that's easy. What's hard is to be as simple as Bach. Making the simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity. - Charles Mingus
IMST is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2013, 03:22 PM   #5
MikeG
Now. Do it now.
 
MikeG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: UK
Posts: 24,804
Originally Posted by IMST View Post
......Thanks for contributing.
Thanks for patronising.

Oh, and thanks for setting up a strawman, too. Didums, some people are soooo threatened by others disagreeing with them.

I want the same outcome as you, I simply would prefer to see laws made by parliaments and politicians rather than by judges and lawyers. So shoot me.
MikeG is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2013, 03:29 PM   #6
marplots
Penultimate Amazing
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 29,167
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Thanks for patronising.

Oh, and thanks for setting up a strawman, too. Didums, some people are soooo threatened by others disagreeing with them.

I want the same outcome as you, I simply would prefer to see laws made by parliaments and politicians rather than by judges and lawyers. So shoot me.
Did the Indian Supreme Court make that legal too?
marplots is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2013, 05:39 PM   #7
IMST
If Charlie Parker Was a Gunslinger, There'd Be a Whole Lot of Dead Copycats
 
IMST's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 6,326
Originally Posted by MikeG View Post
Thanks for patronising.

Oh, and thanks for setting up a strawman, too. Didums, some people are soooo threatened by others disagreeing with them.

I want the same outcome as you, I simply would prefer to see laws made by parliaments and politicians rather than by judges and lawyers. So shoot me.
It was either patronize or call you an *******. Felt the first was more polite. The second was what I was feeling.
Good news, India will have an incredibly harsh penalty for basic human behavior, but at least they'll have style points if they ever get around to rectifying it.
__________________
Creativity is more than just being different. Anybody can plan weird; that's easy. What's hard is to be as simple as Bach. Making the simple, awesomely simple, that's creativity. - Charles Mingus
IMST is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2013, 08:07 PM   #8
Wolfman
Chief Solipsistic
Autosycophant
 
Wolfman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Vancouver, Canada
Posts: 13,394
Originally Posted by IMST View Post
You feel human rights violations in the law shouldn't be resolved by courts even when legislatures aren't willing to take care of it. Thanks for contributing.
...and you feel that judges should be able to ignore and flout the law? "I disagree with this law, so I'm going to ignore it". Works fine when the judges are ignoring laws that you happen to think are wrong; doesn't work so well when the judges are ignoring laws that you think are right.

People actually think so little about such issues; just gut-level emotional reactions, without considering the ramifications. In any democratic nation, the judiciary doesn't have the right to re-write the laws. They can only interpret and enforce the laws.

If a particular judge makes a ruling that is in contravention of the law, what happens? It is appealed, and a higher court affirms that the ruling is, in fact, not according to that country's laws, and there must be a new trial.

What you are advocating for is a system where any judge, if they disagree with a particular law, can just go ahead and make their own law. Which cannot possibly work.

India needs to change it's laws. And the judiciary can't do that. Judges can put pressure on the government to change the laws. Judges can make rulings that state they disagree with the law in question, and are enforcing it unwillingly. Judges can give the smallest possible sentences for offenses that they think should not be illegal. But they cannot change the laws.

Same thing in Canada, the U.S., and any other democratic power with which I'm familiar. There are laws in Canada that I disagree with...but that doesn't mean that judges can ignore those laws. Nor can judges rewrite those laws. They must enforce them as they are, while advocating for change. For example, I personally think that drugs should be legalized (and controlled and taxed in much the same way as alcohol and tobacco); I know that there are judges who agree with my position. But that doesn't mean that if someone's caught with cocaine, the judge can say, "Hey, you're guilty of breaking the law, but I'm going to ignore the law and let you go."

If he did, the only results would be that A) he would lose his job and B) there would be an automatic appeal, and a whole new trial, where the person would inevitably be convicted.

Yes, this situation in India is terrible. But it's the fault of the people making the laws; not the people enforcing them.
__________________
Please check out my business, The Language of Culture
Wolfman is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2013, 08:18 PM   #9
quixotecoyote
Howling to glory I go
 
quixotecoyote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 10,379
I'm no expert in Indian Constitutional Law, but if it works anything like US law, the case could easily have been ruled as "the lower court did not have the authroity to reverse this law, but the law itself is unconstitutional under Part III Sections(?) 14 and of the Indian constitution:

Quote:
14. Equality before law.—The State shall not deny to any person equality before the law or the equal protection of the laws within the territory of India.

15. Prohibition of discrimination on grounds of religion, race, caste, sex or place of birth.—(1) The State shall not discriminate against any citizen on grounds only of religion, race, caste, sex, place of birth or any of them.
http://lawmin.nic.in/olwing/coi/coi-...dexenglish.htm

So if the Supreme Court wanted to consider the question (if it works at all like the US) they could have said that banning same-sex marriage is discrimination against citizens on grounds only of sex and noshed it.
__________________
If people needed video games to live, a national single payer plan to fund those purchases would be a great idea.
quixotecoyote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2013, 08:54 PM   #10
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
 
Darth Rotor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 38,527
Question to you, OP aka arrogant western cultural fascist: who the hell are you to impose your values on India?
__________________
Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission.
"Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis
Darth Rotor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2013, 09:02 PM   #11
quixotecoyote
Howling to glory I go
 
quixotecoyote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 10,379
Originally Posted by Darth Rotor View Post
Question to you, OP aka arrogant western cultural fascist: who the hell are you to impose your values on India?
That's covered in the parenthetical. The anti-gay law is the arrogant western cultural fascism forced in by colonials.

Which, in this case, isn't actually wrong.
__________________
If people needed video games to live, a national single payer plan to fund those purchases would be a great idea.
quixotecoyote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2013, 10:11 PM   #12
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 19,853
Have to agree with several others. The law is wrong and needs changing, but it is the responsibility of those that represent the people in Parliament to do that, not some Judge.

I would hate to live in a country where Judges could rewrite the law on a whim, that would be incredibly scary.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 11th December 2013, 10:39 PM   #13
quixotecoyote
Howling to glory I go
 
quixotecoyote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 10,379
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
Have to agree with several others. The law is wrong and needs changing, but it is the responsibility of those that represent the people in Parliament to do that, not some Judge.

I would hate to live in a country where Judges could rewrite the law on a whim, that would be incredibly scary.
You mean, like California, where same-sex marriage bans were declared unconstitutional by judges rather than repealed by the legislature.

That doesn't make it seem too scary to me.

In fact, I think a good cornerstone of a free society is that basic rights and protections should be constitutionally guaranteed to all citizens regardless of their popularity with the majority of the population, and should that majority vote representatives into the legislature who pass laws taking away those rights and protections, the judiciary should declare those laws void.
__________________
If people needed video games to live, a national single payer plan to fund those purchases would be a great idea.
quixotecoyote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th December 2013, 12:04 AM   #14
Corsair 115
Penultimate Amazing
 
Corsair 115's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 14,519
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
I would hate to live in a country where Judges could rewrite the law on a whim, that would be incredibly scary.


Hmmm, not sure judges can rewrite the law. They can strike down laws that don't pass constitutional muster. Legislatures are then free at that point to craft new laws which meet the necessary constitutional requirements.
__________________
"We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things not because they are easy, but because they are hard. Because that goal will serve
to organize and measure the best of our abilities and skills, because that challenge is one we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and
one which we intend to win."
Corsair 115 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th December 2013, 06:13 PM   #15
Tsukasa Buddha
Other (please write in)
 
Tsukasa Buddha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,281
Don't they know that the best system is to trust nine unelected, lifetime appointees with supreme power?
__________________
As cultural anthropologists have always said "human culture" = "human nature". You might as well put a fish on the moon to test how it "swims naturally" without the "influence of water". -Earthborn
Tsukasa Buddha is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 12th December 2013, 08:04 PM   #16
PhantomWolf
Penultimate Amazing
 
PhantomWolf's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 19,853
Originally Posted by quixotecoyote View Post
You mean, like California, where same-sex marriage bans were declared unconstitutional by judges rather than repealed by the legislature.

That doesn't make it seem too scary to me.

In fact, I think a good cornerstone of a free society is that basic rights and protections should be constitutionally guaranteed to all citizens regardless of their popularity with the majority of the population, and should that majority vote representatives into the legislature who pass laws taking away those rights and protections, the judiciary should declare those laws void.
Originally Posted by Corsair 115 View Post
Hmmm, not sure judges can rewrite the law. They can strike down laws that don't pass constitutional muster. Legislatures are then free at that point to craft new laws which meet the necessary constitutional requirements.
However here you are talking about something rather different. A Judge can determine that a law is illegal and should be struck down, which is what just happened the other way in Australia, but in India, the Judge went further then that, the original ruling was that the law, which was legal, just should no longer apply. The Judge changed the law. That was not his right to do so.

Take this into other fields. Say a Judge decides that if a woman is raped it was her own fault, and so pushes through a ruling that rape is no longer a crime? When Judges have the ability to strike down any law they don't like, it starts to create a scary precedent.
__________________

It must be fun to lead a life completely unburdened by reality. -- JayUtah
I am not able to rightly apprehend the kind of confusion of ideas that could provoke such a question. -- Charles Babbage (1791-1871)

PhantomWolf is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2013, 09:30 AM   #17
funk de fino
Dreaming of unicorns
 
funk de fino's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: UAE
Posts: 11,938
Originally Posted by Wolfman View Post
...and you feel that judges should be able to ignore and flout the law? "I disagree with this law, so I'm going to ignore it". Works fine when the judges are ignoring laws that you happen to think are wrong; doesn't work so well when the judges are ignoring laws that you think are right.

People actually think so little about such issues; just gut-level emotional reactions, without considering the ramifications. In any democratic nation, the judiciary doesn't have the right to re-write the laws. They can only interpret and enforce the laws.

If a particular judge makes a ruling that is in contravention of the law, what happens? It is appealed, and a higher court affirms that the ruling is, in fact, not according to that country's laws, and there must be a new trial.

What you are advocating for is a system where any judge, if they disagree with a particular law, can just go ahead and make their own law. Which cannot possibly work.

India needs to change it's laws. And the judiciary can't do that. Judges can put pressure on the government to change the laws. Judges can make rulings that state they disagree with the law in question, and are enforcing it unwillingly. Judges can give the smallest possible sentences for offenses that they think should not be illegal. But they cannot change the laws.

Same thing in Canada, the U.S., and any other democratic power with which I'm familiar. There are laws in Canada that I disagree with...but that doesn't mean that judges can ignore those laws. Nor can judges rewrite those laws. They must enforce them as they are, while advocating for change. For example, I personally think that drugs should be legalized (and controlled and taxed in much the same way as alcohol and tobacco); I know that there are judges who agree with my position. But that doesn't mean that if someone's caught with cocaine, the judge can say, "Hey, you're guilty of breaking the law, but I'm going to ignore the law and let you go."

If he did, the only results would be that A) he would lose his job and B) there would be an automatic appeal, and a whole new trial, where the person would inevitably be convicted.

Yes, this situation in India is terrible. But it's the fault of the people making the laws; not the people enforcing them.
Well put. Let's see if OP flees the thread.
__________________

Stundie - Avoided like the plaque, its a scottish turn of phrase.
funk de fino is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2013, 02:19 PM   #18
quixotecoyote
Howling to glory I go
 
quixotecoyote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 10,379
Originally Posted by PhantomWolf View Post
However here you are talking about something rather different. A Judge can determine that a law is illegal and should be struck down, which is what just happened the other way in Australia, but in India, the Judge went further then that, the original ruling was that the law, which was legal, just should no longer apply. The Judge changed the law. That was not his right to do so.

Take this into other fields. Say a Judge decides that if a woman is raped it was her own fault, and so pushes through a ruling that rape is no longer a crime? When Judges have the ability to strike down any law they don't like, it starts to create a scary precedent.
It's not different at all.

They didn't say "the law is legal but I'm changing it" they ruled it unconstitutional (as applied to gay sex at least).

Quote:
In 2009 the Delhi High Court ruled unconstitutional a section of the penal code dating back to 1860 that prohibits "carnal intercourse against the order of nature with any man, woman or animal" and lifted the ban for consenting adults.
http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/...9BA05620131211
__________________
If people needed video games to live, a national single payer plan to fund those purchases would be a great idea.

Last edited by quixotecoyote; 13th December 2013 at 02:37 PM.
quixotecoyote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 13th December 2013, 02:25 PM   #19
Polaris
Penultimate Amazing
 
Polaris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,396
Originally Posted by Darth Rotor View Post
Question to you, OP aka arrogant western cultural fascist: who the hell are you to impose your values on India?
When the values directly harm people for no good reason, **** those values.
__________________
"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

"Let your ears hear this beautiful song that's hiding underneath the sound," Ed Kowalczyk.
Polaris is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 27th December 2013, 10:18 AM   #20
Beerina
Sarcastic Conqueror of Notions
 
Beerina's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Posts: 30,153
Originally Posted by quixotecoyote View Post
You mean, like California, where same-sex marriage bans were declared unconstitutional by judges rather than repealed by the legislature.

That doesn't make it seem too scary to me.

In fact, I think a good cornerstone of a free society is that basic rights and protections should be constitutionally guaranteed to all citizens regardless of their popularity with the majority of the population, and should that majority vote representatives into the legislature who pass laws taking away those rights and protections, the judiciary should declare those laws void.
Judges can't get close to overturning old, settled legislation because of "changing times" until the times change, which is to say, decades of persuasion have passed. Better to keep going a few more years and change the laws properly rather than harden hearts of the no-longer-crumbling resistance, dragging things out.

I have a soft place in my heart for freedom increasing by force, including judicial fiat, but it's still dangerously a charlatan's game. Next time, the seductive charismatic might not be doing things you want, but tough -- they've got a big mass of public opinion on their side, need for legislation, much less constitutional amendment, be damned.

Like, ohhh, I don't know. Spying on Americans without warrants, say, which is still pretty popular?

Why do they get away with it, in the courts? Anyone? Anyone?
__________________
"Great innovations should not be forced [by way of] slender majorities." - Thomas Jefferson

The government should nationalize it! Socialized, single-payer video game development and sales now! More, cheaper, better games, right? Right?

Last edited by Beerina; 27th December 2013 at 10:19 AM.
Beerina is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2013, 06:01 PM   #21
quixotecoyote
Howling to glory I go
 
quixotecoyote's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 10,379
Originally Posted by Beerina View Post
Judges can't get close to overturning old, settled legislation because of "changing times" until the times change, which is to say, decades of persuasion have passed. Better to keep going a few more years and change the laws properly rather than harden hearts of the no-longer-crumbling resistance, dragging things out.

I have a soft place in my heart for freedom increasing by force, including judicial fiat, but it's still dangerously a charlatan's game. Next time, the seductive charismatic might not be doing things you want, but tough -- they've got a big mass of public opinion on their side, need for legislation, much less constitutional amendment, be damned.

Like, ohhh, I don't know. Spying on Americans without warrants, say, which is still pretty popular?

Why do they get away with it, in the courts? Anyone? Anyone?
That's quite the ramble, but it doesn't seem all that relevant to what you quoted.

You quoted me saying that constitutionally guaranteed freedoms should be backed up by judicial rulings regardless of legislative preferences or popular opinion.

How you got from there to wild eyed charismatics running amok is anyone's guess.
__________________
If people needed video games to live, a national single payer plan to fund those purchases would be a great idea.
quixotecoyote is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 29th December 2013, 06:52 PM   #22
a_unique_person
Director of Hatcheries and Conditioning
 
a_unique_person's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: Waiting for the pod bay door to open.
Posts: 42,704
In a country where rape is rampant, they ban consensual sex.
__________________
Continually pushing the boundaries of mediocrity.
Everything is possible, but not everything is probable.
“Perception is real, but the truth is not.” - Imelda Marcos
a_unique_person is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2014, 06:55 AM   #23
Darth Rotor
Salted Sith Cynic
 
Darth Rotor's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 38,527
Originally Posted by Polaris View Post
When the values directly harm people for no good reason, **** those values.
I guess I need to figure out which smilie is for sarcasm. Try my post again, with that in mind.
__________________
Helicopters don't so much fly as beat the air into submission.
"Jesus wept, but did He laugh?"--F.H. Buckley____"There is one thing that was too great for God to show us when He walked upon our earth ... His mirth." --Chesterton__"If the barbarian in us is excised, so is our humanity."--D'rok__ "I only use my gun whenever kindness fails."-- Robert Earl Keen__"Sturgeon spares none.". -- The Marquis
Darth Rotor is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2014, 07:09 AM   #24
geni
Anti-homeopathy illuminati member
 
geni's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 28,185
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
In a country where rape is rampant, they ban consensual sex.
Under R v Coney which dates to 1882 and thus pre-independence common law places limits on what you can consent to.
geni is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 3rd January 2014, 07:11 AM   #25
Polaris
Penultimate Amazing
 
Polaris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,396
Originally Posted by Darth Rotor View Post
I guess I need to figure out which smilie is for sarcasm. Try my post again, with that in mind.
I figured your post for sarcasm. My statement was more of a blanket opinion.
__________________
"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

"Let your ears hear this beautiful song that's hiding underneath the sound," Ed Kowalczyk.
Polaris is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2014, 06:49 AM   #26
Alferd_Packer
Philosopher
 
Alferd_Packer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Posts: 8,746
Originally Posted by a_unique_person View Post
In a country where rape is rampant, they ban consensual sex.
Gang rape is the new national sport of India.
__________________
No laws of physics were broken in the writing of this post
Alferd_Packer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2014, 06:55 AM   #27
Polaris
Penultimate Amazing
 
Polaris's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 11,396
Originally Posted by Alferd_Packer View Post
Gang rape is the new national sport of India.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-india-25855325

This happened 2 days ago.
__________________
"There's vastly more truth to be found in rocks than in holy books. Rocks are far superior, in fact, because you can DEMONSTRATE the truth found in rocks. Plus, they're pretty. Holy books are just heavy." - Dinwar

"Let your ears hear this beautiful song that's hiding underneath the sound," Ed Kowalczyk.
Polaris is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 23rd January 2014, 09:18 AM   #28
yodaluver28
Muse
 
yodaluver28's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Posts: 569
Sadly, I'm not surprised. I have several Indian co-workers. Every single one, male and female, have said on numerous occasions that they would literally rather die than go back to that hell hole.
__________________
Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering. We must have the deepest commitment, the most serious mind-Jedi Master Yoda.
yodaluver28 is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

International Skeptics Forum » General Topics » Non-USA & General Politics

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:05 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

This forum began as part of the James Randi Education Foundation (JREF). However, the forum now exists as
an independent entity with no affiliation with or endorsement by the JREF, including the section in reference to "JREF" topics.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.