The Banned on Gay Sex is Not Being Taken Laying Down by Most Gay and Friends
Congress president Sonia Gandhi meets women members of the party’s Mumbai wing, in New Delhi on Thursday.
New Delhi: After Congress president Sonia Gandhi and her son Rahul, the party’s vice-president, openly expre-ssed support for gay rights and voiced “disappointment” with Wednesday’s Supreme Court decision on Section 377 IPC, the government, which had only a day back decided to adhere to the court’s verdict, on Thursday said that it was considering all options to decriminalise homosexuality in the country.
This move appeared to send a strong positive signal to the upwardly mobile urban population, which had been shifting away from the Congress of late, but it could also possibly disturb some of the party’s major vote banks, including conservative sections of Muslim society. For the time being, though, it has ensured a positive image in urban areas and among the middle class.
Joining the chorus, a “disappointed” Aam Aadmi Party (AAP) said, “The party hopes and expects that the SC will review the judgement and that Parliament will step in to repeal this archaic law.”
SP backs SC, BJP yet to decide on homosexuality
The Samajwadi Party has made it clear that it will oppose any amendments to Section 377 if it comes in Parliament for discussion even as the BJP put the ball in the government's court, saying it will take a stand on the matter if the Manmohan Singh dispensation calls an all-party meeting on the issue.
“Homosexuality is unethical and immoral, it is against the culture of the country and we will fight it,” SP leader Ram Gopal Yadav was quoted as saying by a news channel.
In the government, finance minister P. Chidambaram took the lead in supporting gay rights, saying: “LGBT has the right to have sex as they wish. The Supreme Court has taken us back to 1860.” Terming Wednesday’s ruling as “disappointing”, Chidambram said the court should have applied “current social and moral values” in the case.
He said the government should file a review or curative petition, and the matter should be heard by a five-bench judge. He said the bench that gave the order should have referred the matter to a five-judge bench, and said the interpretation of law couldn’t be static.
Expressing similar views, law minister Kapil Sibal said millions of people were affected by the ruling. “And I don’t think we should expose those millions to Section 377 IPC, we are very firm about this.” He said: “We will have to change the law. If the Supreme Court has upheld that law, we will certainly have to take firm steps.”
Comments