For now, the 3:2 verdict of the Hon’ble Supreme Court refusing to legalize same-sex marriage has given some hope to our much-beleaguered society. While decriminalizing homosexuality was acceptable since as long as it was consensual there was very little for anyone to oppose it. And, what to say about this ever-tolerant society of Bharata. It embraces everyone, everything, anyone, and anything that comes its way. It was much expected and in line with the ‘agenda’ that the next immediate demand from the proponents would be for their ‘Rights’ to legalize same-sex marriage, grant equal adoption rights, inheritance, and so on.

It is possible that those demanding for legalizing same-sex marriage did not realize that our society while being infinitely Tolerant has another unique trait of self-correction. From time to time like in any other society, anomalies and aberrations do creep in our society too but then, the same society has the unique latent power of self-correction which saw many social ills like – Dowry, Sati, Child Marriage, Female foeticide, Widow marriage, etc. get junked slowly, but surely. Sometimes by means of voice-vote, at times enacting law with division, and other times by merely awakening of the combined social consciousness.

Keeping the legality aside, there are certain major and glaring concerns which makes the demand for same-sex marriage unacceptable to our society at large. Not to mention, the grave risks which it carries along with it for all the stakeholders irrespective of their Religion or Faith.

Unifier of Religions

Same-sex marriage is one such contentious demand which has possibly, unified ALL religions in opposing it. Is it merely a coincidence that Religions as diverse as Catholicism to Islam to Hinduism are all seemingly repelled by this proposition? Would it not be safe to infer that, this demand is overtly anti-Religion at its core? If so, then it would be better to come out in the open calling it as an anti-Religion movement instead of associating it with some misplaced Pride? Some religion see marriage as a contract while some see it as divinely ordained Union of Man and Woman. Some consider it as foundation to serve God and His creation while others see it as a significant step towards achieving the goal of Life. However, no Religion considers Sexual relationship as the foundation or the purpose for this solemn act called Marriage. Irrespective of which Religion we talk about, the idea behind Marriage is recognising the Truth that Man or Woman are incomplete in themselves and the best in them comes out only by the Union between them. That is what every Religion says and also what the Nature around us points to.

Religion has always meant to be the ring-fence around the endeavors of Human which sets the limits of morality and the larger good for the society.Whether being achieved or not in true spirit, the fact remains that welfare of the society has been one of core principlesof every Religion however flawed or skewed it may appear to be interpreted and implemented as in the present passage of time. After all, the unit of any society is a healthy family and the unit of every family is the individual – Man or Woman. Any sort of perversion or aberration in an individual is bound to affect the family and in turn to the society at large. That is the reason, an aberration needs to be called as what it is and not glorified by same strange mumbo-jumbo of alphabets, LGBTQIA++++++.

Please spare the ‘T’

 The greatest disservice this LGBTQIA++++++ movement has done is to include the Transgender community in the grouping as well as their nomenclature. By clubbing the T with L, G and B (the 3 under reference being nothing but merely sexual orientation and preference even if we put aside the aspect of morality involved) has only left the-Tfind their need for basic social equality not just getting diluted but also side-tracked. Transgender is a state of existence where the aspects of masculinity and feminity is disoriented within the same body. Being a Transgender is neither a matter of choice or preference but an unfortunate aberration or condition. It needs to be dealt with sensitivity and accommodation without falling prey to stereotypes.

In our Puranas, we find Transgender characters like Shikhandi, the Great Arjuna and Brihannala, Ila, and Aravan to name a few. In fact, we find references to Kinnaras who can be seen to be in a similar categorisation. But we don’t find any reference to L, G, and B in any Puranas.

In our Society, Transgendersdo suffer due to a lack of acceptance in society in terms of finding jobs or accommodation or even toilets in public places. This makes them vulnerable to crime, violence, and exploitation. Without doubt, this is an issue that requires social attention for the sake of our own society. The same cannot be said to hold true for Lesbians, Gays, or Bisexuals.

The Supreme Law of Nature

Whichever way the Court of Law of the land may view the subject, the fact remains that the above-mentioned 3 categories have created their identities merely on the basis of their sexual preference or rather lack of preference, as the case may be. Let us be clear that this cannot be called as anything else other than perversion of the senses. Human Being is considered to be the pinnacle of creation. What sets aside the Human Beings from all other Beings is the unique blessing of the faculty of Intellect. The faculty which allows them to discriminate which enables making a choice. The animals do not have this faculty and so they merely go by their instinct. Animals do not violate the law of nature due to the lack of Intellect but it appears that Humans violate the law only because they have an Intellect. To treat Choice as an absolute Right comes with its own fallings since Choice can often be in divergence with Nature. Same-sex is a similar expression of choice, nothing more and nothing less. There is neither any need to glorify it nor should there be any compulsion to normalise it. The Hon’ble Courts have rightly set the limit of choice by decriminalizing same-sex. If that is the choice of an individual and it is consensual then the Courts have rightly decided to look away.