Why Centre is against legalising queer marriage
2023 ж. 3 Мам.
432 711 Рет қаралды
"We used to treat even this as far-fetched." Arguing for the Centre against same-sex marriages, Tushar Mehta asked some important questions in the Supreme Court.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------Brut India is the fastest-growing digital video publisher in the country. We're a young, independent platform producing compelling journalism in new formats.
You can also find us here:
Facebook: / brutindia
Instagram: / brut.india
Twitter: / brutindia
Snapchat: Brut India
Snapchat: Brut India Stories
One of the best decisions taken by the Indian Judicial System was to implement Live court hearings . Should've been implemented a long time ago but better late than never . Helps show the dire process that goes into implementing a law . And gives us a perspective what went on and the reasons why some conditions are placed in some laws. Stops us from just jumping into conclusions why the law is wrong or right or what it shouldve been.
Blessings of Corona.😃
Can you please post the link for the full hearing.
court does not implement law, it interprets law and direct gov to enforce it.
??? Suppose 2 ppl of same sex wanna marry but cant (in india). u live to gether all happy after 10 years 20 years you both get old together and are living happily both of ur parents are no more and suddenly one of u gets sick or goes in a car accident. Ur partner dosent have any right on u according to the legal system and dont have any relation between u. But then I also understand that India isnt ready precisely the majority pf ppl arent maybe india after 10 years is ready to accept this
@@gamerboy7820 👍
For the first time I am impressed by the Indian Judiciary. They are discussing the matter in depth. Irrespective of the conclusion, everyone should be proud at the independence of our Indian judiciary! I hope a win-win arises.
CHUP
Goodness no! Being impressed with the judiciary for discussing a matter in depth is like being impressed with the fan blades turning when you flip the switch. It's what it was MADE TO DO! This guy's argument is that a section of society should be denied their basic rights because it's inconvenient for them to rewrite the laws. Trust me, we have a long, long way to go.
Crores of cases pending and this is hopeless judiciary for u
@@anirudh2704 this is the government's responsibility actually but they're avoiding it so what should we do!?
@@didd2810 since when Indian government started dispensing Judicial cases?
I don't think these are arguments against same sex marriage explicitly but they just highlight the work that needs to be done on our legal system to actually integrate same sex marriage better.
Ohh ya thats a really good point
Yeah this is the bigger issue here. Millions of cases pending across judiciary aren't important we should first solve this issue. This is nothing but virtue signalling bullsht to hide the rot in judiciary.
Basically no one wants to provide law for your sexual orientation.
@@abhisheknarayana1224it's not providing laws for someone else's sexual orientation, it's changing rigid and obsolete laws to ones that fit the needs of today's time and can be fair for a large, more inclusive population.
@Parijat Singh You have no idea, what's coming after same sex marriage legalise, just look at what's happening in west!! We don't want those things to happen in India, India must focus on poverty and employment, not such futile issues, let me guess you're the from that community who can not describe what a women is? Tell me what is a women?
As far as I get it, these are not arguments to not allow same sex marriages but rather shortcomings of the present system built mainly for the binary community. When we are deciding to generalise the law, every other needs to be generalized as well..which, shouldn't be the reason to stop generalization in the first place.
Excellent. This is EXACTLY what I thought, too. What the SG is pointing out are the wordings that have been put in with the binary systems in mind
If I am being honest with you... Ancient Hindu Texts have the reference of Homosexuality in them and if they had no problem with it at that age or time, I think we should neither. But yes, the problems listed by the SG definitely makes sense. I know your argument about reforming the current system sounds logical but it isn't factually accurate. The LGBTQ community fails to determine their gender. In the Indian Law their are certain privileges given to both the genders respectively. Now, how to determine these things? Their can't be two parallel laws for the two of them because if so, then what if someone decides to identify themselves as LGBTQ in between their trail? So, my point is... What problem doesn't have a solution? But not every solution is feasible.
@@rohanvats9982your argument is that years ago people didn't have problem with something so we shouldn't have problem with it too? That's so stupid
@@rohanvats9982 - Ancient Hindu text does not refers to Hindu religious texts. Hindu society in the past had a lot of sub-groups living together which did not follow Hinduism - which included Buddhism and Jainism. A lot of their arguments are not accordance to Hindu beliefs and therefore, should not be added as a "Hindu text" in general.
@@rohanvats9982 can you please link me to some ancient Hindu texts mentioning homosexuality as you clearly remember them in the back of your mind.
Forget about same sex marriage, I want them to ban cousins and uncle-niece marriages. They are creating genetically disadvantaged children and deaths among them while they have the ability to stop it. It's also disgusting how your own family has the ability to have carnal desires on you. And also how ridiculous that is when a maternal cousin is a potential partner but a paternal cousin is a brother/sister. The same goes with uncles.
where is it practiced
See if u r Targetting muslims , as a Muslim my self .. There r no uncle and niece marriage here ( by no I mean it's very rare and uncommon ) And about cousin marriage it's usually between 2nd cousins or 3rd cousins they r Usually not direct cousins So the cases r already very rare if u talk about direct cousins and very very rare about uncle and niece Probably the same as other communities
@@Berries_11how can you even marry your 2nd cousin lol That’s literally your sister You guys are bit disgusting
@@Berries_11 I don't which part of the world you're from, but from where I come from, uncle-niece and 1st cousin marriages are very common. And no, I didn't target Muslims. I was targeting Hindus who do that and also people from other religions who do that.
@@Berries_11why did you assume they were targeting Muslims? Maybe if it quacks , it is a duck😂😂
This is how the country should operate !! Proud of these guys !!
keep crying when we get our marriage rights very soon
That means this is an issue of "system of marriage" on which the whole"family system" of India stands. Obviously it's not an easy decision to make.
I am in support of same sex marriages but these questions are absolutely valid...we need to fix all of these issues before arriving at any new conclusion
... y to jump in it , are all the next generations gotta be gays. ?
yes
So true
Support of mental illness
Disgusting!!!
It's my first time seeing how all laws are interlinked and breaking one law can cause chain reaction leading to system breakdown...
Except for the Incest thing, every other argument seems fair. If CJI thinks there is no concept of absolute biological men and women, he should give the parameters on how to decide who is the man and woman in all other acts of domestic violence, dowry, and rape. If a man who raped a woman doesn't identify himself as a man, what should be the deciding factor to consider him a man. CJI knows how messed up this gets, so he left it to the parliament. For a small minority of the population, the court cannot throw the entire women under the bus.
Then change the definition of rape already! Why is it a notion that men are only capable of committing rape??
Boy are you kidding me? Only a man can rape? No sir. A woman can rape too. Have you not seen criminal cases of father sexually assaulting their sons or mother doing the same to their daughters. Rape is wrong, whether done by a man or woman
This is the route to slippery slope. Vested interest want to see this through to destroy society as we know it.
What you want to say i don't understand but inc**t is is worst If it is allowed then human meat should be allowed
Hahaha
The majority of people have absolutely no idea about the complexity of this matter and are foolishly reducing it to an "Equality issue". Most of the people have no idea about the arguments put by advocates and Justices in this matter. The Chief Justice just announced that the Honourable Supreme Court cannot entertain popular morality because if they go by what young people feel then they afterwards have to listen to what many other people feel. Listen to the arguments put forth by the Solicitor General and how the bench agreed on the devastating effects and ramifications of legalising same-sex marriage on the personal laws, Special Marriage Act, Constitutional laws, Criminal and Civil Procedure, and provisions and laws and safeguards for women. The problem is that people are seeing this without even a smidgeon of technical knowledge, and it is not a problem but people should restrain from speaking on the matters which are exceedingly severe. Same-Sex Marriage entails Identity-crisis (just like what is happening in USA) and after that Identity Politics. There would be thousands of petitions on the identity issues with the defence of 78th paragraph in NLSA v. UoI(2014). You should look at the severity and complexity of the matter to decide if you should speak or not.
I agree
Valid.
A well thought comment 👍
how would this be made understood to shallow thinkers? who just think that it is the right of a person to choose and become what ever they want. who are of more individualistic than collectivistic.
@@freakshit22 Yes, I saw how intelligent people really are.
I'm surprised by the controversial news presented in this video. It challenges the traditional concept of marriage, and it's interesting to see how our society is evolving. The lawyer showcased in the video plays a crucial role in making our society more livable. Thanks for sharing this thought-provoking content.
The biggest stupidity in this case is comparing gay love to incest. If straight people have the right to love who they want then gays should too because these 2 are morally correct and are not breaking down any society norms. Incest however will always be a crime.
On what grounds have you come to this conclusion? The same argument can be used against gay marriages as well
@@afreenkhan1470 Khud ke maa baap aise honge....rehne do use😂
There is no credible system of marriage it is just sexual attraction not more than that what if 2 brothers marry each other and establish themselves as gay couple
I know... they took the phrase bro code too seriously to call gay marriage incest
@@afreenkhan1470 bhai they have no argument .these guys have no souls.nothing zombies all of them
the thing what people need to understand is Marriage is not just love rather a legal contract, thats why we need these debates... else no one is stopping one from having a livein relationship
By definition - In US, marriage is legal contract. In India, Marriage is sacred and a union of man and a woman, and not a legal contract. So, LGBTQANDHFJXSJSKAK doesn't understand that
@@SamratKiranjeet the definition can be changed then.
@@SamratKiranjeet sadly in India, judicially the purpose of marriage is clearly defined as for the purpose of reproduction. This is why infertility can amount to divorce. So the problem lies in the definition of marriage itself in the judiciary.
@@perseusvlasov367 They are playing with the definitions, that's why west and the Lqbtq + doesn't even know 'What is actually a women'.
@@deadmeatbones6742 Sadly in India, the people who doesn't know the definition of marriage is 'the young fellas, especially the educated and wealthy ones' just look the statistics. who has the most divorce rate? Is it among young couples or elderly couples? Is it among well educated- fully occupied couples or among poor farmers?. Fact is that elder people know what is marriage and the purpose of marriage. And that's exactly why the west has more divorce rate than Indians. Back in the days India has below 10 rate for divorce. Now what is the situation. Why? People are more attracted to money, sex and wealth not love, care, humility and respect. Our father and mother have that, but I'm afraid what is the fate of next generation. So its clearly not the problem of definition, its the mentally of people who is attracted to western culture and 'Ultimate freedom' which will only endup in more orphan kids and destroyed families.
Totally impressed with questions against judiciary ❤
these questions are merely against the judiciary, rather an discussion about what will be obsolete with illegalizing same sex marriage
Before
The Judicial system needs to have more live court hearings, and these hearings must be more widely available to the people just to see how backward the thinking of our top solicitors is at the moment.
Sai sir waiting for his chance to argue 🔥🔥🔥
Im waiting for his sledgehammer blows.
J sai is meanwhile watching ben shapiro videos to get warmed up. Master information manipulator that guy..
@PDM i am actually praising him..politics and law is about manipulating information anyway
@PDM he became famous via sabrimala by asking to treat deity ayappan as a physical person and protesting against cracker burning ban . Both these cases showed his way of words and pseudo-mordenist approach to argue in favour of customs that lack any value in the mordern world. Treating ayappan as a physical person is the violation of several beliefs in the hindu system which state that idols are representaion of gods and god itself is formless and not necessarily a human. The second case of Diwali he argued that crackers are burned as a way to show spirits the lighted path to heaven or whatever and it is a custom that should be respected. I agree that lightning has a special significance but there is no mention in vedas about crackers , the lighted path you provide via diya and candles. But he speaks in fast english sentences and provides pseudo logic for all his assertions just like Ben Shapiro. And most of the times he is like - if other religions do it , why we should not? So he doesn't provide solutions, he thrives on conflict and he is obsessed with pandering to his bhakt base and inciting them.
His position on NRC - "having a register of citizens is a fundamental function of the state" and therefore essential. This, when some Indian states have a 40% birth and death registration system after trying to improve it for a decade and can't even conduct the census.
I just couldn't fail to notice Sai Deepak at the back 😅
Best compromise is to have a civil agreement act which is a kind of a special marriage act. Should give away most rights in that, except some.
J Sai Deepak is there in the bench. 😊😊. This is the best argument and discussion done in court. There will be a lot of change in culture an we indians cannot accept that
He is a fool
J sai deepak always talks illogically, and gay people have been existing since mahabharatha. J sai deepak is no one to deny two people from loving and staying with each other
@@abhi_25246 ohh illogically 😢 ..
@@abhi_25246 ok so the logical thinga to do is ask the male child in childhood whether he feels like girl or boy if wants to transition then do it before being 16 years old using hormnal therapy in the end the male child feels he did a mistake and de transitions is this logical for you. Going through numerous pain since childhood.
@@abhi_25246 I agree on that
In India, where we are so hellbound about marriages happening within the same caste only, if we go up along the generation tree, we are bound to find most of the married couples to be blood relatives by the way. And somehow that is still okay with people.
Saudi ka history padhte the kya bhai
@@rishikabharti1789 😂😂😂
Little knowledge is dangerous my friend, give a try on reading the concept of Gotra 👍
@@sakshampandey3193 marrying outside your gotra has worked till now. But after say, a few hundred generations, the effects of homogenisation will start to show. Because gotra doesn't take maternal inheritance into account. Eventually, one would have to mate outside their caste gene pool, to reduce the incidence of certain genetic disorders
@@wutangmuslin very nuanced!!
Rather than solving a SSM question , People should think about making the laws around marriage gender neutral which will automatically solve the SSM and would a phenomenal step towards equality.
They don't deserve such equality.....I don't want my nation to become like western nation culture....u guys really don't have any idea how this will affect our future generation......
I have a better idea . Build asylums for those things
yes, exactly!
@@kirikiri44695cheeky uncivilised fella aren't you
@@kirikiri44695 you mean for things like you? for sure.
Very Understandable... We already have lot of loop holes in our law and now this makes even worse. So, they need to change all laws accordingly
My respect for Uganda is sky high !
@BrutIndia ..Hi Brut India, Im sorry that im gonna have to go off topic, But Can u Please please Cover the Communal Violence happening in Manipur, Churches, Lands, Homes are burnt down and people are killed and all that started in response to a peaceful unarmed Tribal Rally which was only held against the Govt. And not against another community....please help us People are dying in Manipur😭😭🙏🙏🙏
Then next time elect kejriwal as your cm
@@Vizorfam easy for you to just say that, Bcus youre not the one dying, your house is not burnt, your people are not fleeing their rightly owned properties and lands. Be realistic, If Kejriwal was there, We would have surely Voted
hey, I think brut is probably looking into this, and hopefully would be sharing a video regarding this issue! I hope everything become alright in Manipur, as we speak!!
@@Vizorfam why you have to say nonsense when you dont know whats happening at all?
Let Jesus save them. Why are you wailing.
You really wanna know who will be the wife or who will be in the kitchen to cook and wash clothes? Just burry these gender roles and grant them the rights they need. It's just spouse. Being Wife or husband is secondary and hardly matters.
Bury everything and return to caves ,we have created this to live in a society
@@mohitanand1844 You live in that society but they don't want to.
@@HG58058 he did not talk of gender roles . He talked about actual laws
Bro just once in your life try to fill a government form . You will relief to know who is your mother and who is your father. Iam not saying roles are defined for someone . My mother was in public sector , my father was in buisness . The roles are very modern , but atleast i know who is my father and while writing my jee form i know who was dead and who is alive and doing what . If someone with no defination as father and mother so you will change the whole process for a marriage . Bro the thing is that i support LGBTQ , but there are arguments which need to be heard . You can't call everyone a hater of lgbt if he putting up valid points.
You need a psychiatrist... You are having patriarchy-phobia named disease... And you assign everything to just gender roles without thinking about actual matter... Let's suppose there is a divorce case in lesbian couple.. who will pay alimony? 💀💀 Oh no... That's too much patriarchy for today... And what if a husband is told to pay alimony to his wife after divorce and husband claim to be a Gay.... He can calim to be a lesbian as well of our gender based progression continues... How cases will be carry on in courts? With every right, a lawyer makes 100 defences... Justice will be delayed in every court... Because majority matters in court are like this only..
In this particular case centre is right. If this marriage will be recognised then the whole social structure will suffer
Absolutely, as per 2019 research there is no gay gene.. Hence sexuality is totally dependent on environmental factors after a child is born.. If homosexuality is legalized and promoted in a society we will have more homosexuals in next generations. Disrupting the societal structure by giving emotional arguments of individual freedom and choice is total madness. Human stupidity has no limits 😂
Abdul in many cases govt is right and abduls are wrong But because of your religion you are against
it won't ...u are just saying this because its against your religion
@@omnamahshivaya7894 No government of humans on this petty little planet can be superior to the creator of this universe
@@robertjunior260 No argument here has been presented based on religion. If you have better arguments please present and enlighten us. Personal attacks is no argument
The points are valid but there are actual ways to solve the problem and grant LGBTQ+ people same equal rights, there is a solution but centre needs to have an intent to solve the problem
What's your solution??
Dialogue leads to solution. And they are having a dialogue
There is no problem to solve. Only problem here are the ones imagined by LGBT people and wasting court time with it.
So why don't you bring up the solution??
Then why don't you argue in front of all the judges of the supreme court and give out a "solution"? Its very easy to be a keyboard warrior or an armchair general. Simply "importing" western laws doesn't work.
So we change these laws to include diversity.. Why wud he even bring incest into this topic🤦♀️
Because the next thing these individuals would demand will be incest. They will say the same thing “my individual freedom my sexual orientation”
It’s logic bruh…! They scream LOVE IS LOVE so by their belief incest is also acceptable
Yea that can be wt if brothers marry each other 😂
Because that's the truth. Its not just him who thought about it. I hv been thinking the same for long too. Incest relationships today are in the same position in society that once gay relationship did! If we give gay rights today, tomorrow incest couples wud stand up too because they also exist and suffer
@@sneha8732 is incest really present in our Indian Society ?? .. I mean Real siblings from same mother 🙄
Idiotic argument. In case of gay marriage both are husbands, in case of lesbians both are wives….., so on and so forth. What’s is the problem with SG or the government or the society. LGBTQIA want legal status for their relationships. Earlier it was Criminalised against which they fought a long drawn battle…
This is not how Laws and society works.. This will cause chaos in future... That is happening in USA Right now. Who will give doctors right to assign genders to new born babies? 💀💀💀
I beleive you are a lawyer . Who i will write as father name in my jee form. Father 1 , father 2 .. woowwwww
@@madara7305 forms can simply be changed to say...parent 1 and parent 2
@@madara7305 the forms can get changed but I guess u didn't consider that instead of father what if guardian's name is only needed,then u won't have any confusion.
@@asmitamajumder6260 just try to fill a form bro u will realise
A few things India can take into account - legalizing conjugal relationships, live-in relationships for LGBTQ, looking at which elements from Western nations can be implemented within the Indian societal framework. Sexual act without consent remains a punishable crime regardless of the genders of the people. Same can be done for Leading Partner and Second Partner. There were times when single women couldn’t adopt, people had to fight for it. We are undergoing a big change, india you can do a good job. There are a whole bunch of people waiting to live a free life in India and come out of closets, especially in Tier 2 and Tier 3 towns.
Can you define LBGTQ before making such statements? Define them and tell me what is this.
@@khrawbryan mental disorders .. *in simply words
You want us to adapt elements from the western nations? So you want to bring the identity crisis here where anyone can identify as whatever they please regardless of their biological sex? That will bring all sorts of problems and issues here
@@azraelinium1012 i identify as a television.
@@azraelinium1012 rightly said. Ppl are going crazy over there 😅 Who has time to entertain their delusion. Ps. Am not against same sex marriage.
I fear the day when there will be demands of incest marriage recognition saying " Love is Love" because what was considered a sin yesterday is a reality today. You never know what will come up after this.
I fear the day when people will stop using the heads for once and not actually study about the reality. Incest is not the same as same sex marriage and gay relations were never a sin. They were just not recognised legally before.
@@byebyedislikecount939 I never said it was a sin. I said it was CONSIDERED a sin just like today people consider incest as sin. My question is what will you do when they demand incest marriage rights in future?
@@Rohan_Kumar___ Incest is not a sexuality. You are not attracted to your sibling due to ur sexuality, you have the choice to like anyone from the sex or opposite sex depending on your sexuality. Gay people are only attracted to same sex, and hence they don't have the choice to like opposite sex.
INCEST INCEST INCEST BRO LET THEM WIN FIRST WHY DO U WANT INCEST RIGHTS SO MUCH
Yes this feels like very logical and possible issue. Other worst things in future to consider - What is stopping People from posing as fake gay's and try to adopt a girl child or get close to women ('Desi girl' scenario) for achieving various devious goals ranging from illegal housing, faking to get jobs positions, cheating and or sex abuse. Their pretext will be 'Oh but we are legally proven gay, how we can impregnate or have affair with a girl or woman impossible.. rubbish!'
Incest and attraction to same sex are not the same thing, even if brothers wanted to have sex it would be weird. A step child should also have same right as biological child if the step parent legally adopts the child. An adopted child has the same rights to property as a biological child. Just extend the same domicile for husbands as well and call it spouse instead of 'wife'. Extend the same sucession acts to the husband as well and just apply the widowers/ widow for the gay/ lesbian couple.
@Windless Flame People wouldn't find sex pleasurable then, by that logic all contraceptions should be banned and that has terrible consequences. And people who are infertile or sterile should be banned from having sex. Based on how same sex couples are being treated, no one would choose to be attracted to the same sex.
@Windless Flame sex just isn't the same as driving a car
@@therealgrimreaper68 if you can't understand a simple analogy ,why are you even debating here ??
@Windless Flame indeed , ur truthful
@Windless Flame you have legs, don't use cars and walk everywhere otherwise you are abusing the purpose of legs. You use your brain and think about it. Why would someone willingly choose to be homosexual based on how badly you treat them? They lose a lot and gain nothing.
sounds more of a colonist mentality..
Using English , wearing shirts and even blouses came from colonialism . I suggest you stop using them all and start speaking prakrit
homos got checkmated.
@@mohitanand1844 globalisation is not colonialism
@@theeducator8574 colonialism is not limited to physical illegal occupation of a foreign country .
@@_Windless_Flame If our purpose in life is procreation, why are some people infertile?
the concept of 'wife' is a gendered term that is traditionally used to refer to the female partner in a heterosexual marriage. However, in a same-sex marriage, both partners are equal spouses. Therefore, there is no single 'wife' in a same-sex marriage. Using gender-neutral terms like "spouse" or "partner" is more respectful and accurate.
And that would end the exclusive privilege that women enjoy in marriage (should've ended it long ago) Modifying the current laws to gender-neutral terms would mean you leave women to face the brutal misuse of laws that are currently only faced by men or to simultaneously rectify these laws where people don't get punished based on mere accusations ( which they're not willing to do as men are their primary cash cow and rectifying these laws would mean men no longer having to face legal extraction ) For simplification let's take IPC 498A as an example, currently a gender-biased section that can only be applied by the wife (woman) onto the husband or his family By making it gender neutral women would get eligible to be accused and charged under this section, tbh They'd suffer more during the case is pending between court by facing issues in bail/delayed hearing dates/harassment by police Now when women start to be the victim of fake accusations (or legitimate crimes proven against them) government would have to change the punishment or it'll affect their vote bank The LGBTQ community was not led down because of the social structure of this country but rather the legal structure where giving them privileges would mean women and government consequently lose their ability to extort from men
@@theredstar6493 It's important to understand that using gender terms, in marriage doesn't automatically lead to the issues you mentioned. Advocating for gender terms like 'spouse' or 'partner' in same sex marriages isn't about taking privileges from any specific group, including women. It's about promoting inclusivity and acknowledging the worth and rights of both partners in a marriage regardless of their gender. When it comes to matters it's crucial to establish an just system for everyone involved. This entails addressing biases and rectifying existing laws that might be biased based on gender, such as IPC 498A. By making laws gender neutral we ensure that both men and women are protected from any form of abuse or false accusations. It's not about shifting the burden from one group to another; rather it aims to establish a system that treats all individuals under the law. Supporting the LGBTQ community and advocating for gender terms doesn't mean compromising womens rights or hindering the governments ability to address crimes. It's, about constructing a society that respects and values the rights and well being of every individual of their orientation or gender identity. By striving for opportunities and fairness we can foster an inclusive society that benefits all individuals involved.
I don't know the technicalities of this sensitive matter but I feel that just by mere inconveniences predicted to happen in our laws we can't curtail the basic right of choosing one's life partner. There will always be a way of modifying the laws but there can't be any compensation for robbing someone's freedom to love and live the way they want.
Which is why one should elect the right people and not expect the judiciary to do their job
Do you support incest?
We live in a nation which sti upholds religious law. And you are talking about free civil liberties. How senseless you have to be. And anyway it is India we are talking about not west. Marriage is a sacred institution, not time pass. Recently people have started identifying thselves as Disabled. You must check Google. If tomorrow I say I identify as woman and provide me with same consession and priveledges that are provided to women then how would you deal with that. There no turning around such situation. It's better to keep things how they are until society has found equality in real terms or alteast when social fiber had deteriorated like it's in west
It's not mere inconvenience. It's a huge inconvenience. Without taking care of all the major issues and possible legal problems, one cannot go right ahead and legalize same sex marriage.
@@truthlight6435 All concerns aside, for a second, can we please put ourselves in one of such situations where we are denied the right to be with the person we love and are forced to either be with someone we can't love or stay alone the entire life. Every new idea needs time and effort to be implemented. We can't sit in fear that it will disrupt the existing order. Infact it will make our laws more inclusive, widen their scope, plug its loopholes and most importantly it will reduce the exploitation of people who are different than normal. We as human beings have a tendency to be afraid of those who are different from us but the real maturity lies in accepting those differences and make things work for the greater good of everyone. Let this be a good start from our side. Let's give this idea a chance and then see what miracles it creates in the lives of thousands that are struggling for basic rights. The very idea of electricity, trains and infact internet was resisted on the mere belief that it will disrupt the contemporary order. They were just technological ideas. Whereas this is a system made by nature. If it was against nature then it wouldn't have existed. So let's welcome this change with open arms and open minds!
The best part about the video is Sai getting bored in the background .
Is he sai deepak ?
Yes at 0:50
I didn't see him sitting at back. U have a keen eye that u pointed him out. I really wanna hear his argument 😂. I'm a big fan.
A dangerous statement we often hear these days "I identify as a man or a woman" and then one can use the loopholes in the system to bend the rules.
totally not happening
Totally not happening? What about the MAN who identified as a woman and went to a female prison and S.A many women and got them pregnant
@@anujthapa2346 Who are you talking about exactly? if you're talking about Demi Minor, both instances were consensual sex.
i remember reading about this father in the US identifying as a women to win a court case for child custody then theres the several other issues like trans women (geneticall males) participating in womens sports competitions etc
@babum karam let me tell you that right to self determination for gender is already legal in India... There's no chaos and loopholes that have happened so far...
1:13 time will tell how far fetched it is.............within few decade we are going to see it in western culture
Isnt it actually in practice in some Muslim cultures??
@@Hithere-qj1wj Islam doesn't allow incest. marrying a cousin is allowed in many religions and cultures including Islam
@@AbdulRehman-bu3ho Half incest is still a incest.
@@Hithere-qj1wj for sapinda marriage(for cousin marriage in Hinduism ) to perform its require son side 5th generation and daughter side 7th generation Here the degree of incest is less but it's still a incest
@@AbdulRehman-bu3ho It is prohibited Abdul.
I think what SG is trying to say here is that, anything short of legislative action by the court(which the SC obviously won't do) will make the existing laws redundant or difficult to implement. The SC can make the marriage legal but they ultimately must rely on Executive and Legislature to make necessary amendments to existing provisions which the executive and legislature can refuse to do. I think the Hon. SC may formulate general guidelines to deal with confusion. But,sooner or later this issue has to be dealt with by the legislature. Either,they accept the ruling of SC and make necessary amendments,or they make laws contrary to the Hon. SC decisions thereby nullifying it or they can refuse to do anything while the Courts deal with this one case at a time.
These are amazing questions which arise situations making everything a mess. Specially when you can wake up to feel something else everyday
Visit any of the family courts or divorce lawyers these days and check out the number of divorces happening in the straight couple marriages. If people are happy and are not harming other humans what's wrong in giving them their rights. Thinking beyond sex is important. There are so many orphans without parents. Legalization of these marriages will give them the right to adopt those orphans who deserve a better life. What is the count of straight couples who cannot conceive adopting?
@Windless Flame The issue is purpose. Yes What is really the purpose for same sex marriage?.. Did society pressure two same sex induviduals to be married in India?? no that rule is pressured only on different sex people.. because else they are seen as illicit relations. So what is the problem if there is no registered marriage certificate in case of same sex couples??
@Windless Flame Ya sure blah.. blah.. Have you just made absolutely like 'ZERO' sense with your reply to a simple question? Anyway good luck to you too "O' My friend" getting a life i guess!! Lol..
The issue is purpose. Yes What is really the purpose for same sex marriage?.. Did society pressure two same sex induviduals to be married in India?? no that rule is pressured only on different sex people.. because else they are seen as illicit relations. So what is the problem if there is no registered marriage certificate in case of same sex couples??
@@_Windless_Flame the purpose of sex could be procreation, but is sex the only purpose of life? If no, then what else than to find love and solace in someone else? Sex is just the biochemical hormonal reaction that brings two people together. It's not necessary that they have the sex. Hence gay people can love whoever they want. Homosexuality is not just having sex with the same gender, it's finding love and purpose in the same gender too.
@@_Windless_Flame so murdering infertile people is not a crime I guess, considering they are not fulfilling the purpose of life?
Bcz what Americans are facing as society we also have to ho through.
Yess,
But if we already know that what we have to face, So why we pass it and allow LGBTQ marriage....
That's different thing. To be identifying with something which they aren't is different to the actual gay people. Two different things you're talking about.
The Americans are make us going through it in the garb of liberty
*This is the issue of the colonized thought process. We have to bring back Ancient customs and traditions with the public being fully educated on all these topics.* Our culture and civilization has been scientific so far. If not for personal opinions and perspectives at least the baseline fundamental truth of genetic health among humans must be maintained. Those countries whom have allowed same sex marriage just observe them in five to six decades..... this artificial fertilization by three partners, two same sex partners etc. is going to lead to a whole another level of trouble causing humans to degenerate. It won't be the same humanity we have seen, interacted with and experienced till now. Man is going against natural rhythm and processes that has had a complex evolutionary pattern by itself. You go against it - you cause the whole world to become Hell. These countries will have LGBTQs in higher nos. than normal heterosexual couples leading to few healthy humans vs. millions with unhealthy genetics (1:2 ratio). These so called "developed" countries are killing humanity.
Brut please give us more clips like this
Just a idea: stop making laws based on who's the man and who's the woman . We are all people
Quite an optmistic approach you have.
As ideal as it sounds the thing is the constitution of india is vast. Not to mention the biggest in the world which has been drafted almost a century ago. The amendments made follow a long procedure and amending everything in a go would be something id like to refer to as 'hysterical'. It would cause a chaos and as much as i am in the support of same sex marriages India has a lot more things to deal with especially as a developing nation. Its also important to keep in mind the conservative mindset of the generations living in the Indian society. Riots, domestic violence, protests, internal conflicts can be easily arisen if any amendment is made in a hurry. The laws will hqve to completely change and will cause extreme confusions. Had our constitution been one like from the west it wouldnt be as hard to make such changes but our constitution came into existence at an expense of millions of lives and a lot of dedication. Everything will be overturned with a single mistake. India needs time and the SC deserves a huge applause for taking this matter up and ckosely analysing it with reasonable arguments. Taking this matter up is anhuge achievement itself.
is it possible??like staring at a women is wrong but not at men kind of law??
@@shivendraupadhyay8415 thats what i wanted to say change these laws,laws of crime must not see gender ofc... but the laws of marriage and all need to be based on men and women thats how society works
His arguements remind me of the those retired men who assemble at 6o clock with their chairs on to streets and discuss about affairs
They are smarter than you . Each of his argument is valid . Imagine losing to retired uncles
Can't believe we have to hear this in 2023. Its time these guys retired and stop making rules for a country which is majorly young
@@mohitanand1844 lose an arguement to a man who's more worried about who's going to be the wife in a relationship and says incest is prohibited whilst it is still widely practiced in india and is considered not illegal and with no regulations ? Don't make a fool out of yourself man
@@donthomas1690 again you are a complete idiot .it is important cuz of second order affects such as them adopting children (which is sad ) . Also the arguments that can be used in favour of same sex marriage can be used to support cousin marriage as well
@@mohitanand1844 It's okay, we get it, you're a kid. Calm down and educate yourself❤️❤️
Setup a committee create a draft for correction and make parliament vote on it. How hard is that?
Man this is gonna be tough on both the parties I hope the best for all!!
The succession act and Domicile act needs huge changes to accomodate modern times, even in heterosexual marriages more girls are opting for their name because of plethora of reasons
I think the issue is with the rights they want and perks allowed to married couples....so it's not necessary we call it a marriage but it can be thought that way , that they should get similar rights+perks as a married couple is allowed...that won't interfere with the meaning of marriage as well as they'll get what they want
That's why there is a concept of " civil union" where they can get their rights. It will a best solution.
correct.
Same thinking was allowed in US and west and it went bonkers We should do it carefully and learn from them A gender neutral as a whole kind of law would help much better in arguments against sexuality
Next time evolution in marriage is legality marriage with an animal...
This has become a war between wokes and sensible persons.
Can you explain?
@@lady5049 woke/ wokism is the act of normalising disorders and fetishes and pushing it to everyone and compelling everyone to follow and support all those stupidity.. Wokism has severe negative impact on the society and could destroy the balance of the whole mankind..
@@lady5049 woke is a mixture of postmordernity and moral relativism . But this thing which is discussed particularly has western flavour.
Idk why so many people are blatantly supporting it ? They are even portraying Hindu gods as transgender. Shame on these degenerates
queer people have existed since ages in India. These are not some western ideologies. These are real people. Homophobia, however, is most definitely a western ideology.
These dilemmas are bound to come when the legal and socio-political system was designed keeping the heterosexual-binary in mind. Just because more paperwork is needed does not mean that we should not make the effort to make these changes. We owe this much at least to the people who have suffered for years.
Marriage is a by product of religion and is happened only between the opposite sex
This argument feels like saying that we have laws in place which do not account for same sex marriage and so we should not have same marriage instead of updating the laws to account for it.
This argument is addressing the issues and loopholes that will arise in the Judiciary system if SSM was to be legalised, so before that is done, these changes need to be made in the constitution to account for same s*x couples
Just for some peoples delusions changing the law for other billions is very idiotic
I think it's better that the Judiciary of India takes time to set the laws carefully because the purpose of judiciary is to serve justice which is just and fair. Either don't make laws or make ones carefully so that that no one can escape or commit any wrongdoings by finding loopholes.
I don't why it is important to discuss who who will be husband and who will be wife. Just call them partners and make laws same for both there will be no problem.
Exactly what I was thinking...they should be the one deciding their relationship dynamics and are not at all required to announce to the world saying who is the husband and who is the wife in the relationship. Going by default, lesbians would be known as wives and gays would be known as husbands...as simple as that.
All the govt documents and legal documents require basic things like husband name /wife name. Also most of the documents only accept father's signature . What are the lesbian couple going to do then. There will be many changes in many proceedings and documents in order to legalise same sex marriage which has to be discussed.
Nepal legalized same-sex-marriages. It's time for India now.
Wow, great thing to know yaar
Hell no
We are not fool like Nepal..
These are brilliant questions which I never thought of. System should be simple.
Ofcourse mate I always say ki people think things are simple but are simpletons and easy overall Life is simple and complicated at the same time Hope we can do better than the west
Ahh I used to believe too that life was simple
Dhanyavad sahab ,nice argument
Is it all about provisions to be changed in different laws? Then we shall look into how other countries have made the changes in provisions...its done before. It can be done here also.
That very man speaks for the humanity my friend. We better be ded if that gets legalised
Both are wife both are husband 😂😂😂
@Brut India: Stop misleading your audience with your WRONG TITLES.
You can’t change the reality with emotion.
Government and courts should not be involved in marriages. marriage should be totally between 2 individuals, and no one should be involved. Should be like business between 2 individuals
....you know that marriage is a legal contract, right?
@@apolloismydad it shouldn't
These laws have to be updated. Don't think these communities were discussed over at earlier times. World has changed now, people ve become more accepting. The present population must be judged based on what is believed to be right now. We'll never get out of antiquated customs n rules n beliefs if we stick to these old rules. Communities at every generation update their rules according to their present day environment n understanding.. Otherwise we'll ve to go back to triple talakh, casteism, honor killings. If problems are new, it doesn't mean we revert back to the old.
We are with Centre 🎉
Is J Sai sitting in the back ? I'm really interested to know his point of view on the matter
It is amazing that both parties are giving such a convincing facts which makes me want to believe both of them.
@@_Windless_Flamedon't you do anything in life whose divine purpose is not procreation? And what's procreation got to do with marriage? It's not like some features of human beings gets unlocked with wedding rituals.
@Windless Flame This is a very utilitarian approach to sex. Don't get me wrong. I prefer to look at sex through the same lens as you do. It is a spiritually inclined point of view. But at the same time, I would not want to impose this view on everyone.
In LGBTQ, a husband is a male and a wife is a female just like straight couple. Therefore, gay couple would be of 2 husbands and lesbian couple would have 2 wives. Hence, everything needs to be looked into a new point of view that of a straight marriage. You cannot implement straight marriage or straight couple property or inheritance law on LGBTQ marriage. There has to be a different marriage Act just like Hindu marriage Act is different than Indian Marriage act.
Exactly! Other aspect of legal and social life need new rules and regulation with the basis of rational background
Well, if a Hindu Man claims to be a Woman during his Divorce, which act would govern what happens?
Questions are very necessary and important but the answers of these should be found out by society as these are social problem these should be discussed but sources are not the right place to discuss but the conclusion must be made and reached
why the hell are we wasting time on this western problem. Do we not have bigger problems to solve?
Because there are many upper elites in India with time to file petition for these BS and complicate an already delicate family unit. This is global agenda to divert attention from real problems.
SG Tushar mehta does hell of a job.. He is just a formidable power to be reckoned on
w indian judiciary system
Is that person behind the person who is speaking is J Sai Deepak??
Is there a video for the counterpart's argument?
2:50 dude obviously they would come under the Indian succession act when they are marrying under the special marriage act. Why would they come under the Hindu marriage act or the Hindu succession act?
What if they are Hindu's or their family believes in marriage by Hindu act. Possible hai na?
@@varunemanidude Hinduism as a religion does not recognise same sex marriage. That's just not a thing. So the Hindu marriage act won't apply because the marriage would not be done under hindu customs. Don't get me wrong I am not singling Hinduism out here.. All those three acts won't recognise this because those religions don't recognise it. So they will have to come under special marriage act.
@@altairauditore3782 Oh come on.. are'nt we just going around in circles with this DUDE! My point is would it be entirely upto the induviduals here in India to decide on such a thing (Choice of special marriage act) if their families are orthodox traditional Hindu's and are staunchly against accepting anything else to be considered a lawful marriage.. it's a terrible pickle of a matter and you cant certainly argue / force the entire society or nation to accept a certain special marriage act unless ofcourse all of said society deem it PURPOSEFULLY essential now.
@@varunemani oh this is entirely because amending the special marriage act in this way would grant certain civil and legal rights which were not available before. Societal acceptance may or may not change anyways.
@@altairauditore3782 Civil and legal rights such as..??
I am watching j Sai...I wish he produced argument...i think civil union type new law solution....
To the objections raised, there are solutions. Just need to delve deeper. Raising the objections which are precisely resolvable makes the discussion linger. Are we just biding time??
The answer to this very argument will be, that since the parties concerned are consenting adults, they themselves have, decided amongst themselves to enter into the act of marriage, similarly they will acknowledge amongst themselves that who will play the part of the father, and who will act as the mother, it just has to be signed under their consent on a legal paper. Now because of this a whole lot of technicalities and adjustments regarding succession and other acts would come, but again when this question would arise, their signatures , would testify their role in the marriage.
Perhaps a signature can reduce legal ambiguity but that’s not only at stake here, notion of marrying same sex questions the concept of marriage, concept of man and women and their descendants. Same sex marriage will make biological differences between man and women redundant.
@@ishukumar4208 ooh you have a, point here
The problem with deciding among themselves is that they need to put it down into a legal contract before a Court to legalize it. That means that someone have to accept the role of Man and another must accept the role of the Wife. That is what the lawyer is arguing. Not the rejection of LGBT relationship altogether but the lack of legal binding for the same sex couple (on who will be accepting the role of the man and woman). Only when that legal obstacle is removed, the same-sex marriage can be added into Common Marriage Laws. But the problem here is the LGBT groups do not believe in the traditional definition of Man and Woman. They want to erase the concept of Man and Woman and demanding the whole legal spetrum of Marriage and Family laws to be changed just for that which is utter nonsense. This is like to fix the roof, you burn down the house and then rebuild the house to accommadate the new roof.
OMG , excellent arguments by SG !! 🥶🥶😱😱 The level of depthness in their argument is unfathomable.
"Level of depthness" 🤣🤣
@@screwupturfmann8611oh man , that was *deepness* not depthness, it's a typing error . Well , how your nerd social media campaigns going? why u all people are behaving like desparates , hysterias and Manias ! # fu*king Geeks .
It's to make understand the Present CJI lord of hell .... What it takes , to legalise the gays marriage or same sex marriage.. Chandra choor seems not to understand anything except for marriage of same sex .
@@sujatanaik3848 he finally didn't pass any law, just asked legislation that will include LGBT couple to have other perks and benifits as hetero married couple.
Doesn’t make sense, same sex marriages are there in other countries as well, we can adapt and learn from them and how did to overcome the shortcomings
same sex marriage is not in our country, let the other countries adapt and learn from us and overcome their shltcomings
Perfect! @@lin-we3pv
Good discussion...good to see
Does the guy sit behind the solicitor general is J Sai Deepak
Common indian judiciary W
in case of Gay marriage both the men will be the husbands no wife! in case of Lesian marriage both will be the wife no husband! Its as simple as that! There is a term called spouse that would be used. Shows that guy lives in stone age, connecting gender to genitals😂. This is hilarious.😂😂 Also its good if they legalise it, lot of people would get rights etc.. but if it doesnt get legalised its still a win! You can simply go to a better country and live there! better lifestyle! 💪😍
I identify as your father, on my way to sleep with my wife.
Ot is better to connect gender to genitals than to connect gender to "trust me bruh" logics.
No its not as simple as that. In case of domicile, wife's domicile automatically becomes husband's domicile, if no husband or wife then how the domicile be decided. In case of divorce husband has to provide alimony to wife, if no wife then how the alimony thing works, if no husband then from whom to ask for alimony? In case of dowry law, the burden of proof falls on husband to prove that their was no dowry demanded from wife. If no wife or husband and this dowry case happens who will be charged and how? It's not simple as that. The law is written in very fine printed lines u just can't say this equal to that so simple, lots of things have to be considered
so what is gender based upon if not genitals? just curious
It is not as simple. They got to rework many laws and do a detailed research on these issues. Law-making is not just making a law for the sake of it but also making sure to put in provisions to handle the consequences appropriately.
There can be amendments in the succession acts if the act for legalising marriage is passed. Why doesn't the opposition state this as an argument?
The older person among the couple can be given rights of being father and the younger one mother. The question here seems more like is our courts active enough to make new laws or is it lazy rather than is the legalising good or bad for society and individual
Those are some really good points. His research should be taken into account so that all these British-era laws may be updated hand-in-hand without leaving any legal inconsistency for anyone including both heteros and LGBTQ+ people. If we truly want to return to pre-colonial glory, we much acknowledge and respect the LGBTQ+ community as did our distant ancestors.
Nobody supported these mentally ill fools in significant scale anywhere or anytime in our history.
@@IIBaseTotally false. Homosexuality, for example, was used to strenghten relationships within Spartan army. i can name you hundred of ancoent authors who talked positively about same sex realtionships. Go back to school.
@@NicolaFossi there is positive mentions of homosexuality in carvings and ancient texts which was made in pre-colonial india. They treated gay people the same way they treated straight people!!
@@_march_egg_ Oh really 😂 in Tamil Nadu I heard It was a sin in past. Not by scriptures but in local belief systems. We never accept this.
Is that J Sai Deepak in the back?? 🤔
Yes
It truly irritates me hearing centre's argument against same sex marriage. Nothing feels substantial. All questions can be answered. His main argument is that previously made provisions, laws, etc which were made ignoring rights of LGBTQ will have to be rewritten.
@@yumi-e2o so can you, if cant digest progressive thinking.
Brilliant rationale arguements put forth by SG
Leaving the incest comment aside as it has no grounds in this debate, the rest is just implementation challenges. Having faith in judiciary, our constitution allows amendments when there is a threat to an individual’s or a community’s fundamental rights. These are good points to be taken care of when implementing the legislation for same-sex marriages, so that the laws do not differiante individuals based on gender/sex based terminology (i.e., husband/wife or father/mother).
Why to leave aside incest argument???
@@byron2477 for 1 it is a completely unrelated topic, and is simply presented to distract the focus of debate. Listen to the judge’s remark “…very far fetched…” The real discussion is about the equality in marriage regardless of gender/sex, which is not something one can choose, In contrast of the choice of partner. Try to understand the thin line that deeply affects the crux of the discussion.
Although I support centre on this case that it shouldn't be legalised but in summary the argument of govt is that too many already written laws would get in trouble if this get recognised. Too much work would have to be done to amend the laws if this is recognised. And ammendment of laws is parliament's function not of courts so at the end court will direct the govt to amend laws related to marriage acc. to homosexual marriage act. And govt. don't wanna do it. So it's better to defeat the argument in the court only so that they don't have to work a lot on those ammendments. They don't have a good argument.
@@hitarthnarvala8889 It is not at all an unrelated topic. If a brother and sister are into each other and they are consenting adults, I guess it is only fair that we have no say in what they do in their bedrooms. Even if we are their parents. It is not unrelated. It is also about the right to privacy and they are consenting adults as well!
@@akilansundaram2181 it’s unrelated because that’s not the case about, not every world problem can be addressed in a single court case.
Because they have to solve cases so they have to think how it will be affected in complicated situations. In everything there is 2 genders so changing that overnight is an issue. And people will find loopholes so that's why they are arguing in court. You can't change laws overnight it will cause chaos. So he is referring to the situations that will happen. And people in comment section only have to scroll and post there opinions and move on. But the judges and lawyers have to fight in cases using those laws and articles mentioned. Its very easy to find loopholes in Justice system
Solid point. Totally valid 👍
100+ gender from US are on Their way to India, we must protect our borders
then twit buddy
Our schools will be invaded first
Tere baap ka india hai kya Muhammad andhbhakt
SG- I won but at what cost .. legend lmao 🤣
Is they are fighting over lgtv ?
LGTV
Great argument chaos should not be in our society
It was heartwarming to know that there in actuality exist no problem with the union of same gender individuals. The solicitor general, considered to be learned counsel with unparalleled experience after thorough study couldn't find any fundamental problem in the union of man and man or woman and woman. Instead, he has however found that laws as they exist today do not accommodate same sex unions and that same gender civil rights need greater debate, community participation etc to develop inclusive laws. Quite happy