sidchhikara
New member
Itna badhiya sakool tha fer bhi tere te fundamental right nahi sikhaye?
Chauthi -pachvi ke balak ne bhi bera ho sei .... kati dhyaan nahi diya tanne.
"Should the Govt amend HMA to ban 'same-gotra' marriage"?
- Thread starter virj
- Start date
Itna badhiya sakool tha fer bhi tere te fundamental right nahi sikhaye?
Chauthi -pachvi ke balak ne bhi bera ho sei .... kati dhyaan nahi diya tanne.
Hi Kapil Ji,
HMA is not a generic law, it recognizes the customs of one community and does not do the same for other community customs. It would have been generic if it hadn't had any exceptions for anyone. If a law can provide exception because it is a custom in one community then it should also respect other communities' customs otherwise its is discrimination, a gross violation of basic human right of equality (Speaking the language of human rights activist).
Courts do not make laws, they only rule things out if they are legal or not. It is the respionsibility of the parliament to make/amend laws.
It was not a wise move to ask the court to change the law, its not their job. But at the same time the Judge has no right to ridicule our social system and customs. The petition would have been rejected saying that the courts are not the appropriate authority to approach in this request.
It was not a wise move to ask the court to change the law, its not their job. But at the same time the Judge has no right to ridicule our social system and customs. The petition would have been rejected saying that the courts are not the appropriate authority to approach in this request.
Chothi-paanchvi se pahle ye baat bhi sunte the ki jakhar-jakhar, mailk-malik, chhikara-chhikara khoon ke rishte hote hain. agar kuch log ise nahi maante to iska matlab ye nahi ki ye rishte badal jayenge.
Doosri baat ye ki fundamental rights are not absolute.
Doosri baat ye ki fundamental rights are not absolute.
narwaldeepak
New member
Judiciary can interpret the laws enacted by legislature.
bilkul sahi baat ... bahas sirf wo karen jo raye rakhte hain
Normally voting takes place only when discussion is concluded. If you will not allow people to put across their counter arguments how will they vote according to their conscience. By the time the forum of discussion is open let people speak and then they will decide. What is the hurry.
Last edited:
But they can not make a new law or can not amend any existing one. Judiciary can elaborate, it can tell if it is being implemented correctly or not.
Bhai mere, don't get senti and don't misrepresent me. I have never argued on this issue on the basis of fundamental rights. Though I appreciate where that argument comes from, I still argued against it in my reply to Ms Kusum Dhochak where I mentioned how personal laws are invariably shaped by the culture of the land and not by logic/rational.
My reply to you was just to highlight 2 points, as you were going on and on about some fuddu media poll, and drawing a lot of inferences from it. Here I summarise again (please don't read in between the lines):
1. Since you were stressing a lot on 87% figure and inferring that that itself was sufficient to make a law: Approval by majority is not a sufficient condition for making a law. Not for nothing courts have powers to rule on the validity of a law, even if it is approved by majority. Point already elaborated in my previous post.
2. That 87% number is cr*p. The only right ways to know what majority wants is to either hold a referendum or count the Lok Sabha MPs in favor/against the move. Referendums have never been done in independent India, so latter is the only way. Unless you are suggesting that we should do away with all future elections and media opinion polls are sufficient to prove where the majority lies.
.
Well I admire Jakhar Bhaisaab's viewpoint on this discussion, the way he expressed his views n' tried to put his thoughts in simple language is very nice. Thanks Bhaisaab !
Anyways, even Doctors feel that its good practice to avoid same gotra n' cousin marriages, a good article published in today's Bhaskar that depicts what dangerous genetic diseases can happen if you practice marriages in close relations.
Have a look : http://digitalimages.bhaskar.com/dainikrajasthan//EpaperImages/18052010/djjj-large.jpg
Well I admire Jakhar Bhaisaab's viewpoint on this discussion, the way he expressed his views n' tried to put his thoughts in simple language is very nice. Thanks Bhaisaab !
Anyways, even Doctors feel that its good practice to avoid same gotra n' cousin marriages, a good article published in today's Bhaskar that depicts what dangerous genetic diseases can happen if you practice marriages in close relations.
Have a look : http://digitalimages.bhaskar.com/dainikrajasthan//EpaperImages/18052010/djjj-large.jpg
The way it is going on, the best you can hope for is support of MPs from Jat dominated areas. Maybe that is enough if others don't care. Anyways, my best wishes are with you if you are going down the route of getting lawmakers' support. As that is the right way (though for a wrong cause in my opinion).
I didnt get senti !! You asked me "I would suggest you should read about principles of justice. And please don't say it is not needed. If you are advocating a case for a new law, then you ought to know what law is" I just asked u to teach me(and other people like me) but Anyway leave it. Yes u are right this is not a referendum but all these polls clearly show the trend but again I said little earlier sometime these sample polls could go wrong as well though I highly doubt that every poll which is more or less same result is wrong.
Please read my reply to Vipin on the context behind the post. The comparison is just to show that majority is not always right, if someone is arguing that desire of majority in itself is sufficient for making a law (It doesn't say that the majority is wrong in this case like in the other cases).
I have never argued on this issue on basis of modernity or fundamental rights. In fact, I have said much the opposite. Here:
http://www.jatland.com/forums/showt...otra-marriages&p=245967&viewfull=1#post245967
The restrictions you are mentioning are general in nature and applicable to all. They are not caste/community specific. The law doesn't say that Jat couples are not allowed to romance in public, while other couples are. Not sure of the details of that law (I think it is something about obscenity in public). Just for arguments sake, say in future that law goes away, would we then insist that though romancing in public is legal for others, it should be made illegal for Jats as it violates our customs?
If we are such a virtuous community, why can't we ensure voluntary adherence to customs?
Thats the only route my friend. Thats why people are asking this to be discussed in vidhan shaba. Thats why khaps has asked all MP/MLA's from haryana to clear their stand on this issue. The amendment may be passed by state (first) as well.
To get it passed in parliament. They need to start this debate at least. Than prepare a proposal/draft according to what majority want and discuss it there. Other routes can be thought of if it doesnt get passed in lok sabha or rajya sabha.
Now I understand where u got me wrong. You thought I am saying if these poll results says it make it LAW. Well No, I mean the polls shows the trend and at least gives a vague idea what people want and its time Govt should at least start the debate or if they want referendum "do it".
By The poll result reference i meant its a "hint" to those who says on NDTV or whereever that youths are against it and its only khaps ( may be 0.1% or less of jat population ) want it.
Last edited:
Jakharji,
I can probably only repeat myself.
The HMA is very much generic. I am yet to see a clause codifying customs of any particular community, which is what we are asking for. Usually, restrictions in law are generic in nature, while exceptions are specific. The exception in HMA is to ensure that law doesn't tinker with already existing customs. I had asked earlier, how is the current law tinkering with our custom? Where does it say that following these customs is wrong or punishable under law?
The law is already respecting the customs by not tinkering with them. I am not sure what discrimination you are talking about. What rights don't we have that anyone else has? Right to follow our customs is very much there. It is upto the people to use that right.
So you mean to say that discussions are there to make up one's conscience and not for mutaul agreement? If you do not have a stand then what are arguing for? I say "Yes" and you say "No" initially then an argument starts. If I say "Yes" and you say nothing then there is nothing to argue about.
As far as I think, when two people get into an argument/discussion, they have different intepretation about an idea/thought/subject and they try to dissolve the conflicting areas of the idea as this idea/thought/subject is related to both and come out with mutually agreed interpretation or they stop discussion after a certain time saying that we agree to disagree.
As far as I think, when two people get into an argument/discussion, they have different intepretation about an idea/thought/subject and they try to dissolve the conflicting areas of the idea as this idea/thought/subject is related to both and come out with mutually agreed interpretation or they stop discussion after a certain time saying that we agree to disagree.
rakeshsehrawat
New member
Inki ghani si na sochya karo kayee baar to manne lage hai in ne khud nahi bera ye kehan ke lag rahe hain.
narwaldeepak
New member
VPSingh jee .... Voting 1 aise mudde pe hai jispe sabki apni raye hai .... uske liye arguments ki jarurat nahi hia .. kya arguments ke baad aapne apni raye badal di ?? na hi maine badli
... in such a scenerio i have to say Yes or NO and justify why i said it.
Arguments ke baad jo raye denge wo unki khud ki nahi hogi balki tht will be influenced by other thought process.
Deepak, still it is good to have discussion among ourselves before arriving at any firm opinion. Individually, I wont mind to be influenced by any brother, including the younger ones, if they are able to convince me by their logical arguments. We are human beings, always in the learning process, and should learn from each other. No one would like to go against one's community but on some particular issue we may not be able to reach consensus and it is natural.
rakeshsehrawat
New member
Kyun Bumble ne chade hai isme ek dana nahi likde