Murder, Bigamy, Adultery, Incest, Theft, Dacoity, etc sections of IPC can be repealed too

Good to be back at blogging after 4 years. In fact, i've been forced to come back to save time. I'm tired of defending the recent Supreme Court of India judgement upholding section 377 of IPC in various forums and finally decided to post a blog (a sarcastic one) which can save my time. I need not type my opinion on this issue again and again, rather can just quote this as my opinion and move on. This is in continuation to my previous 2007-08 posts on Abnormal Sexual Behaviour, Adoption by Homosexuals and Sexual Orientation.

If Homosexuals can demand exemption of IPC 377 by quoting the ‘perceived’ rare homosexuals acts of over 1000 species, then the following provisions of IPC as well as many more Statutes can also be scrapped under the same logic, because the same 1000 living species are also seen exhibiting the following ‘NATURAL’ acts:

299 to 304  -  Culpable Homicide and Murder (animals kill often sometimes due to injury in fights which is CH and sometimes through planned Murder)

378, 390, 391  - Theft, Robbery and Dacoity (You might think how dacoity? Yes Hyenas are known for dacoity. lol)

493, 494, 495 & 497 – Concubine, Bigamy and Adultery (animals are known to have multiple partners)

496  -  Fradulent Marriage

And last but not the least, don’t prosecute people for their Incest relationship under 376 (there is no separate section for incest), because animals are predominantly into incestuous relationships.

Are not the above acts ‘ORIENTATION’ too ;) Too many species are seen exhibiting these acts.

If the above sections are taken out of IPC, then the Government can save lots of Tax payer money by closing scores of Magistrate courts :)

Apropos, we cannot approve every behaviour that achieves critical mass as right. If we do that, as mentioned earlier, we will open the Pandora's Box...

Homosexuals and Adoption

As mentioned earlier, given an option I would neither condone nor aggressively oppose same sex marriages for the reasons cited below:

1. They are against law of nature
2. Their adopted children may grow in a state of confusion / identity crisis
3. “Consenting Adults” as an operative word could be misused for future parent-child (grown up child is an adult too) or any other abnormal sexual relationships too.

The last point may sound a bit exaggerated, but when i look at certain happenings around the world, am quite convinced that such developments too can happen, if we continue to approve such digressions. One best example here is North American Man-Boy Love Association (NAMBLA). As same sex relationships are given a base now, similar groups like NAMBLA will cry for recognition in future.

Now comes the question of adoption by Homosexual couples. I don’t want to question here the good intention of providing a better life to deserving children, but that of the basic conceptual flaw. When they don’t subscribe to the natural way of procreation, why do they need children? If they really feel like helping the children, they can very well donate the amount to the orphanages.

Now the important reason which prompted me to write a post on adoption by homosexuals. Recently I read a news report about 2 boys who (for financial gains) duped others posing as transgender. Like wise pedeophiles may act as same sex couples, adopt children and abuse them.

Hence (as per me), natural parental guidance (ie heterosexual parents) is the best option for a child.

Previous post >>> Father of 1000 children