Human behaviour explained by psychologists should be most acceptable. They say:' ...no one can become gay or lesbian. If he/she is, he/she is'. By the same argument it can be infered that if one is not, one is not. The problem arises where it is expected to accept it normal or natural by opposite party. So if some people oppose gay/lesbian behaviour, it is because they are not that kind, and it is natural for them to oppose. How to solve the problem then? Ask psychologists. Society and legal system should follow the guide line similar to medical advice given by doctors who know better about diseases. It remains to understand whether ailment or aberration is natural or not.

Oh come on have we not already copycatted west enough yet to steal their political issues? Starting from the Bollywood all the way to 26/11 we try to copy everything, we try to name after them we try to eat after them we even show Tiger Woods stories on our home pages, enough is enough.

We have to start with changing the education system. There is a tremendous amount of homophobia in India today which is primarily due to the lack of knowledge about this subject. We are taught that human beings can be categorized as male and female.
This ignores the reality that there are a lot of individuals who are in between and millions of others who are physically male or female but are not emotionally.
Some of the toughest critics are the religious and culture warriors. It is difficult to change their opinions. They only want to see and hear what they already believe in (they are blind to evidence to the contrary).

http://indiafirsthand.com/?p=1491

India might have passed a law on homosexuality just a year ago but the world history is replete with cases of people who have strayed away from the accepted norms of society and yet contributed heavily in the various fields of art, literature, sports, politics and so on. Elton John, George Michael, Martina Navratilova, Leonardo da Vinci, Michael Angelo, Alexander The Great are just a few names which have defined excellence in their respective fields. The list is long and strong enough to prove that sexual preferences do not bear any consequences on the talent of an individual in any manner in any field. Irony of this man's (professor) life is that while he was chairing the MODERN Indian Languages in one of the most prestigious universities, he has been thrashed by an ANCIENT belief.

Its time when we realize that mincing progressive words and slogans is not going to put India on the pedestal of success and growth but aligning our thoughts with our words and metamorphosing them into actions is what our nation needs. A comprehensive walk towards more liberated and benevolent environment is a long pending and more pragmatic approach, which should be followed by our people who are frozen in time. Is AMU listening?

:bow:
once again, a great article Jug sir..
and who ever says that Homo sexuality is natural you need to look into nature and it's beings more thoroughly. There are a lot of creatures on this earth which are Homo sexual.

Well said Jug Ji..

There is no dearth of hypocrites in our country. Where such a big issue is being created about being Lesbian or Gay there is little remorse for people indulging in pre-marital sexual relationships, live-in relationships or the likes.. These are left out to perception of people and living style. Then why bein gay is termed as dysfunctional?? Love is not defined by you or me alone, its first felt and then defined by every being. Let them be and othas can concentrate on their life..!!

Mr Suraiya, So you want to say that people who are opposed to Homosexuality are Unnatural, Bigots, Backward thinking. All Progressive thinking person should support Gays/Lesbians. MAY GOD GRANT YOU SOME NATURAL THINKING.

I am not sure if there's any danger in being a homo but one thing I'm sure is that same-sex is a sin according to God and he hates it. If we legalize one sin, is there any limit to the different types of sin mankind can commit? Son can sleep with the Father, daughter with mother, someone can sleep with an animal etc. etc. How would you stop such acts? If we cannot be bigots to such things, then where's the end? Getting easy on these things will change the ethos and the culture of the society. When the west suffered with divorces, they looked towards India as a role-model for families. Now our culture is being shattered.

one of my sister says that some of the gays have excelled in various fields like science,sports, military (alexander), films, music etc. in same way many prostitutes, incest loving people, drug addicts (like Jahagir) and various types of criminals have done a great job in above mentioned fields perhaps better than gays. diehard followers of gay movements might say that gays should not be compared with sex workers, drug addicts, alcoholics, incest loving people and people who want to have sex with animals. in case if some gay put up such type of argument i am going to congratulate him, atleast he has some morality in him and he understands that there is no uncontional freedom.Switzerland banned new construction of Mosques and France violated the FREEDOM of women who wants to wear BURQA out of their FREE will and choice. Therefore freedom is never uncontional or unlimited. as regards genetic factor behind homosexuality. this theory has never been proved. the propogatar of this theory was a Gay who is suffering from AIDS. prevalance og this perversion (homosexuality) is uneven throughout the worlds history, in TIME and SPACE. for example Sydney and San Fransisco are having considerable gay population while other cities in near by them are having lesser gay population. Now as per this bugus and stupid theory "laws of genetics" is working in sydney san fransisco in large numbers but it is not working in other cities. like take the case of CANCER. the factors causing cancer are uniform all over the world. whenever one debates with these fagots on rationale lines they jusr run away and start abusing and misbehaving. many civilizations like ROMANS and GREECE were destroyed becouse people were indulging in these vices. How unnatural is anal sex can be gauged from the fact that once i asked a gay faggot can you people have sex with lube, jelly or any type of cream. he burst and started crying. anal sex is hot bed of disease and pain. KORAN & Bible both have condemned gays

Gays are typical upper caste diseases. Lower caste people dont suffer from it.

To Mr/Ms Godse, Homosexuality is not an imported fight or concept. Millions of Indians are gay, born gay not made gay by watching MTV. This is their fight, our fight, for equality and no more hypocrisy/bigotry. How would you feel if suddenly we took over and decided to banish rights for straight people? Imagine us invalidating your love for your spouse, kids, even parents? Stealing away your right to live a life you want? Not give you legal recognition and even say 'sorry, for us people who have sex with the opposite sex dont exist'? Its amazing how unaware you are of your own surroundings. Please wake up - India probably has more gays than the US (coz if its 10% of the population, we definitely score!).

You've said "In sexual matters, the distinction between the 'natural' and the 'unnatural' is particularly problematic. In some major religions such as Roman Catholicism, for instance even heterosexual relationships are permissible only between man and wife, and for the sole purpose of procreation. On an already dangerously over-populated planet, such a proposition is not just morally but also environmentally dubious. Equally harmful in a world threatened by AIDS is the corollary injunction against the use of condoms." Would you solve the problem of alcohol addiction, shop lifting, rape, murderous behavior in the same way? Would you make all these legal and provide maybe a face mask to protect a rapist, so he can continue raping people? Condoms don't create loyalty between two people, they create a false sense of freedom where in people are free to be promiscuous. It's like an insurance policy, except that when you take out insurance, you don't start jumping before a train, but with a condom people do just that, they engage in risky behavior because they think they are safe. Gays and lesbians have only one identity, that they are sexual, I'd like to label them as hetrophobic because thats what they are. They have no business calling normal people homophobic, since we are not afraid of them, but would like them to be more than just sexual beings.

Decriminalizing homosexuality is a welcome thing. If it is a.consensual b. between adults and c.not adultery, then it is not criminal.
Bud stating that homosexuality is queer,should not be intolerable to anybody. Why this urge to make everybody accept that homosexuality is normal or commonplace. The point is simple and logical and scientific if you understand.
Whatever the religious or yogic quacks have to say, the point is the reason for sexual urge is to further the species. Its a survival instinct. And it is, for our species, hetero in nature. So we say, heterosexuality is natural. And since majority of the human species (I don't have survey at hand, but i believe- any statistics to contrary looks quite impossible) have been hetero, it is also common.
By corollary, homosexuality is uncommon, strange, or queer.
And who's a bigot - one who say's that he won't like his child to be a homosexual - may I ask why is he a bigot?? No sense in this arguement.

Good Write. If a married couple decide to masturbate each other or have oral sex, it can be termed as unnatural. So a cop in every bedroom! And a department to process and pass as being natural all the video tape made in every bedroom! Great employment opportunity :)
You are right, being a bigot is far worse than anything else. Everything in this world is part of nature, how can only some things be part of nature and others outside of nature?

Everything coming out of the west need not be gospel to India. Liberty is important but we must also know where to draw the line. Homosexualism is more of sexual perversion rather than the high flying ideal of liberalism. The issue isn’t about people with deformed sexual organs with genuine need for understanding and consideration by society. The issue is more about individuals with absolutely normal sexual anatomy but given to grossly perverted notions of sex and sexuality. Votaries of homosexualism who cite phoney “research” reports from the west to drive their point, should remember the widely accepted view among physicians all over the world that, “90% of sex is in the mind and only 10% is between the legs”. Thankfully, this piece of wisdom is more universal and time-tested than western and gives one hell of a good reason to refute all talk of the west being the end of all wisdom, especially of the moral variety. This phenomenon of unbridled, irresponsible and irrational liberalism is a recent phenomenon, barely a few decades old, beginning with the Hippy culture of the 60s, originating from the west. But most of our beliefs that have sustained us over thousands of years have never strayed on the question of discipline in sexual behaviour since those early days. Bigotry, did you say? So, why is sex with minors and animals as well as having it forcibly, not acceptable to civil society? It’s because all problems arise with “having” sex and not for “not having” it, explaining why it is important to be restrained and disciplined while having sex. Excess of nothing is good, more so sex, even if it is between heterosexuals.

This question actually makes me remember of the Oscar nominated movie 'Milk'. In one scene Harvey Milk challenges his competetor for a public debate, and during the debate he asks one question to the competetor that ' How can you teach somebody homosexuality, Is it like French?'....
The political parties takes advantage of old befiefs.

I have no opinion about my daughter's sexulity. She can be what she wants. It is a choice for her to make or change. Her sexuality would matter to me (1) if it were to be pervert and she were to be a sexually, emotionally or physically abusive person; and (2) if she were not protecting herself and her partner. In the first case, I would go against her and in the second case, I would ensure she has necessary information and access. Other than these ser sexuality is not my business.

Jug, you are best when you stay in the j(oc)ugular vein and your opinions in this writeup are far from it.Every once in a while a soul attempts to whip up this debate about homosexuality.There's little doubt that AMU,like any other organization,reserves right to define its constitution (and nobody got killed if you call this an act of bigotry).Decriminalization of homosexuality not necessarily equals an acceptable social norm.Even Nityanand claims that he has not done anything against law(which may be true but not acceptable).Will this amount to bigotry as well?Sympathizers of homosexuality employ many methods to justify their point. Mocking(calling homophobe),abusing,pseudo-scientific reasoning,religion bashing,glorifying exceptional achievements of a few popular figures(as if civilization would not have progressed in their absence).With regard to military morale,I presume the sample population consisted of american soldiers and therefore,is in no way reflective of a jawaan posted at Siachen.Imagining sodomy or lesbianism to be a life saving practice like vaccination makes me wonder your understanding about scientific reasoning and lustful gratification.By expanding horizon,do you mean that incest and pedophilia, taboos(and criminal)today,will be next major goals?And cross cultural globalization-have you failed to notice the slow but sure trickle back of the diaspora from almost every where.You are being selective in interpreting Catholics because it allows you to(and forgives you too).I am sure that you would probably be running for a cover had you mentioned any other major religion.Instead of preaching the virtue of sex between man and wife,you seem to proclaim-homosexuality is the answer to population explosion and condom is the ultimate saviour against AIDS.It appears from some responses that some sympathizers of your views are just as much intolerant so the 'disease' of bigotry can afflict anyone and not just whom you chose to call homophobes.