Homosexuality...continued

If ya'll recall, I had directed your attention recently to a couple of posts made by my good friend Sandipan on the topic of homosexuality (http://writerthroughlife.blogspot.com/2006/02/musingmonsoon.html). Incase you did not have the opportunity to view those posts, I have copied the direct links here:

Musing Monsoon: Homosexuality in India
Musing Monsoon: Section 377

I urge you to take the time to read those, as I believe they are not only well-written, but simultaneously address very valid points. After you read those posts, I want to direct you to a news article I came across online just a couple of days ago:

News Article: click here

I find it quite coincidential that so soon after learning about section 377, I come across a news article that addresses an issue along those very lines. Reading this however, made me understand even more the irrationality of the entire homosexuality "situation".

Summary of the situation:

Two young women are "in love" and run away from home to live together. The family of one girl [girl A] accuses the other girl [girl B] of kidnapping girl A while also accusing girl B of being a man dressed as a woman. The police get involved, and find out 1] both girls ran away together - nobody kidnapped anbody, and 2] girl B is in fact a woman dressed as a man, as she would like to henceforth live her life as a male.

Quick [obvious] analysis:

a] Did girl B kidnap girl A as girl A's family accused girl B of doing?
>>No. They ran away with mutual consent.

b] Was girl B a man dressed as a woman as girl A's family accuses girl B of doing?
>>No. She was in fact a girl, simply dressed in a man's clothes.

c] Do police have the right to invoke Section 377 [regardless of how ludicrous Section 377 sounds in the first place] and charge girl B with "unnatural sex"?
>>No. There must be penetration in order to utilize Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.

d] If in fact, there is no reason to accuse the women and if in fact, they have not done anything "illegal" [again, meant to be taken with a pinch of salt since laws such as Section 377 are so absurd and vague], should the police now let the girls go?
>>Yes. The accusations made by girl A's family are not true, and the police have found nothing else illegal about the girls' actions.

However, what do the police do instead? Keep the young women in custody and waste time trying to find a way to penalize them for absolutely nothing!

I quote from the article [Sonu is girl B]: "We cannot accuse Sonu of kidnapping," said Panchmahals deputy police superintendent J.K. Bhatt. Nor, he added, could Sonu be charged with "unnatural sex" under section 377 of the Indian Penal Code.

"To invoke Section 377, one has to prove penetration," said Bhatt. "We have conducted a medical examination which proved that Sonu is a woman."

I quote again from the article: Since Sonu was not, in fact, male, and since both women told police they wanted to live together and no kidnapping had taken place, the law enforcement officers seemed hamstrung.

Then why on earth are they still being held in custody? Why do people think they have the time to waste on such mundane issues that really should not even be issues in the first place? As the article explicitly states, this is certainly not the first occurence of the likes of such a case, and it probably will not be the last. I do, and will always, fail to understand the energy and time spent on homosexuality in India, in the United States, and in any other country it is made to be an issue.

India is supposed to be the largest democracy in the world, while the United States is meant to be "the land of the free" where freedom of expression is a privilege. So much for that.

And as far as the United States goes, so much for keeping "religion and state separated". I would like one person to come up to me and just try and argue out that any law speaking out against homosexuality does not have a bit of religion that plays into that decision. If it did not, what other reason is there for it to be an issue?

I don't usually have problems with religion in general. I myself am a practicing Hindu, and use religion to help me achieve a certain state of mind [to make a long description short - of course it is more complicated than such, but that's another story]. But it is when religion starts clashing with logic, and what in my mind is the simple and obvious path/decision, that I become frustrated and annoyed with the stupidity of it all.

howdy ya'll!

Howdy from Arkansas! I had written a whole post, but considering I don't have the little fan to keep by my laptop here with me and considering the fact that my computer as a result overheated and shut down, I lost the entire post I had written describing my experiences travelling. So if you are interested, you can ask me - but to make a long story short, I was supposed to arrive on Friday night at Arkansas, which fell through because of weather delays from Albany - ended up spending the night in New Jersey, left for Arkansas on Saturday morning from Newark, and arrived "home" at around 5:30pm Saturday evening. I could have gone to India and back in the time that it took me to travel from Albany to Little Rock. That's pathetic.

Not to mention, my luggage didn't arrive then, and it still has not arrived to this minute. However, they claim they have it - rather, they know it's with Continental, it's a matter of getting it to me now. I'd be surprised if I get it before my stupid vacation is over in less than a week.

I'm having a great time here with my family. I've been introducing them to Arabian/Middle eastern music! And surprisingly, (perhaps even for the first time in my life), my family actually listens to me when I say things! It's really quite amazing.

The weather here is absolutely gorgeous. Sunny, warm, everything that Troy is not. Or New Jersey for that matter.

We went hiking at Pinnacle Mountain here in Arkansas yesterday. And of course, anybody who knows me, knows I LOVE hiking/walking/nature/etc. So I was in absolute bliss.

Anyway, I'm off for now. Will my luggage arrive today? Hmm...

l8er ya'll!

Drunk Driving...and the logic is...?

Alcohol-related motor vehicle crashes kill someone every 31 minutes, and nonfatally injure someone every 2 minutes. Do you realize how scary that is? Unfortunately, deaths due to drunk driving are the leading cause of death in the United States.

In spite of all the warnings, public awareness and educational programs, stricter penalties for violations, and efforts by law enforcement agencies across the nation to be more visible and diligent in protecting the highways, people will still make the decision to get behind the wheel of their vehicles while intoxicated. And the logic in this is...?

All 50 states and the District of Columbia have per se laws defining it as a crime to drive with a blood alcohol concentration (BAC) at or above a proscribed level of 0.08 percent. But honestly, how much do these laws matter? Obviously not enough since over 40% of all highway related deaths are due to drunk driving. That is a ridiculously high percentage.

It frustrates me to no end when I read things such as the "fact" that automatic license revocation appears to be the single most effective measure to reduce drunk driving. Nothing is effective if IT IS STILL SO PREVALENT. And then to read that automatic license revocation along with a mandatory jail sentence appears to be even more effective than just automatic license revocation angers me even more. How does any of this matter? Great, so it stops some people from getting behind the wheel drunk. But what about the hundreds of thousands of people who don't stop? What about all the lives that are lost due to wreckless drunk driving? Does a license revocation and a jail sentence do justice to the possible loss of an innocent life or lives?

I'm someone who lives my life by logic. If it doesn't make sense to me, I will not accept it. Getting behind the wheel and driving when you have no control over your mind or your body is not in any way a logical, decent, or intelligent decision. How can one be so irresponsible that he/she can risk the well-being of himself/herself and others through his/her poor judgement and incapability of handling alcohol (and getting behind the wheel while intoxicated for that matter)? I can never understand this.




::R.I.P. AD *~* forever in my heart::