India not to criminalise marital rape

[Desertfalcon]

When you cannot prove an act then why make it a law at all. Are laws in your country merely for show and have no substance to them?

Are you serious? It's difficult to prove child molestation so according to your thinking, why should it be a crime at all? Good gosh, man, surely you don't believe that rubbish! Just because some crimes may be difficult to prove does not mean that laws against them are "just for show". It just means that by their nature, they are more difficult to prove than say, armed robbery. It's simple logic.

 

[SitaramVillas]

BTW there are 9 kinds of marriages in Hinduism, and I assure you not all of them are sacred.

1. Brahma Vivah
2. Daiva Vivah
3. Arsha Vivah
4. Gandharva Vivah
5. Prajapatya Vivah
6. Asura Vivah
7. Rakshasa Vivah
8. Paishacha Vivah
9. Swaymvara

BTW Mallu's don't marry in front of Agni. Its either in a temple before a god, or before a community with the community as witness.

We are not talking about Asura and Paishacha vivah. But mere normal human marriages something done by Hindus, not again not talking about demons.

 

[uparyupari]

The Hindu law does not make marriage a contract between two individual. Marriage is held sacred. Most Hindu marriages are not even legally registered unlike the Muslim marriages.

When you use the world "Hindu LAW", you are talking about the constitution Law called the Hindu Marriage Act. and it treats marriage as a legal contract between consenting adults of sound mind with conjugal rights except when either one takes sanyas and withdraws from society. It overrides any other Hindu custom, tradition or texts. .

In a religious or Dharmic context, any sexual relationship between man and women is considered marriage. Forced or consensual. Which is why Rape is also considered marriage in Hinduism and grants legal rights of a wife to the victim.

Registration is a politico legal requirement. But the concept of a community approval exist, which is why we have a marriage feast to invite the community and inform them and seek their approval.

 

[SitaramVillas]

Are you serious? It's difficult to prove child molestation so according to your thinking, why should it be a crime at all? Good gosh, man, surely you don't believe that rubbish! Just because some crimes may be difficult to prove does not mean that laws against them are "just for show". It just means that by their nature, they are more difficult to prove than say, armed robbery. It's simple logic.

I am serious. Who says is it difficult to prove Child molestation? Is a Child in a legally sexual relationship with the molestor for it to be difficult to prove? Gosh man, I hope every one in US is not as dumb as you are. What is the point of making a law that cannot be proved? It is simple logic. We do not have laws against walking upside down, does not mean we legally sanction walking upside down. We do not have laws for eating from the *** instead of the mouth, does not mean we legally sanction eating from ones ***.

 

[uparyupari]

We are not talking about Asura and Paishacha vivah. But mere normal human marriages something done by Hindus, not again not talking about demons.

You misunderstand. Asura or Paishacha vivah has Nothing to do with demons. Rape is called Paishacha vivah and Asura Viah is marriage between unequal. e.g. A beautiful girl with a deformed man.

 

[Desertfalcon]

I am serious. Who says is it difficult to prove Child molestation?

Anyone who has prosecuted such cases. Children in general, are often reluctant to testify in court and are easily led into contradictory or confused testimony by defense council. There is almost never a witness in such cases and not always conclusive forensic evidence.

Is a Child in a legally sexual relationship with the molestor for it to be difficult to prove?

There is no such thing as a, "legally sexual relationship" with ANY child. An 11 year old for example, is not able to legally give consent.

Gosh man, I hope every one in US is not as dumb as you are. What is the point of making a law that cannot be proved? It is simple logic.

So again, you seem to not be able to grasp the most simple logic. What is the point? Because it is criminal behavior, NOT because it is easy to prove. Your approach to ideas of law is utterly amoral. I.e.," it can't be easily PROVED that someone sodomizes his daughter every night, so why have a law against it?" Please, please, tell me your thinking is not that barbaric!

 

[SitaramVillas]

When you use the world "Hindu LAW", you are talking about the constitution Law called the Hindu Marriage Act. and it treats marriage as a legal contract between consenting adults of sound mind with conjugal rights except when either one takes sanyas and withdraws from society. It overrides any other Hindu custom, tradition or texts. .

In a religious or Dharmic context, any sexual relationship between man and women is considered marriage. Forced or consensual. Which is why Rape is also considered marriage in Hinduism and grants legal rights of a wife to the victim.

Registration is a politico legal requirement. But the concept of a community approval exist, which is why we have a marriage feast to invite the community and inform them and seek their approval.

No, it does not consider Hindu marriage act as a legal contract. It has made provisions though for divorce in case of a failed marriage and gives protection in case of domestic violence. Does not mean it treats marriage merely as a legal contract. When a business contract falls apart, the courts do not advise counseling and do everything within their powers to save the contract, but when a marriage fails courts do not immediately favor dissolution. Extensive effort is undertaken to enable reconciliation.

Rape is not considered a marriage in Hinduism. Please this is absurd. It does not grant legal rights of a wife to a victim. Where are you pulling these kinds of stuff from? Rapes resulted in the rapists family being annihilated. It would spawn a feud lasting generations. Which is why later on families fearing bloodshed suppressed info on rape.

Anyone who has prosecuted such cases. Children in general, are often reluctant to testify in court and are easily led into contradictory or confused testimony by defense council. There is almost never a witness in such cases and not always conclusive forensic evidence.

Oh, I may have missed something given how many cases have been filed and proved and so many churches have declared themselves bankrupt due to legal settlements. Now you come and tell me cases almost never get proved.

There is no such thing as a, "legally sexual relationship" with ANY child. An 11 year old for example, is not able to legally give consent.

Exactly, while a child is not in a legal sexual relationship, the man and his wive are. So how are you going to decide the sex they had last night was rape and not just passionate lovemaking?

So again, you seem to not be able to grasp the most simple logic. What is the point? Because it is criminal behavior, NOT because it is easy to prove. Your approach to ideas of law is utterly amoral. I.e.," it can't be easily PROVED that someone sodomizes his daughter every night, so why have a law against it?" Please, please, tell me your thinking is not that barbaric!

What is criminal behavior? Having sex with one's husband or one's wife? It is you who are immoral. It can be very easily proved some is sodomizing his daughter every night given she is in his care and protection but her asshole wears signs of wear and tear which should not have been there at that age.

Please tell me your culture is not so barbaric that you are taught to rape your wives and they find you so repulsive that they can be had only via rape and hence your society felt the urgent need to provide this protection of law.

I come from a very different gentle culture where a man walks away if his wive says she has a headache or is tired that night.

 

[uparyupari]

No, it does not consider Hindu marriage act as a legal contract. It has made provisions though for divorce in case of a failed marriage and gives protection in case of domestic violence. Does not mean it treats marriage merely as a legal contract. When a business contract falls apart, the courts do not advise counseling and do everything within their powers to save the contract, but when a marriage fails courts do not immediately favor dissolution. Extensive effort is undertaken to enable reconciliation.

Sorry, but it DOES. As per law, it is a contract with special provision, different from a commercial contract, but a contract never the less.

Courts suggest counselling since the court ALSO have a responsibility to society and social welfare. But in the end, if one or more party in the contact wishes, the court HAS to grant divorce and end the contract.

Rape is not considered a marriage in Hinduism. Please this is absurd. It does not grant legal rights of a wife to a victim. Where are you pulling these kinds of stuff from? Rapes resulted in the rapists family being annihilated. It would spawn a feud lasting generations. Which is why later on families fearing bloodshed suppressed info on rape.

Rape is not allowed nor acceptable in Hinduism, but when it DOES occur, it is considered Paishacha Vivah. The girl is free to break a Paishacha Vivah and is not forced to go with the man, but the man is bound to grant ALL legal rights to the girl if she so desires. If the victim is not interested in the vivah, the perpetrator is also held guilty and is punishable under the law of the land.

A girl, who is not in her senses (she may not be of sound mind or intoxicated or drugged, etc) is forcibly married off or if the girl has not consented to the marriage or is raped is considred a Paishacha Vivah.

You can consult the Dharmashastras for more details.

 

[Desertfalcon]

Oh, I may have missed something given how many cases have been filed and proved and so many churches have declared themselves bankrupt due to legal settlements. Now you come and tell me cases almost never get proved.

You have missed something and I will as you apparently do not know the difference between "criminal law" and "civil law or torts". It is far easier to win a case in civil law. One need not prove "beyond a reasonable doubt". One need only prove, "a preponderance of evidence". You may win a monetary settlement in civil law, but there are no criminal penalties. Check to see how many of those exact same cases that you use as an example, have been successfully prosecuted in 'criminal' court, and you will have your answer. Virtually NONE have.

Exactly, while a child is not in a legal sexual relationship, the man and his wive are. So how are you going to decide the sex they had last night was rape and not just passionate lovemaking?

Now you are agreeing with me that such cases are difficult to prove as it often boils down to, "he says/she says". That does NOT mean however that such sexual assaults are not nor should not be, crimes! Again, by YOUR thinking, that a man may sodomize his daughter every night may also be difficult to prove, as it also will depend solely on "he says/she says", but according to YOUR logic, "hey, it's difficult to prove so why make it a crime?" Disgusting!

What is criminal behavior? Having sex with one's husband or one's wife?

If it is forcible sexual assault, rape? Yes! A marriage does not give one the right to rape one's wife!

It is you who are immoral.

Sure sign you have lost this argument my friend. Ad hominem.

It can be very easily proved some is sodomizing his daughter every night given she is in his care and protection but her asshole wears signs of wear and tear which should not have been there at that age.

Who says it is anal? Who says it would be rough? Who says that just because there may be physical evidence, the father is the guilty party? You have a very naive idea of how such crimes are committed, (often involving intimidation and not 'forced rough sex'.). ANY prosecutor will tell you that such cases are always difficult and frequently problematic to prove in court.

Please tell me your culture is not so barbaric that you are taught to rape your wives and they find you so repulsive that they can be had only via rape and hence your society felt the urgent need to provide this protection of law.

I come from a very different gentle culture where a man walks away if his wive says she has a headache or is tired that night.

What on earth are you on about here?

 

[Bang Galore]

Do you understand what rape means?

"Rape is a type of sexual assault usually involving sexual intercourse or other forms of sexual penetration perpetrated against a person without that person's consent."



What a disgusting attitude

So its ok to force somebody to have sex? Even by using violence? What a sad day for the nation...



Its a terrible decision in every way!

You realize that it makes it ok to fukcing RAPE your partner!?

Is that what you call morally just behavior? If yes, you can stick your traditions in your ***.

Fukc logic

And what is the punishment for domestic violence (In this case husbands rapes wife) ?




And for the millionth time: There are faults in the system which urgently need to be addressed.... but how on Earth does it help to not admit that there is something called rape within a marriage?! If someone can rape another person without having to fear rape charges, there is something seriously wrong within the system.



Low? How can it even get lower than not accepting the fact that people get raped without any law protecting them ?
While some moronic MP points towards "morals" and "traditions" ?

And where is the irony? Whats the problem with my statement? Isnt it true?

If his mother is forced to have sex by her husband, would he still deny to call it rape? Its just a hypothetical question, nothing wrong with it... since its the topic of this thread, right?

And I bet my *** that many people here would not have gone so mad if this move had not been made by the BJP....

You are right to call it disgusting but there is a simple problem, how do you prove it? How do you prevent abuse?

Forget the government's reasoning in public (they can hardly say anything else), this is the main issue and it's a fairly commonsensical one.

 

[jamahir]

Voluntary immolation equvivalent to suicide. Not induced or forced.

1. even if roop kanwar volunteered to burn herself upon her dead husband's burning pyre, she would have been brainwashed into doing this via a evil cultural environment... it is crime against humanity to retain such a environment.

2. however, roop kanwar was forced into the wood-to-be-burnt by her village and her family.

from ( Sati: Roop Kanwar was cheered as she burnt on her husband's pyre, now she's a faint memory : States: Uttar Pradesh - India Today )...

Police says Kanwar was forced by her in-laws to die with her husband.

Sati or murder - the sight of someone being burnt alive only evokes horror, but numbed by custom the crowds had cheered. As they are doing now in Satpura.

from ( http://www.unipune.ac.in/snc/cssh/HumanRights/07 STATE AND GENDER/ [ 06.pdf ] )...

 

[uparyupari]

1. even if roop kanwar volunteered to burn herself upon her dead husband's burning pyre, she would have been brainwashed into doing this via a evil cultural environment... it is crime against humanity to retain such a environment.

2. however, roop kanwar was forced into the wood-to-be-burnt by her village and her family.

from ( Sati: Roop Kanwar was cheered as she burnt on her husband's pyre, now she's a faint memory : States: Uttar Pradesh - India Today )...

from ( Documents on Human Rights Violations - file 07%20STATE%20AND%20GENDER/06.pdf )...

View attachment 217918

So maybe Roop Kanwar was murdered. What doest that prove ? That ALL Sati is murder ? The Rape of women and taking of slaves by Islamic invaders is the REAL crime against Humanity.

The Naming of an Entire Mountain Range as the "Hindu Kush' of "killer of Hindus" is the real crime against Humanity. Not the few hundred Sati in 1500 years.

Society brainwashes soldiers to kill other and die for their nation too. That is also a crime against humanity too. so is to retain such a environment

 

[Star Wars]

And what is the punishment for domestic violence (In this case husbands rapes wife)

It will probably come under physical abuse. Punishment depends on the case.

And for the millionth time: There are faults in the system which urgently need to be addressed.... but how on Earth does it help to not admit that there is something called rape within a marriage?! If someone can rape another person without having to fear rape charges, there is something seriously wrong within the system.

Its not about admitting, there is rape in marriage,. BUt considering the past turn of events on bringing such laws. We are going to end up with a bigger problem than solving anything.

Low? How can it even get lower than not accepting the fact that people get raped without any law protecting them ?

Of course, that is the only thing lower than what you said. What you said was disgusting . KInda funny to see you taking a moral stance.

While some moronic MP points towards "morals" and "traditions" ?
And where is the irony? Whats the problem with my statement? Isnt it true?

The problem is you directed it at someone's mother and father to deliberalty hurt him. It was very very low even by your standards.

If his mother is forced to have sex by her husband, would he still deny to call it rape? Its just a hypothetical question, nothing wrong with it... since its the topic of this thread, right?

I am not going to answer a question directed on someone's mother and father. Am not like you.

And I bet my *** that many people here would not have gone so mad if this move had not been made by the BJP....

Read my comments idiot. Keep your political insecurity away form this thread. Read more and bark less. Its less about BJP and more about abuse of such laws.

 

[jamahir]

taking of slaves by Islamic invaders is the REAL crime against Humanity.

it was indeed a crime because islam does not permit the bondage of a person by another person, so it was double the crime.

however, cases of the "invaders" giving proper legal rights to local ladies in exchange of relationship... slavery, i think not.

Society brainwashes soldiers to kill other and die for their nation too. That is also a crime against humanity too. so is to retain such a environment

hence the communist ideal... "a world where governments have fallen, militaries have been disbanded and people rule themselves".

 

[Star Wars]

The issue is people view rape by stranger differently from the rape by someone the victim knows.
Historically the definition of rape is, an act of forcing s*x by a male assailant on a woman....who is NOT his wife.
This definition of rape still hasn't changed!!
Another issue is as the level of intimacy between the victim and the perpetrator increases the perception of seriousness of the assault decreases. In short, consent is presumed in a marriage; a wife is husband's property. And ergo spousal rape is acceptable.
And trust me marital rapes 're very difficult to prove because
1) Within a married couple "love-making" is somewhat regular and it would be difficult to try to make a case against your spouse.
2) Chances of misuse of consensual rape role play 're also high.

The government's reasoning behind not accepting marital rape as rape is preposterous to say the least. IMO, they don't want to accept spousal rape as rape because it is extremely difficult to prove it, the jurors would struggle to convict.

The reason i oppose this is because i can bet on my life this will be misused. If Section 498a and the 2012 rape laws were not being so largely misused by women on men i would not have had a problem with it. But since the laws are being misused to a very large extent i have a serious problem with these laws.