Liberals after Sabarimala

Is the constitution a strait jacket? No, it leaves a plenty of room to change and it makes no attempt to regulate every aspect of human life.

अगर सबरीमाला मंदिर की लड़ाई सच में औरतों के हक की लड़ाई है तो क्यों इतनी औरतें उसके खिलाफ हो गयी थीं?

Do we need to change customs and traditions because they discriminate women, if they do not endanger or detrimental to the advancement of women?

It is very sad to see that when there are many real and hurtful incidents happening against women in various parts of India, the Sabarimala women petitioners have managed to find time, money and other resources to indulge in a court case where not a single woman is getting hurt.

In the name of administering gender justice and to uphold order in the society, the courts and thereby the law- makers want to effect permanent change in the human condition.

The state has, from its Nehruvian beginnings, supported the Communists whose primary aim has been the demonization of popular Hinduism, which is termed as 'secularism'.

Now that the SC has ordered something that is against the temple commandment, will temple perform Punyaham?

Not just Sabarimala, but there is no specific sanction in any Hindu scriptures to impose gender bias in Temples: did supreme court not review Hindu scriptures before passing its judgement?

While working on Sabarimala and Ayodhya issue, SC must remember that Justice being served must be equitable not blind to sensitivities of the Society.