As a result of India’s rising incomes, higher education levels and technological advances that ease communications, arranged marriage is changing there and among people of Indian heritage who live elsewhere.
The definition of rape in India is still looked at through the lens of a woman’s marital status. If you oppose criminalising marital rape, you are a rape apologist.
To address growing problem of NRIs deserting and harassing spouses, govt considers bringing in a new law that’ll make the erring spouse a proclaimed offender.
Countering insurgency needs the Pakistan Army to demonstrate a political will that ties leaders at the centre with those in the borderlands. But it may not have the imagination.
Centre for Science and Environment in new report makes case for rationalising GST on waste material, saying most informal operators can’t afford high tax & it also hinders recycling.
21st edition of annual joint military exercise will be held from 1 to 16 September, aimed at sharing military tech, operational best practices & disaster relief coordination methods.
Standing up to America is usually not a personal risk for a leader in India. Any suggestions of foreign pressure unites India behind who they see as leading them in that fight.
Acts done by women under the combined effect of Brainwashing and alleged love can’t be called Agency. As a women I am of firm belief that a child (male or female) has supreme duty not to bring any disgrace to family. One’s action affects reputation of whole family. Like it or not this is the way social system works. Ignoring parents to marry someone not liked by family is a clear act of selfishness and not love marriage.
The author is biased on this subject and criticising the courts for giving some leniency towards parental custody. I think the author is female and is writing the whole article just on the basis of women’s rights. Parental custody can also be useful in other situations. Let us take for example, religious fundamentalism. Forget about gender here. If a boy wants to go to join ISIS or Kashmiri militants or wants to kill an enemy or wants to drive drunk on the road, would you say it is wrong if parents would rather lock him up in a room and work off the anger and emotions and give some time to heal and think.
The authors article just shows how immature she is. I do not know how old she is. But, consider this, if responsible parents resorted to parental custody of boys or girls to prevent drunken driving or acid attacks or suicides or homicides, will the author argue that since the boy or girl has attained the age of legal maturity and is an adult, they cannot be restrained by parents? Is the author saying that DP YADAV was right in not stopping his son and friends from killing another youth for loving his daughter?
The author needs to think some things through. The judges in high courts are not dumb. Finally, I would like to say that the case of Hadiya was not merely that of a interreligious love marriage, it was also a fear of parents that the girl was being turned towards religious fundamentalism. Is the author going to take responsibility if such a couple turned up under ISIS in Syria and the girl was sold in sex slavery? What action can be taken by the author after the disaster has already happened? Please put things in context in your argument. Any debate has to involve both sides. You do not need a journalism or any higher degree to simply argue your own point of view. Even an uneducated lout can do that.
Acts done by women under the combined effect of Brainwashing and alleged love can’t be called Agency. As a women I am of firm belief that a child (male or female) has supreme duty not to bring any disgrace to family. One’s action affects reputation of whole family. Like it or not this is the way social system works. Ignoring parents to marry someone not liked by family is a clear act of selfishness and not love marriage.
The author is biased on this subject and criticising the courts for giving some leniency towards parental custody. I think the author is female and is writing the whole article just on the basis of women’s rights. Parental custody can also be useful in other situations. Let us take for example, religious fundamentalism. Forget about gender here. If a boy wants to go to join ISIS or Kashmiri militants or wants to kill an enemy or wants to drive drunk on the road, would you say it is wrong if parents would rather lock him up in a room and work off the anger and emotions and give some time to heal and think.
The authors article just shows how immature she is. I do not know how old she is. But, consider this, if responsible parents resorted to parental custody of boys or girls to prevent drunken driving or acid attacks or suicides or homicides, will the author argue that since the boy or girl has attained the age of legal maturity and is an adult, they cannot be restrained by parents? Is the author saying that DP YADAV was right in not stopping his son and friends from killing another youth for loving his daughter?
The author needs to think some things through. The judges in high courts are not dumb. Finally, I would like to say that the case of Hadiya was not merely that of a interreligious love marriage, it was also a fear of parents that the girl was being turned towards religious fundamentalism. Is the author going to take responsibility if such a couple turned up under ISIS in Syria and the girl was sold in sex slavery? What action can be taken by the author after the disaster has already happened? Please put things in context in your argument. Any debate has to involve both sides. You do not need a journalism or any higher degree to simply argue your own point of view. Even an uneducated lout can do that.