Same Sex Marriage Verdict: ‘Queerness not urban or elite’ says CJI

Queerness not urban or elite! Have Ever thought of a law that allows same sex marriage verdict,  i.e., where people who love each other, no matter if they’re a man and a woman, two men or two women, can marry—should be made legal or not? Till now, India has been struggling to decide its legality, and the Supreme Court of India has recently given its answer. It is decided that same-sex couples cannot adopt children or be married in the same way as a man and a woman.

But here’s the thing: not all the judges agreed. One side said that same-sex couples should get more rights by giving them something called a “civil union.” We will go into more detail about it below, plus why it’s so important to know that “queerness” isn’t limited to those who live in cities.

STORY | Same sex marriage: SC commences pronouncing verdict, says it is for Parliament to effect changes in law

READ: https://t.co/tRCo9aXQ7L pic.twitter.com/qqkMwMV7is

— Press Trust of India (@PTI_News) October 17, 2023

Who Made the Decision?

The Chief Justice of India (CJI) and four other judges made up the group of justices the same sex marriage verdict in India. Interestingly, different judges had different opinions on this matter. Some of them supported the choice, while others didn’t. The judges’ divergent opinions greatly impacted the decision’s outcome.

#WATCH मैं सुप्रीम कोर्ट के फैसले का स्वागत करता हूं जिसमें उन्होंने समलैंगिक विवाह की अनुमति नहीं दी है: सुप्रीम कोर्ट बार एसोसिएशन के अध्यक्ष आदिश अग्रवाल, दिल्ली pic.twitter.com/QKixKIEQ9o

— ANI_HindiNews (@AHindinews) October 17, 2023

The Supreme Court’s Landmark Ruling on Same Sex Marriage Verdict

What the Supreme Court Said?

Recently, the Indian Supreme Court ruled significantly on same sex marriage. They claimed that same-sex couples are now unable to lawfully enter into marriage or civil unions in India. They also said that borrowing children by same-sex spouses is illegal.

CJI DY Chandrachud reads out operative part of the Judgment

Watch FULL VIDEO – https://t.co/e2USCjkOjx#SupremeCourtofIndia #SameSexMarriage #MarriageEquality #SupremeCourt pic.twitter.com/rQgFfaN3Zn

— Bar & Bench (@barandbench) October 17, 2023

In India, the Supreme Court is akin to the law’s master. The ultimate word on what is and isn’t permitted in the nation is found in the Supreme Court judgement on Same Sex Marriage. However, this ruling does not preclude same-sex couples from having romantic relationships; rather, it only means they are not entitled to the same legal privileges as married couples.

Majority and Minority Views on Same Sex Marriage Verdict

What the Majority Judges Said

Most judges, including judges Bhat, Kohli, and Narasimha, said there is no automatic right to marry anyone. They also mentioned that same-sex couples can not claim it as an abecedarian right. They said that same-sex couples can not borrow children under the current law.

What the Minority Judges Said

But the Chief Justice of India, CJI Chandrachud, and Justice Kaul had a different opinion. They believed that same-sex couples should be suitable to have civil unions and get some legal benefits. They also said that same-sex couples should be allowed to borrow children. So, they allowed same-sex couples should have further rights than the other judges.

The Complexity of the Supreme Court Verdict on Same Sex Marriage

Marriage vs. Civil Union

First, let’s understand the difference between marriage and civil union. Marriage is when two people, generally a man and a woman, fairly become husband and wife. A civil union is like a marriage, but it’s not called marriage. It’s a way for two people to show their love for each other and get some legal benefits, but it’s not as extensively accepted as marriage.

No Automatic Right to Marriage

In the majority opinion, the judges emphasized that nobody has an essential right to marry, and it’s a decision for the government, not the courts, to make. Supreme court verdict on same sex marriage also clarified that same-sex couples can not claim marriage as an abecedarian right, which means they can not contend on it as a commodity they must have, like food or water.

Different Opinions For Same Sex Marriage Verdict

In this important decision, the judges had varying views on the rights of same-sex couples. utmost judges said they shouldn’t have further rights, while the minority judges argued that they should.

The minority judges felt that same-sex couples should be allowed to have civil unions, which are like marriages, and they should also be suitable to borrow children. These differences in opinions punctuate the ongoing debate on LGBTQ rights and the need for a fair and equal society.

What This Decision Means for Same-Sex Couples

No Marriage, but Some Hope

In India, same-sex couples can not marry like same-sex couples. However, the possibility of civil unions and adoption rights is still a hint of stopgap. The struggle for equivalency persists, with some judges advocating for expanded rights. This ongoing battle emphasizes the significance of feting and supporting LGBTQ rights, seeking for a further inclusive and accepting society.

Queerness is Not Just for Cities

The minority judges emphasized that queasiness, which means not being straight, is not limited to big cities. Queer individualities live in small towns and villages too. This serves as a vital memorial that love transcends geographical boundaries, underlining the significance of treating everyone with respect and granting them equal rights, anyhow of their background or where they live.

The Path Forward for LGBTQ+ Rights

The Importance of Equal Rights

The recent decision highlights that the battle for equal rights is far from over. While the majority of judges believe that changing the laws is the government’s responsibility, it does not discourage the ongoing efforts of individualities and activists advocating for same sex marriage. The fight persists as they continue to amplify their voices, pushing for equal rights and recognition for all couples, anyhow of their gender or sexual exposure.

Recognizing Love and Relationships

The minority judges believe in recognizing same-sex connections and furnishing them with legal benefits, potentially paving the way for significant changes in Indian laws. This station is vital, as it holds the implicit to foster lesser acceptance and understanding for the LGBTQ community. It marks a step towards equal rights, emphasizing the significance of inclusivity and respect for all love and connections, anyhow of gender.

Public Opinion Matters For Same Sex Marriage Verdict

Public opinion is an important force. Courts and the government pay attention to what people suppose. When further and further individualities voice their support for equal rights for same-sex couples, it sends a strong communication. This collaborative voice has the implicit to impact changes in laws in the future, making it pivotal for people to express their views and stand up for equivalency.

Conclusion

In India, the Supreme Court’s recent same sex marriage verdict is complex. While some judges believe that same-sex couples shouldn’t have the same rights as traditional wedded couples, others argue for equal treatment. The fight for LGBTQ rights in India continues, and ensuring that love and connections aren’t limited to civic areas is essential. Every voice that supports equal rights can make a difference, and one day, the laws may change to grant further recognition and acceptance to same-sex couples.