It is not wise at all to convert only for marriage.
(However, the idea of laws on interracial marriage directly violates many rights such as people's liberty, personal liberty, and the right to life. If a couple wants to marry despite their faith, the state must Enable and facilitate them to use their freedom, not restrict it.)
The Uttar Pradesh government has proposed legislation to prevent 'love jihad' from an ordinance for illegal religious conversion '. Casteism and theism have been prevalent in India for centuries. Despite many laws, the social stigma for interracial marriage still exists in Indian society. However, the idea of laws on interracial marriage directly violates many rights such as people's liberty, personal liberty and right to life.
The Uttar Pradesh government has proposed legislation to prevent 'love jihad' from an ordinance for illegal religious conversion '. Casteism and theism have been prevalent in India for centuries. Despite many laws, the social stigma for interracial marriage still exists in Indian society. However, the idea of laws on interracial marriage directly violates many rights such as people's liberty, personal liberty and right to life.
The Uttar Pradesh government's proposal is a vicious blend of patriarchy and communalism. It lends legitimacy to a term that causes disrespect against inter-ethnic marriages and relationships in which one of the parties is a Muslim person. The reason for bringing such a law is that Hindu women are trying to convert to Muslim youths in the name of marriage. This law, called the 'Illegal Prohibition Bill 2020', claims that it only forces conversion, however, to allow the state to file private judgments of inter-faith couples. The effect is how they want to get married.
The UP law may have the effect of discouraging marriage from punitive action between two consenting adults of different religions, because the terms it uses are unclear. Any such law is contrary to the core values of the Constitution on many counts. Political terms such as Love Jihad have no legal sanction. There can be no law based on an extra-legal concept. In any case, legislative interference in marriages involving consenting adults would be unconstitutional.
Interracial marriage is believed to be forcible conversion of one of the spouses (mostly women). According to Muslim personal law, conversion to marriage is the only way to marry a non-Muslim. Hinduism only allows monotony and those who want to get married a second time take another course. There is no provision regarding caste determination of children born from such marriages. The Special Marriage Act, 1954 is not compatible with the backwardness of society. The validity of Article 226 is being debated in the context of cancellation of interracial marriage by the High Court.
The decision of the Allahabad High Court was based on religious conversion only for marriage. It refused to intervene on a writ petition demanding police protection for a couple, noting that the bride had converted from Islam to Hinduism solely for marriage. Such an accelerated conversion was found to be unacceptable, citing the 2014 decision. The 2014 decision questioned the change of heart in the principles of the new religion or conversions without any punishment.
Inter-faith couples keep their religious beliefs separate and opt for marriage under the Special Marriage Act. The Supreme Court held that marriage is a highly personal matter. A person's right to marry a person of choice or to choose one's partner is an aspect of constitutional freedom as well as privacy. In 2018, the Supreme Court reiterated this position of law in the Hadiya case, where it dismissed the allegation that Hadiya was forcibly converted to another religion for marriage.
The Supreme Court has struck down laws restricting individual freedoms because such a law "is not only overboard and ambiguous, but also has a strong impact on a person's freedom of choice". To avoid inclusion of further laws, the Special Marriage Act, 1954 should be adopted at the mental and social level. Rights should not be exploited; It is not wise at all to convert only for marriage.
The diverse social groups of India are so mixed that it is not easy to separate one from the other. Social endosmosis can only occur when we evoke social feelings of love and fraternity that cross the boundaries of race and religion, gender, sexuality, class and language. If a couple wants to marry despite their faith, the state must enable and facilitate them to use their freedom, not to prohibit it. The state should relax the ambiguous process under the Special Marriage Act to facilitate and promote inter-marriages, rather than bring the Love Jihad 'law.
Research Scholar, Poet and Journalist
333,Pari Vatika, Kaushalya Bhawan,
Barwa, Hisar-Bhiwani (Haryana)-127045
Contact- 94665-26148, 01255-281381
No comments:
Post a Comment