Three bigots walk into a bar, and drown it with their stupidity!

So the case against reading down of 377 supreme court is going to be heard sometime this year.

Turns out, there have been a large number of additions to the original petitioner who wanted to criminalize adult consensual sex.

On Saturday, the number of petitioners in the Supreme Court - challenging the July 2009 decision of the Delhi High Court to strike down an anti-sodomy law - stood at 16 from the original two.

Two Christian church coalitions, three Muslim NGOs, two Hindu astrologers, a disciple of yoga guru Baba Ramdev, an NGO run by a former Delhi police officer, and an environmentalist, will be among those in the Supreme Court when it hears an appeal next month against the overturning of the Indian Penal Code' section 377.

Only one person, film director and Rajya Sabha MP Shyam Benegal, has quietly joined the original petitioner, Delhi NGO Naz Foundation, in support of gay rights in the Supreme Court.

Here is what I think of the petitioners:

1) Christian Church Coalitions - Really? I can only give you a fair hearing when you actually punish those members of your clergy who were caught molesting little children. Until then, how about shuting the fuck up on morality? KThanksbai.

2) Three Muslim NGOs - Is having just a single partner the thing you have a problem with? Because, really, I'd expect polygamists to be a little sheepish (Sheep, Also!) about criticizing other people's sexual habits?

3) Hindu Astrologers - Yeah, I'd take you seriously if you'd be able to predict ONE fucking thing correctly. Or that you could see that punch in your fucking face that's in your future!

4) Police Officer NGO - This is the same guy who appeared on tv last year and wanted to have sex with a female dog. And somehow, kept calling his wife a bitch? Confused!

5) Environmentalist - Dude, firstly no one is having buttsex with teh environment. I hope you realize that if it wasn't for Lesbians, there would be no environment to save. Also, I don't have documents to prove it right now, but Mother Earth is probably a big ol' lez too.

Now, here are some of the arguments that are being presented:

Chairman of the Jammu and Kashmir Panthers Party, Prof Bhim Singh, said in his petition that the Delhi High Court ruling would be "a disaster for the Indian defence forces and the security of the country… in deserted areas".

"Seedlings of homosexuality developed among the (European and US) soldiers during the first and the second world war when they had to stay back in the forests and the hills for years without having any access to meet their sexual desires," said Singh, whose party otherwise fights for the reorganisation of J&K.

Yeah, I know!!

Where do I even begin with this guy? So I'm not gonna even try!

But I'm sure he's pulling his arguments out of his own deserted area!

"My challenge of the (Delhi) high court judgement is that it should not have relied on foreign judgements," said Mushtaq Ahmed, counsel for Mumbai's Raza Academy, a 32-year-old Islamic advocacy group. "We can't impose a foreign cultural morality today."

Hey, dude from whatever academy, let's go on a little tour. Thousands of years ago, when India had only one religion and everything was considered Hinduism (Jainism, Buddhism etc.), and everyone had sex with everyone else (it wasn't the land of the Kama Sutra for nothing!) and then some weird people wanted land and money and shit and so they invaded this county and along with themselves brought their religion(s) and their own morality. So, India had homosexuality much before it had Islam or Christianity or mughlai food. Therefore, using your own logic, I could say, STOP TRYING TO IMPOSE YOUR FOREIGN MORALITY ON US!! But, I'm not going to do that. Cause I ain't no uneducated bigot moron who doesn't know what the frack he's talking about! Because, two can play the same game. I just choose not to.

Yeah, so these are the people we're up against.

They shouldn't be out there presenting arguments for a case, they should be institutionalised, or have their own show on Fox News. These people can't string together a coherent sentence, let alone justify their bigotry.

Most of our judges know better than that and this makes me hopeful that the Supreme Court will come out on the side of equal rights too!

This post would have gotten beaten up if it had ever gone to a pub

So almost every politican and their hooch drinking uncle seems to have come out against "pub culture". Yesterday, our most exalted Health Minister said that he is coming up with a policy which will put an end to "pub culture". Yes, Ladies and Gentlemen, this is all part of the government's plan to protect us from the terrorists. If we adopt the same laws as the taliban, maybe they wouldn't train people to come and kill us and all?

But why does everybody seem to change their mind suddenly? Not because pubs haven't existed in our country. They have been here for decades. The real wink,wink nudge, nudge reason why such a large number of people in power have been feigning this outrage is because they seem to have just discovered that young, "impressionable" woman are now regular visitors to these places which dare to serve decadent western values along with each portion of chicken wings. Our esteemed leaders were under the impression that only lose woman who failed their medical examination and had no choice but to marry a man with a regular source of income, who could only be found drowning his sorrows in a city pub, were the ones who frequented pubs, and not those young teenage women who are of marriageable age and who nowadays, because of "pub culture" know more about different types of Tequila than about different ways to cook eggplant.

Suddenly these people seem to have discovered that it's the twenty first century and that women refused to be treated as free vending machines who alternate between turning out food and popping out children.

Many of these "leaders" might not agree with the methods of the goatfuckers who attacked those women at the bar in Mangalore, but they all agree with the sentiments. Of course, now the horrendous act will be justified using crazy right wing nut job logic according to which the woman were asking for it because of dressing "to provoke" and stepping outside their house without the company of a minimum of three male relatives.

These people think that by just putting a girl and a boy in a room together means that they would end up having sex. Just because most of these people were born centuries before us (some of them literally. I mean how old do you think Arjun Singh is? Multiply it by a hundred. That's his approximate age.) does not mean they know better.

We "youngsters" (they say it like we're smug little assholes) can decide which jackass politician to vote for, we can decide which brokerage firm loses our money in the stock market, we can decide which pious neighborhood we would like to desecrate with our unholy presence. In fact we can even decide how many children NOT to have (unless of course we're living in a joint family. Then it's the decision of the joint family council. Just like they show in Survivor.) So, I think we can pretty much decide how much alcohol we require so that foreplay is minimized. I mean we're Indian. The sooner we "close the deal" the sooner we can go back to praying to God for forgiving us for having sex without the intent of having children.

Legislating your own sixth century morals is against the freedom that our constitution pretends to give us. What pisses me of is when I hear people our age talk the same drivel these old farts do. They also buy into this myth of "culture". Yes. Sure. Because it's served us so well over the past few centuries. *coughsecondlargestpopulationintheworldcough*

In our country, people can get away with murder, with creating mob hysteria, with forcing little kids to work below minimum wage, but the heavens will fall and the gates of hell will devour us all if two, law abiding, tax paying citizens just want to have a cocktail together.

Makes you want to hit the bottle, dunnit?