Enter your email address to receive our daily LGBT news roundup

You're free to unsubscribe at any time.

UK Government: India’s Supreme Court ruling against gay sex is a ‘matter for India’

Post your comment

Comments on this article are now closed.

Reader comments

  1. Yet gay British athletes (and others) in Russia aren’t a matter for the British government either, so who the hell does the British government care about, because it sure as hell isn’t their own citizens nor citizens of other countries. Idiots.

  2. Michael Walsh 11 Dec 2013, 8:56pm

    Germany’s invasion of Poland was a matter for Poland, wasn’t it? No, it wasn’t. We were far more heroic and rightfully so, it would seem, back in the day.

    1. this statment is typical of british government.

      despite having military pact with poland before german’s invasion, brits did nothing for couple of years, which would suggest that they thought it was matter for german government what it does with its military power

  3. That is all the UK government can come up with…..utterly pathetic and weak. Try standing up the equal rights of all regardless.

    1. Yes, but look who is in charge of the FCO, Mr. Spineless from Yorkshire. So Britain as a member of the Commonwealth and the country responsible for these iniquitous laws in the first place, has no skin in the game. Right :(
      Guess it won’t be any of their concern either when Indians here in this country start to claim asylum for violations of their human rights and persecution if they return to India !!!!
      Oh!, thats right thats a problem for the disfunctional Home Office and the nonfunctioning UKBA.

  4. Kev Diltwick 11 Dec 2013, 9:01pm

    Disgusting.

    It’s not a matter for India; it’s a matter for humanity. It was Voltaire who said something along the lines of every man having a burden of responsibility for the good deeds we have an opportunity to do, but that we do not take.

    If we sit on idly by and ignore this newly justified, legally enshrined persecution for which we historically aren’t blameless to begin with, then what right do we have to call ourselves moral?

    How spineless of my government to wipe themselves of all responsibility like this. Very disappointing.

  5. Scott Rose 11 Dec 2013, 9:01pm

    Right. Because using governmental institutions to terrorize a minority doesn’t demand that we all condemn the government doing that terrorizing.

    1. Michael Anthony 12 Dec 2013, 3:11pm

      I agree. But before the UK goes after India, perhaps the EU needs to have full equality in all member countries. It looks hypocritical to condemn and actively punish India, when some member countries have their own personal hate and discrimination laws in place.

  6. Disgraceful response.

    Shame on Cameron and his party of bigots.

    If it was any other minority being criminalised I doubt the response would be so pathetic.

  7. If it was not for Brazil, the BRIC Nations would be the Quadrangle of Evil.

    Maybe we should rename it the RIC nations.

    1. Um, why bring China into it? Homosexuality is legal in China and there is no anti-propaganda law there. Anyway, I would not put China or India at the same level with Russia. Russia is in its own sphere of homophobia.

  8. I agree with the UK government’s position. Obviously the position of the Indian Supreme Court is unfortunate but we don’t have the right to tell other people or societies the difference between right and wrong; it’s patronising and frankly illiberal.

    1. Except the anti gay laws were imposed by Britain to begin with, now they’re pretending it had nothing to do with us.

    2. You are wrong. It’s a matter of human rights. Such laws are like genocide.

    3. That There Other David 11 Dec 2013, 11:46pm

      It’s that sort of twisted logic that leads to situations such as the UK police turning a blind eye to female genital mutilation, carried out for cultural reasons in UK territory on UK citizens by their parents who have come here from elsewhere.

      Some things are just wrong. Real harm caused because of “religious” or “moral” reasons falls slap-bang into the middle of that category.

      We have our standards, and even if theirs are different we should shout about ours. Maybe they’ll dismiss it completely, but maybe it would result in someone listening occasionally. If we never speak up how will we ever know?

    4. Jock S. Trap 12 Dec 2013, 11:44am

      So what about the rights of All human beings to be Equal and the right to Freedom?

      Should we really say that their appalling abuses and lack of rights is to be accepted along with the imprisonments, tortures, murders…

      Where is Our humanity if we just fall by the wayside, ignoring the life of others?

      We All have the right to be treated as human beings.

      A Chosen Religion Does not have the right to dictate how others are born!

    5. Ah, the old equation of “Liberal” = “bad” rather than meaning “just”. Typical of the right wing, always the first to label anyone promoting Human rights and equality as “meddlers”.

      You won’t like this, but the vast majority of people are now considered “liberal”, and that’s primarily because most people are inherently good. They don’t associate themselves to dictatorial opinions where a minority controls the freedoms of others.

      It’s pretty simple… what others do when it harms no one is not the business of anyone else. For one group to try to control another based on their ideology is sickening and unacceptable to the vast majority of free-thinking people.

    6. Frank Boulton 14 Dec 2013, 7:51am

      Sam, what’s illiberal for taking a stand against inequality, discrimination and persecution? We all have, or should have, the right to voice an opinion.

  9. Pathetic, the criminalisation of a harmless and innate natural minority of tens of millions of people and the effective removal of equal protection of law and opening them up to blackmail and persecution for consensual victimless behaviour against the stated violation of their human rights on International Human Rights Day – no less, is no concern of the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. To say this is a less than adequate response would be a gross understatement.
    So will the spineless Rt. Hon. William Hague be issuing a new travel warning notice for India? How does he explain his “Matter for India” to the thousands of Indian ex-pats and recent new UK citizens of Indian decent, not to mention those seeking asylum for persecution and violation of their human rights and the inability of the Indian state to protect them if they return to India, yeah, obviously none of our concern, nothing to see here.

    1. The UN are going to have to alter their map on this video ! and the countries criminalising gay people!

      https://www.unfe.org/en/actions/human-rights-day

  10. From the point of principle, the ruling is a matter for all people and not just India.

    However from the hypothetical point of view of actually supporting the rights of gay Indians and wanting progress for their cause, I wonder if the FCO is calculating that the British government lecturing India about laws created by Britain while it ruled India might be counter-productive and come across as entitled.

    It’s a bit like calls for military intervention in Zimbabwe. Ethics/logistics aside, no matter how bad things got or get there, the idea of British troops “liberating” the place would carry so much colonial baggage that instead we always politely ask South Africa if they’ll keep an eye on it.

    The silly thing is it’s an angle that the UK could actually use to the advantage of equality in the Commonwealth – “These are laws which our systemically racist and imperial government inflicted on other people. Just as with the widespread abuse, exploitation and mistreatment of native peoples, the government of [India/wherever] should now consign this shameful chapter of British history and its imperial attitudes to the scrapheap.” Go full-on flagellation, link homophobia explicitly to colonialism, and push LGBT rights as anti-colonialism.

  11. Can’t help thinking those opposed to the recent ruling by the Supreme Court of India aren’t tainted by feelings of cultural and imperial superiority. India has every right to decide it’s own course when it comes to laws regarding it’s own identity.

  12. Just bizarre, what a heartless and cavalier attitude. Peoples lives are being destroyed and it apparently means nothing, UK Government washes it’s hands of the matter.
    Is this indifference caused by sheer ignorance or by the calculated wickedness of prejudice?

  13. Not a matter for us, seriously, it’s our old laws they are bringing back, we imposed that stupid law on them, of course it’s our business.

  14. U.K. has no right what so ever to criticise India and how it’s courts judge, smacks of cultural superiorty.

    1. Frank Boulton 14 Dec 2013, 7:58am

      We’re all entitled to criticize whatever we want to criticize. It’s called Freedom of Speech.

  15. Having sex with a person of the opposite sex is against the order of nature for a gay person, make this a slogan for the Indian gay minority and plaster it everywhere.

    1. Excellent point!

  16. what’s with the supreme courts in socially retarded pseudo democracies, that they are more concerned with moral fabric of the law than with its legal position

  17. GingerlyColors 12 Dec 2013, 6:51am

    What a cop out! Mr. Cameron, please phone the Indian Prime Minister and tell him in no uncertain terms that India is not welcome at next year’s Commonwealth Games unless they overturn that ludicrous law for once and for all.

    1. That There Other David 12 Dec 2013, 10:59am

      Cameron would never even broach the subject, too many business opportunities might be lost in his view. Salmond might, although only in private and away from cameras.

      Our politicians are pretty spineless all in all. Boris is the only senior one capable of speaking his mind, but sadly his politics are in the wrong place in so many ways.

  18. I can see a bit of good in this as it is now up to the Indian parliament to finally repeal the law.
    As India is a democratic nation their parliament and their judiciary are separate; as indeed they are in the UK and many many other countries.
    When the law is finally repealed, by parliament, then that will be an end to it for once and all.

    1. Bobbleobble 12 Dec 2013, 10:26am

      If the court had upheld the previous decision yesterday then that would have been the end of it once and for all. The court is empowered to strike down legislation which runs contrary to the constitution. Instead what they chose to do was recriminalise a minority in a very socially conservative country where there is little chance of parliament acting at any time in the near future. There is no good in this.

  19. “Section 377 of India’s penal code bans “sex against the order of nature”, which is widely interpreted to mean gay sex,…”

    It is not scientifically accurate to refer to homosexual sex as “sex outside the order of nature” There are close to 1,500 species, ranging from primates to gut worms, have been observed engaging in such behaviour which may include sexual activity, courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting among same-sex animal pairs.and this is well documented for 500 of them.
    “One species in which exclusive homosexual orientation occurs, however, is that of domesticated sheep (Ovis aries). “About 10% of rams (males) refuse to mate with ewes (females) but do readily mate with other rams.” (wiki)

  20. Jock S. Trap 12 Dec 2013, 11:40am

    And yet I thought the British Government was to publically promote equality.

    Saying it’s a matter for India is a cop out and not good enough.

    We shouldn’t be hearing about those countries going backwards as a matter for them but instead, helping them to accept equality for all who just want to love their partner.

    We should be promoting Freedoms not Oppression.

    Shame on India!

  21. A Matter for India? – this is matter for ALL humanity – ignorance and the brainwashed superstitious are to blame for ALL inhumanity on this planet – when will it all be marginalised and treated with the contempt it deserves?

    Religion now and forever stands for hatred,stupidity and bigotry

    1. Yes, “sex against the order of nature” applied in a derogative sense to homosexuality expresses a prejudiced moralising view based on ignorant religious superstition and is not a view backed by scientific field research or factual evidence.

    2. I don’t think you can blame India’s majority religion, Hinduism, for this. The laws are old British colonial ones and this mixed with the general rigid social conservatism in India is the reason for India being behind on LGBT issues. The Abrahamic faiths are far more homophobic than Hinduism or Buddhism.

      Shame on India’s Supreme Court in any case.

  22. Discrimination wherever it occurs and whenever it occurs is a matter for all of us and the Governments we vote for. Is the Tory UK Government returning to the days of Thatcher when apatheid was a matter for the South African Government?

    Write to your MPs and protest that anti gay laws are a matter for all of us.

These comments are un-moderated and do not necessarily represent the views of PinkNews.co.uk. If you believe that a comment is inappropriate or libellous, please contact us.

Top commenters this week

Latest stories

See all