From                                                                 Date: 14-04-2023.



No. 123, Addl. Law Chambers,

High Court Buildings,

Chennai-600 104.

Tamil Nadu.


1. Hon’ble Shri Narendra Modi

Prime Minister of India

Prime Minister's Office
South Block, Raisina Hill,
New Delhi-110011.

2. Hon'ble Shri Kiren Rijiju

Minister of Law & Justice

3rd Floor, 'C' Wing, Lok Nayak Bhawan,
Khan Market, New Delhi - 110003.

3. Secretary to Government,

Government of India,

Ministry of Law and Justice.

4th Floor, A-Wing, Shastri Bhawan

New Delhi-110 001.

Most Honourable sir,

Sub: Some points for consideration in respect of

        Same-sex marriages in India pending before

        the Hon’ble Supreme Court of India-Reg.


          I am a practicing advocate in the High Court of Judicature at Madras, with 38 years of bar experience. I am a Roman Catholic Christian by birth and living according to the teaching of our Lord Jesus Christ and the Tradition of the Catholic Church. Our forefathers were converted into Christianity 300 years before. I am hailing from Kanyakumari District, our family has the genealogy from 1754 onwards till date. (      

         1. The Supreme Court of India heard the arguments on the plea seeking legal validation of same-sex marriages in India. The Supreme Court noted that legalizing same-sex marriage in India is a ‘seminal Issue’ and noted that a constitutional bench of five judges would further make a decision on the plea. The apex court posted the plea for arguments on 18th April. In this regard, I am also submitting some facts for consideration.

        2. The Indian government opposes recognizing same-sex marriages, it said in a filing to the Supreme Court on 12th March, 2023, urging the court to reject challenges to the current legal framework lodged by LGBT couples. “Living together as partners and having sexual relationship by same sex individuals ... is not comparable with the Indian family unit concept of a husband, a wife and children," the ministry argued. The court cannot be asked "to change the entire legislative policy of the country deeply embedded in religious and societal norms", it said.

         3.  The Ministry of Law believes that while there may be various forms of relationships in society, the legal recognition of marriage is for heterosexual relationships and the state has a legitimate interest in maintaining this. In recent months at least 15 pleas, some by gay couples, have been filed asking the court to recognize same-sex marriages, setting the stage for a legal face-off with Hon’ble Prime Minister Shri. Narendra Modi's government. "When the question of granting recognition, legal sanction to a relationship is concerned, that is essentially a function of the legislature and for more than one reason," India's Solicitor General Tushar Mehta, arguing on behalf of the government, told the court.

       4.  The Ministry of Law believes that while there may be various forms of relationships in society, the legal recognition of marriage is for heterosexual relationships and the state has a legitimate interest in maintaining this, according to the filing seen by Reuters, which has not been made public. "Living together as partners and having sexual relationship by same sex individuals ... is not comparable with the Indian family unit concept of a husband, a wife and children," the ministry argued. The court cannot be asked "to change the entire legislative policy of the country deeply embedded in religious and societal norms", it said.

        5.  "As petitioners we have received wide support from people from all walks of life and it does not seem to me that most Indians feel injured by the thought of some loving families getting legal rights," one of the litigants in the current case, businessman Uday Raj Anand, told Reuters after the government filed the reply in court. In an historic verdict in 2018, India's top court decriminalized homosexuality by scrapping a colonial-era ban on gay sex. The current case is being seen as a further important development on LGBT rights in the country.

         6. The issue has stoked emotions in the media and in parliament, where a member of Shri. Modi's ruling Hindu nationalist party in December asked the government to strongly oppose the petitions filed in the top court. The government has argued that any change to the legal structure should be the domain of the elected parliament, not the court.

        7.  Hon’ble Prime Minister Shri. Narendra Modi’s spoke at Dashamah Soundarya Lahari Parayanotsava Mahasamarpane in Bengaluru on 29-10-2017 India's cultural heritage holds the answers to all global problems. Further, Shri. Modi said, Adi Shankaracharya gave the principle of Advaita or Oneness, where there is no existence of Dvaita. There is no possibility of conflict where there is no dualism. In different parts of the world whenever there is an obstruction in the path of life the countries set their eyes on India. In this way, all the problems of the world can be resolved by our traditions. We have inherited these traditions in our life. Further, Shri. Modi categorically said that “if today's young man is reading everything from his mobile phone then how will he get to know about the traditional knowledge hidden in the books? Who will let him know about this great heritage? So, telling the school students about our Indian culture and values through the programme Vivekadipani and through quiz competitions is a great initiative by Swamiji. This is a great service even for future generations.

         8.  Hon’ble Prime Minister Shri. Narendra Modi during the 95th Edition of 'Mann Ki Baat' on 27-11-2022 said that our country is home to the oldest traditions in the world. Therefore, it is also our responsibility to preserve our traditions and traditional knowledge, to promote it, and to take it forward as much as possible. Further, he urged one and all to take up similar initiatives and work for the preservation of cultural styles and traditions in their respective region and areas.

         9.  Further, Hon'ble Prime Minister Shri. Narendra Modi has said that Tradition and Technology are the temperaments of New India. Mr. Modi, while addressing the gatherings during the inauguration of the Barisu Kannada Dim Dimava Cultural Festival at Talkatora Stadium in New Delhi on Saturday, February 25, 2023 evening said that the country is moving forward together with development and heritage, and progress and traditions.

        10. The Court cannot go against the Natural Order and Moral Order.

       11. China went against the natural course and custom and enacted the law that “one family has one child”. Following this Order, the Chinese military faces a significant challenge as the fertility rate falls in 2020. Finally, China has no other way rather than to introduce a three-child policy. The change was approved during a Politburo meeting chaired by President Xi Jinping, according to the official news agency Xinhua.

        12. On July 4, 2011, the then Health Minister Hon’ble Mr. Ghulam Nabi Azad, derided “homosexuality as an unnatural “Disease” from the West, unfortunately, this disease has come to our country too…. where a man has sex with another man, which is completely unnatural and should not happen but does”. The minister said this during a conference held in New Delhi on HIV/AIDS, wherein Hon’ble the then Prime Minister of India Dr. Manmohan Singh, Congress Party President Mrs. Sonia Gandhi, and some of the Government Ministers were also present at the conference.

        13. But, on the next day, July 5, 2011, the gay activists strongly condemned and demanded that the minister “should publicly apologize”, and in Chennai one NGO-LGBT rainbow coalition staged a protest, demanding an apology from the minister. It is unfortunate that the protesting people are not gays, then what do they want? For what purpose? The NGO is run by whose money? But they want publicity under the name and the banner of an NGO. In reality, India is not only a conservative country but also tradition a following country. In reality, GAY people are very microscopic in India.

          14. Everybody talking about global warming and to preserve natural resources to enhance our life securely as well as satisfactorily in future. But, in the human society, somebody goes against nature  and compels everybody to follow that way. It is shame on the legislature who was responsible to enact the same-sex marriage law against natural order.

         15. 2000 years ago the Roman Writer and Politician Cicero in his book “Laws” (I, 10): defined as follows:- There is in fact a true law, namely right reason which is in accordance with nature, applies to all men, and is unchangeable and eternal …. It will not lay down one rule at Rome and another at Athens, nor will it be one rule today and another tomorrow. But there will be one law, eternal and unchangeable, binding at all times upon all peoples; and there will be, as it were, one common master and ruler of men, namely God, who is the author of this law, its interpreter and its sponsor. The man who will not obey it will abandon his better self and, in denying the true nature of man, will thereby suffer the severest of penalties, though he has escaped all the other consequences which men call punishment”.

       16. In this single and short paragraph Cicero summarizes all the essential features of “natural law”: First, it is the direct expression of the Divine Will. Therefore it is universal, eternal and unchangeable. Second, its rules can and must be found with the help of right reason. Third, man has a sacred obligation to obey these rules. Whenever he breaks them, he violates his own “true nature” and therefore automatically punishes himself.

         17.  Thus, the concept of the Natural Law implies that moral principles are inherent in nature, and they tell us exactly how we should behave. As long as we obey them, we fulfil our true destiny. All our actions will not only be natural, but also perfectly moral. In other words, if everybody acted according to his nature, i.e., his “better self”, the world could forever live in harmony, justice and peace. Cicero was, of course, by no means the first to suggest this appealing idea. Long before him a school of Greek philosophers called Stoics, and before him Aristotle and Plato had made the same basic suggestion”.

          18. Natural law depends on natural order. Morality and Natural Order is interlinked. Natural Order is pertaining to Nature and morality is pertaining to human behaviour that is in line with moral science.

What is natural order?

          a). Spring, summer, autumn and winter, the four seasons are in every calendar year. It will come and go without any interruption. This is a natural order. The sun rising from East and setting in West is happening every day and no one can change it. So, this is a natural order.

          b). Likewise, a female crow lay eggs in the nest, while the brooding time come the male crow that was responsible for the fertilization with the female, is to help the female, till the chick to fly and go independent. This is a natural order.

          c). The female crocodile lay eggs in a safe place. For 80 days the female crocodile is to watch over them and after that go over the eggs, therein the crocodile is to take the new born crocodiles in its jaws and transport them to a safer place. This is a natural order.

            d). The cuckoo bird is known to lay its eggs in the nest of other birds, usually crows because the cuckoo bird does not make its own nest. Therefore, it lays its eggs in the nest of crows where the crow takes care of her eggs and her young ones. This is the natural order.

          19. Likewise the ‘moral law’ is in the human society. If we follow the moral order, the human society will be safer. If the human society does not follow the moral order then it causes the destruction of human society, and that leads to the destruction of the planet Mother Earth.

          20. "Climate change" means a change of climate that is attributed directly or indirectly to human activity that alters the composition of the global atmosphere and which is in addition to


natural climate variability observed over comparable periods. So, it is proved that if the world is going against the natural course the world will face the consequences. That is why nowadays everybody talking about global warming and calls for "Save Mother Earth".

          21. If the world is going against Natural order and moral order, then there is no peace in the world. Ultimately, chaos and confusion will prevail in the world.

           22. St. Thomas Aquinas (1224-1274 AD) was the greatest medieval Roman Catholic theologian distinguished from types of law, that is:

(i)    Eternal law: the justice of God, which is almost identical with

       His reason,

(ii.). Natural law: the eternal law implanted by God in nature and

       in the human mind,

(iii). Divine law: God’s overt revelation of His will and

(iv). Human Law: derived from natural law.

The first three types of law express the will of a heavenly legislator and therefore clearly fall into the realm of theology. Only the fourth type, human law, can be said to have some secular basis. However, since it is derived from divine law, its ultimate validity still has to be decided on moral and religious grounds.

         23. Morality is the basis of all things and truth is the substance of all morality.

         24. The most important thing in the world is the “FAMILY” which means, Father, Mother, and Children. If this family system is lost then this Universe's Existence is for whom.  If this traditional family system is lost then there is no meaning in the existence of this universe.

        25. Two persons of the opposite sex living together and to bear children is marriage. It is natural. Two opposite living cells are joined in a womb and form a new being, whether it is human person or animal kingdom or botanical world. Civil union is a friendship, but same sex persons living together is not a family, any time they may be separated and go alone. It is like a partnership firm, it is an understanding until they leave at their will.

          26. But the natural family there is a father, a mother and children. Here they may be separated, but the children can’t call somebody else as father or mother. People should go with the nature, to go with the human behaviour, to go with civilized society, even in the animal kingdom they never go against the nature. The people must allow the world to go as it is.
          27. The West has been pushing for the approval of abnormal deviant sexual practices as alternative lifestyle. The Western World, allows civil unions, providing state–level spousal right to same sex couples. Homosexuality is a sexual perversion and in no way natural.

Legalizing gay marriage would leave “society destroyed” because the family is the basic cell of human society. If we permit homosexuality, then it will lead the society as a fornicating society.

          28. Moreover, Lesbian couples are twice as likely as gay men to end civil partnerships as 'divorces'. Because, Marriage is not a good model for lesbian couples, because they lack the natural complementarity of the sexes. (Annexure-1 and 2).

          29. To commemorate this milestone in LGBTQ history, we are taking a look at countries around the world that have officially legalized same-sex marriage. Nearly 35 out of 195 countries have passed laws allowing gay marriage, according to the internet sources.


 a).  23 countries have legalized same-sex marriage nationally through legislation. Among these, Australia, Ireland and Switzerland legalized same-sex marriage through legislation only after nation-wide votes.

 b).  10 countries have legalized same-sex marriage nationally through court decisions — Austria, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Slovenia (followed by national legislation), South Africa, Taiwan and the United States of America.

c).   2 countries, South Africa and Taiwan, enacted legislation legalizing same-sex marriage after courts mandated them to do so.

          30. If we allowed this gay marriage, then in the future, the following people will be claiming the following matters as their rights. That is;

i.  ‘Marry your rapist’ laws in 20 countries still allow   perpetrators

     to escape justice. (Annexure-4).

ii.  New Turkish law will allow men to legally rape young girls –

      if they marry them. (Annexure-5).

iii. Paedophiles rebranding themselves as 'Minor-Attracted 

     Persons’, seek same protection as LGBT community: Report.


iv.  California Legislature Passes Bill Reducing Penalties for Oral,

      Anal Sex with willing Children. (Annexure-7).

v.   Parent files lawsuit in New York asking for permission to

      marry their child. (Annexure-8).

vii. In the future, somebody may publically sex with the animals.


          Therefore, I request your good self that as per your words, our country is moving forward together with development and heritage, and progress and traditions. The family system that is, Father, Mother, and Children system should be saved.

 Enclosures:                                                     Yours faithfully,

Annexures 1 to 9.

                                                                     (G. Alex Benziger).



Skyrocketing lesbian ‘divorce’ rates show failure of same-sex couples imitating marriage


Marriage is not a good model for lesbian couples, because they lack the natural complementarity of the sexes.


Joseph Shaw      Fri Jan 8, 2021 - 10:41 pm EST

January 8, 2021 (LifeSiteNews) — It seems that women in the U.K. who consider themselves “married” to other women are separating in soaring numbers — at rates higher than actual divorces, which is to say among heterosexual couples, who alone can marry. One lesbian activist, Natalie Drew, blames this uptick in lesbian “divorces” on same-sex “marriage” itself.

The Daily Mail reports that “divorces” among same-sex couples increased from 428 in 2018 to 822 in 2019, and of the 2019 figure, almost three quarters are lesbian couples. (There were also 107,599 actual divorces that year in the U.K., an increase of 20% on the previous year.) Drew ran a clinic to help women in lesbian couples conceive children, and, as she told the Daily Mail, “a third of the 586 lesbian couples [sic] she helped to have babies between 2011 and 2015 have split up.”

Drew’s argument is that the ceremony and terminology of marriage, as opposed to “civil partnership,” encourages lesbian couples to adopt a traditional specialization of roles: “You get caught up in these expected roles, one being the breadwinner, going out earning the money, and one being the mother.”

This may seem surprising, as the legal rights and duties of marriage and civil partnerships in the U.K. are identical, but it’s an argument we’ve heard before. The heterosexual couple who fought in the courts for civil partnerships to be extended beyond same-sex couples (as in due course they were) said they wanted a legal relationship free of the “patriarchal baggage” of marriage.

It seems to be just the word “marriage” that is at issue here, since it has been stripped of patriarchal associations as far as the law is concerned. The U.K.’s Law Commission has gone even farther, taking a few moments out of its busy work of proposing more censorship in order to suggest that the legal guidelines to marriage ceremonies themselves be junked, so people can marry where and when they want, and using whatever words they wish — as long as it is (as they put it) “safe and dignified.” Will this be enough to eradicate the “patriarchal baggage” of the word “marriage”? Certainly, they are going to give it their best shot.

There is another aspect to this. Natalie Drew was in the business of facilitating women in same-sex couples having a baby. What happens when a woman has a baby? Well, the baby needs to be looked after. If there are two adults around, at least one of them will have to be at home, at least for a few months, to do this looking after — preferably the mother, who will be best placed, you know, to breastfeed the baby, and will anyway need some time to recuperate after the birth. It will then make some sense if it is the other one who goes to work, if someone needs to bring home the bacon. Is this not all fairly obvious? But if this is how things are, it is not the terminology of marriage that is the problem so much as the biology of human reproduction.

Biology, the feminists said, is not destiny, but it does have a nasty way of coming back to bite you just when you thought you’d chased it away. Drew offered her clients the chance to have a baby without the involvement of a man — at least, without the involvement of a man they had to have very much to do with. What she could not so easily banish was the masculine role: the role of the person who has not had the baby, who is needed for other tasks to protect and sustain the household while childbirth and child-rearing are going on.

Drew does have a point, to this extent: marriage is not a good model for lesbian couples, because they lack the natural complementarity of the sexes. Insofar as same-sex couples buy into the traditional model, they are going to find themselves struggling to adapt it to a quite different psychological and biological reality. For all that, as I say, the legal treatment of marriage has left us little more than the word “marriage,” it is presumably with some view to buying into its traditions, its social recognition and status, and its durability that lesbian couples are motivated to go through a form of marriage. Drew’s argument seems to be that what they want, they are not well adapted to having.



NewsUKHome News

Lesbian couples twice as likely as gay men to end civil partnership as 'divorces' up by 20% 

Emily Dugan  Tuesday 08 October 2013 16:33  Comments



Lesbian couples are nearly twice as likely as gay men to end a civil partnership, according to the latest government figures.

The number of same-sex couples ending their civil unions leapt by 20 per cent last year, seven years after their introduction in 2005. Overall there were 794 dissolutions in 2012, almost 60 per cent of which were female couples, figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) show.




arriage Equality Around the World


Produced by the HRC Foundation

The Human Rights Campaign Foundation tracks developments in the legal recognition of same-sex marriage around the world. Working with our network of alumni and partners, we lift up the voices of local advocates and share tools, resources, and lessons learned to empower movements for marriage equality. For more information about HRC’s work in support of marriage equality and the full equal rights for LGBTQ+ people--including protections from violence, discrimination and other issues, visit

Current State of Marriage Equality

There are currently 34 countries where same-sex marriage is legal: Andorra, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Costa Rica, Cuba, Denmark, Ecuador, Finland, France, Germany, Iceland, Ireland, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Slovenia, South Africa, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Taiwan, the United Kingdom, the United States of America and Uruguay.

Processes of Legalization

  • 23 countries have legalized same-sex marriage nationally through legislation. Among these, Australia, Ireland and Switzerland legalized same-sex marriage through legislation only after nation-wide votes.
  • 10 countries have legalized same-sex marriage nationally through court decisions — Austria, Brazil, Colombia, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Mexico, Slovenia (followed by national legislation), South Africa, Taiwan and the United States of America.
  • 2 countries, South Africa and Taiwan, enacted legislation legalizing same-sex marriage after courts mandated them to do so.

Countries that Legalized Marriage Equality in 2022

Cuba: On September 25, 2022, in a national referendum, Cubans approved a Family Code that included provisions allowing same-sex couples to marry.

Andorra: On July 21, 2022, the unicameral legislature of Andorra, the General Council, voted unanimously to amend the country's civil union law to include marriage equality for same-sex couples.

Slovenia: On July 8th, 2022, the Constitutional Court of Slovenia ruled that the ban on same-sex marriages violated the constitution of Slovenia and gave the Slovenian parliament 6 months to pass legislation accordingly, which it did on October 4. The ruling took effect immediately after the court decision.

Countries that Legalized Marriage Equality in 2021

Chile: On December 9, 2021, the president of Chile signed into law a marriage equality bill that passed in the Senate on December 7 and the lower house on Nov. 23. Same sex civil unions had been legal since 2015. Slovenia: On July 8th, 2022, a ruling from the constitutional court of Slovenia decided that the ban on same-sex marriages violated the constitution of Slovenia.

Switzerland: On December 16, 2020, the Swiss Parliament overwhelmingly passed legislation extending marriage to same-sex couples. A public referendum held in September 2021 overwhelmingly confirmed support for marriage equality by 64%.

Countries that Legalized Marriage Equality in 2020

Costa Rica: The Supreme Court of Costa Rica ruled in November 2018 in support of the historic January 2018 advisory opinion of the



‘Marry your rapist’ laws in 20 countries still allow perpetrators to escape justice

This article is more than 1 year old

Critical UN report says the legislation is ‘deeply wrong’, subjugates women and shifts the burden of guilt on to the victim

Wed 14 Apr 2021 09.52 BST


A 2016 protest in Beirut against article 522 of the Lebanese penal code which shielded rapists from prosecution on the condition that they married their victim. It was repealed in 2017. Photograph: Patrick Baz/Gettyimages


Twenty countries still allow rapists to marry their victims to escape criminal prosecution, according to the UN’s annual state of world population report.

Russia, Thailand and Venezuela are among the countries that allow men to have rape convictions overturned if they marry the women or girls they have assaulted.

Dr Natalia Kanem, executive director of the UN Population Fund (UNFPA), which published the report on Wednesday, said such laws were “deeply wrong” and were “a way of subjugating women”.

“The denial of rights cannot be shielded in law. ‘Marry your rapist’ laws shift the burden of guilt on to the victim and try to sanitise a situation which is criminal.”

Dima Dabbous, director of Equality Now’s Middle East and Africa region, whose research is cited in the UNFPA report, said the laws reflected a culture “that does not think women should have bodily autonomy and that they are the property of the family. It’s a tribal and antiquated approach to sexuality and honour mixed together”.

Dabbous added that it is “very difficult to change [these laws] but it’s not impossible”. She said the law in Morocco was repealed following widespread outrage when a young woman killed herself after she was forced to marry her rapist. Jordan, Palestine, Lebanon and Tunisia followed suit.

Hamida, right, and Souad, the sister and mother of Amina Filali who killed herself in Morocco in 2012 after being forced to marry her rapist. Photograph: Abdelhak Senna/AFP/Getty

However, Kuwait still allows a perpetrator to legally marry his victim with the permission of her guardian. In Russia, if the perpetrator has reached 18 and has committed statutory rape with a minor below 16, he is exempt from punishment if he marries the victim.

In Thailand, marriage can be considered a settlement for rape if the perpetrator is over 18 and the victim is over 15, if she “consented” to the offence and if the court grants permission for marriage.

Marriage laws and practices that subordinate women are widespread and difficult to root out, said the UNFPA, which reported that 43 countries have no legislation criminalising marital rape.

However, they are far from the only ways in which women and girls, people with disabilities and people of diverse sexual orientations are inhibited.

The report, which focuses on bodily autonomy – the ability to make choices about your body free from violence or coercion – highlighted that nearly half of women (45%) in 57 countries are denied the right to say yes or no to sex with their partner, use contraception or seek healthcare.

A young woman who said she was raped by her friend sits with others at La Maison Rose, a shelter for women and girls who have fled abuse, rape and forced marriage in Dakar, Senegal. Photograph: Zohra Bensemra/Reuters

In Mali, Niger and Senegal, the situation is particularly harrowing. Fewer than one in 10 women make their own decisions about healthcare, contraception and sex with their partners.

“The fact that nearly half of women still cannot make their own decisions about whether or not to have sex, use contraception or seek healthcare should outrage us all,” said Kanem. “In essence, hundreds of millions of women and girls do not own their own bodies. Their lives are governed by others.”

More than 30 countries restrict women’s freedom outside the home, while girls and boys with disabilities are nearly three times more likely to be subjected to sexual violence, with girls at the greatest risk.

Education is key to improving bodily autonomy, said the report, while laws must be changed, and social norms must become more gender balanced. Health providers can also play a critical role.

“The denial of bodily autonomy is a violation of women and girls’ fundamental human rights that reinforces inequalities and perpetuates violence arising from gender discrimination,” said Kanem. “It is nothing less than an annihilation of the spirit, and it must stop.”



 New Turkish law will allow men to legally rape young girls - if they marry them

The new bill is set to be introduced by lawmakers at the end of January. A similar one was defeated in 2016 following national and global outrage

·        Bookmark






·        Comments



Niamh Cavanagh

  • 19:58, 23 JAN 2020

·        UPDATED12:35, 24 JAN 2020

  • A Turkish protester wears a wedding dress and is covered with fake bruises (Image: AFP - Getty)
  • A disturbing law is set to be introduced into parliament in Turkey that will allow men to avoid punishment for raping underage girls by then marrying their victims.
  • The new bill is set to be introduced by lawmakers at the end of January.
  • The People’s Democrat Party in Turkey is warning the legislation would legitimise child marriage and statutory rape, and pave the way for child sexual exploitation.
  • Suad Abu-Dayyeh, a campaigner for Equality Now, told The Independent: "I applaud the brave work of women’s rights campaigners in Turkey who are taking a stand against this discriminatory bill and pushing back again regressive forces that are seeking to remove current legal protections for girls.
  • “Similar 'marry-your-rapist' legal provisions have been on the statute books of countries across the Middle East and North Africa.
  • The bill is set to be introduced at the end of January (Image: AFP/Getty Images)


"Thanks to years of campaigning by women’s rights activists and lawmakers, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Morocco, Tunisia, and Palestine have all removed these loopholes in recent years.

“Rather than attempting to introduce legislation that harms women's rights and protections, Turkish lawmakers should take heed of these advances in repealing gender discriminatory laws.”

A 2018 government report on child marriage estimates a total of 482,908 girls were married in the last decade.

38% of Turkish women have suffered physical or sexual violence from a partner, according to the United Nations. (Image: AFP via Getty Images)



The legal age of consent in Turkey is 18.

Violence against women and girls is prevalent in Turkey – with 38% of Turkish women having suffered physical or sexual violence from a partner, according to the United Nations.




Pedophiles rebranding themselves as 'Minor-Attracted Persons’, seek same protection as LGBT community: Report

By Divya Kishore
Published on : 06:36 PST, Jun 29, 2020

(Getty Images) 

An investigation for The Mail on Sunday has found that several notorious child-sex offenders of Britain are using online platforms like YouTube, Instagram, and Twitter to rebrand themselves as ‘Minor-Attracted Persons’. Through these social media  sites, they are also trying to re-categorize pedophilia as a harmless sexual preference.

As per the findings of the investigation, every day hundreds of social accounts are being set referring to both potential and prolific abusers as “MAPs” - Minor-Attracted Persons. The rebranding is reportedly an attempt by them to detach themselves from the “stigma” attached to the word pedophile. The report has claimed that anonymous users have also come up with their own rainbow “MAP Pride” flag, with some even arguing that they should be celebrated as a niche group alongside the LGBT community.

Not just that, the anonymous users have also created their slogan just like the LGBT community. Some of those slogans are, “#MAPPride” and “#Mappositivity”, reportedly seen as an aim to present pedophilia as part of society’s wider move towards sexual freedom. The unidentified users have posted memes online proclaiming “Gay MAPs are amazing” and cartoon characters saying, “Repost if you think maps should be able to date minors.” One such account was @SandMapMinorva, which has now been suspended. The message posted on that account read: “Minor-attraction is natural.”

Besides, the investigation by The Mail on Sunday has discovered that for the profile image of these anonymous accounts, the users are using cartoon avatars rather than photographs. Most of them have mentioned the ages of children they are attracted to and it goes to as low as “two to seven”. “They are a fiendish group of sub-humans and they will find no haven in the LGBTQ community. We utterly rebuke their delusional and evil claims,” Otep Shamaya, a gay rights campaigner, said.

However, this is not the first time such type of campaign has started online. According to reports, in the 1970s and 80s, the Paedophile Information Exchange (PIE) campaign was there that took advantage of the gay liberation movement at the time to push for pro-child abuse policies, such as lowering the age of consent to just four. It has also been said that the current propaganda has chilling echoes of the PIE that happened decades ago.

Though the PIE campaign was dissolved in 1984, the investigation by the newspaper has found out that its former chairman, Tom O’Carroll, is still active and is using social sites to argue for the legalization of pedophilia. In one “interview”, which is still on YouTube, Britain’s most notorious pedophile campaigner - O’Carroll - has claimed that a sexual relationship between an adult and a child is similar to a relationship between a child and the mother. Along with YouTube, O’Carroll also uses his Wordpress blog to work towards the legalization of sex with children. However, the report said that Wordpress had suspended his blogs.

The report stated that some academics are also supporting these kinds of campaigns as they believe pedophiles’ voices should be heard. One such academic is Dr Craig Harper, senior lecturer in psychology at Nottingham Trent University, who signed a 2018 letter written to Twitter demanding retrieval of pedophile accounts that were taken down. Harper stated that “pedophilia and child abuse are not the same things” and “pedophilia is a sexual attraction pattern that shares common features with other sexual orientations”.

Meanwhile, child sex abuse survivor Jacqui Dillon, who runs the Beck Road Alliance online support network, said: “This is absurd and dangerous. Twitter and other corporations are now providing pedophiles with access to children online.”




EU rebrands pedophiles ‘People with a Sexual Interest in Children’


The Scotland police recently referred to pedophiles as “minor attracted people.” Many expressed outrage over this attempt to normalize the abuse of children. Now comes this.

The West is sinking deeper and deeper into a kafkaesque mix of socialism and depravity, while the Churches remain largely silent instead of protecting Judeo-Christian values and innocent children.

The “EU project’s use of the term Minor-Attracted People (MAPs) to describe paedophiles” is causing a huge backlash. Let’s hope that those who are dissenting succeed in stopping this abuse. The European Commission “is funding the Drag Queen Shows across Europe,” which means taxpayers are funding it, with no say in where their money is going.

“‘Horrible Propaganda’ – EU Project Rebrands Paedophiles ‘People with a Sexual Interest in Children,’” by Peter Caddle, Breitbart, January 16, 2023:

A Member of the European Parliament (MEP) has accused the European Union of pushing “horrible propaganda” after a project described paedophiles as “people with a sexual interest in children”, accusing the bloc of seeking to rebrand them with a term that is both “more appealing and morally neutral”.

Cristian Terhes, a Romanian MEP who sits with the European Conservatives and Reformists group, has slammed the EU for allegedly pushing for the term “paedophile” to be replaced with something “more appealing and morally neutral”.

It comes after controversy surrounding an EU project’s use of the term Minor-Attracted People (MAPs) to describe paedophiles, despite the fact that the term is highly controversial, and seen by some as overly sympathetic towards predators.

However, despite the use of the term prompting huge backlash only last month, Terhes claims that the EU still seems to be trying to soften the language around paedophiles, with another EU project on child protection repeatedly referring to them as “people with a sexual interest in children”.

“I am shocked and appalled, in equal measure, that the European Commission was, until very recently… replacing the term ‘paedophile’ with the more appealing and morally neutral phrase of Minor Attracted Person,” Terhes alleged in comments to Breitbart Europe.

“They even intensified this horrible propaganda and are now talking of ‘people with a sexual interest in children’,” he continued.

“This attitude of the European Commission to soft soap an evil and criminal behaviour, like paedophilia, is dangerous and a threat to all children in Europe,” the public representative went on to say, calling for the project in question to be withdrawn by European Commission, currently led by Germany’s Ursula von der Leyen.

The Romanian MEP also took aim at the EU’s continued funding of drag queen shows for children, with the bloc giving financial support to drag projects in the likes of Germany, Spain, and Slovenia.

One project sponsored by the EU that took place in Berlin — titled ‘Drag It Up!’ — saw “38 young queer people” trained in the art of drag, with those involved being taught to put on makeup and wigs, walk in high heels, and implement “methods of blurring and exaggerating traditional binary gender roles”….



California Legislature Passes Bill Reducing Penalties for Oral, Anal Sex with Willing Children

1,404,083Josh Edelson/AFP via Getty Images

3 Sep 2020482,551 2:44

California lawmakers passed a bill Monday that would reduce penalties for adults who have oral or anal sex with a willing minor child if the sex offender is within ten years of the age of the victim.

The bill now heads to the desk of Gov. Gavin Newsom (D).

According to SB 145, the legislation “would exempt from mandatory registration” as a sex offender “a person convicted of certain offenses involving minors if the person is not more than 10 years older than the minor and if that offense is the only one requiring the person to register.”

The measure would allow a judge to decide if an adult who engages in oral or anal sex with a child must register as a sex offender if that person is within ten years of the age of the victim.

In January 2019, the San Francisco Examiner reported on the introduction of the bill by State Sen. Scott Wiener (D), who claimed the current law, which states oral and anal sex between an adult within ten years of the age of a willing minor requires the adult to be registered as a sex offender, discriminates against LGBT individuals.

The bill would put an end to “blatant discrimination against young LGBT people engaged in consensual activity,” Wiener said:

This bill is about treating everyone equally under the law. Discrimination against LGBT people is simply not the California way. These laws were put in place during a more conservative and anti-LGBT time in California’s history. They have ruined people’s lives and made it harder for them to get jobs, secure housing, and live productive lives. It is time we update these laws and treat everyone equally.

Currently in California, judges may decide whether adults who have “penile-vaginal intercourse” with minors close to their age must register as a sex offender.

Wiener said the current law targets LGBT individuals because they do not engage in penile-vaginal intercourse.

“This is such horrific homophobia,” Wiener said, according to the San Francisco Chronicle. “It’s irrational, and it ruins people’s lives.”

The Chronicle‘s report stated that, in 1975, California decriminalized oral and anal sex between consenting adults, but adults who engaged in these practices with minors were treated as sex offenders.

In a tweet, Wiener urged his followers to read an Associated Press “fact check” story about the controversial bill that minimizes its impact with the headline, “Bill Would Not Legalize Pedophilia in California.”

“The bill is the subject of a massive misinformation campaign by MAGA/QAnon,” Wiener posted.




Parent files lawsuit in New York asking for permission to marry their child

Filing is asking for a judge to declare incest laws ‘unconstitutional’

James Crump

Tuesday 13 April 2021 16:20


0 seconds of 35 secondsVolume 0%


Bottom of Form

parent has filed a lawsuit in New York seeking to overturn laws barring incestuous practice so that they can marry their adult child.

The lawsuit was filed in Manhattan federal court on 1 April, and is asking for a judge to declare incest laws “unconstitutional” so that a parent can marry their offspring in a New York City ceremony, according to documents obtained by the New York Post.

“Through the enduring bond of marriage, two persons, whatever relationship they might otherwise have with one another, can find a greater level of expression, intimacy and spirituality,” the parent argued in the filing.

The lawsuit has kept the identities of both parties vague, with the genders, ages, address and names of both the parent and adult child currently unknown.

The parent wrote in the court papers that they decided to stay anonymous because their request is “an action that a large segment of society views as morally, socially and biologically repugnant”.

However, the filing does confirm that “the proposed spouses are adults. The proposed spouses are biological parent and child,” and reveals that “the proposed spouses are unable to procreate together”.

The documents describe the parent and child as a “PAACNP (Parent and Adult Child Non-Procreationable)” couple and claims it would “diminish their humanity” if they could not be legally married.

The parent has not yet proposed to their offspring, and explained that they have not done so as they feel that it would cause “emotional harm” if they were engaged but not legally allowed to marry.

When applying for a marriage licence in New York City, both spouses must reveal the name and country of birth of their parents and declare that there are no legal impediments to the marriage.

Incest is currently a third-degree felony in New York state, which can be punished with up to four years in prison for each offender.

Incestuous marriages performed in the state are also not recognised by New York, with spouses facing up to six months in prison and a fine for going through with a ceremony.

The pair have not yet applied for a marriage licence, but Manhattan family and matrimonial law attorney Eric Wrubel told the Post that the lawsuit is “never gonna fly”.

Incest between consenting adults is illegal in every US state apart from New Jersey and Rhode Island, but marriage is prohibited in those states along with the rest of the country.




Palestinian Islamic ‘Scholar’ Blames Europeans For Everything, Including Sex With Animals


That indispensable source of information on Muslim lands and peoples, MEMRI, has just carried a report on a speech given by Yousef Makharzah, a Palestinian Islamic scholar, in which he accuses the Europeans of every conceivable atrocity, including having “sex with animals and beasts more than with humans.” MEMRI’s report is here: “Palestinian Islamic Scholar Yousef Makharzah: Europeans Practice Bestiality, Sleep With Animals More Than With Humans; Western Civilization Is Inferior, Asinine, Racist,” MEMRI, March 6, 2022:

Palestinian Islamic scholar Yousef Makharzah said in a March 6, 2022 speech that aired on the Hizb-ut-Tahrir-affiliated Al-Waqiyah TV (Lebanon) that Syrian refugees were driven to Europe by “oppressive Europeans” and that the Europeans are the cause of the Muslims’ tragedies. Makharzah claimed that Europeans practice bestiality to the extent that “they have sex with animals and beasts more than with humans.” He also said that that Western civilization is inferior, asinine, and racist, and that it causes “a man to oppress his brother and kill him with no justification.” In addition, Makharzah asserted that when European colonialist came to Muslim countries, they made the Muslims “more ignorant and shallow” so they would purchase the European consumer goods. For more about Sheikh Makharzah, see MEMRI TV Clips No. 7849, No. 8500, No. 8557, No. 8877, No. 9207, No. 9356 and No. 9411.

Yousef Makharzah: “Why did the Syrians flee to Europe? They were driven there by the oppressive Europeans. Why did the people of the poor countries in Africa flee to Europe?

“They were driven there by the injustice of colonialism that devoured the wealth of those countries. The [Europeans] are the cause of our tragedies.

The 6.7 million Syrians who fled the 11-year-old Syrian civil war were driven to do so to avoid the unending violence of the war, and especially the repeated attacks, by Assad’s army, on  civilians. Europeans had nothing to with those atrocities.  The refugees were Syrians fleeing other Syrians. Why would the Europeans have “driven” Syrians to Europe, where they are not wanted, and where they constitute a terrific drain on the economies of the generous welfare states of Europe, that provide those Syrian refugees who do arrive with free housing, medical care, education, and family allowances. Fortunately, of the 6.7 million Syrian refugees, 5.6 million remain in the Middle East, in Turkey, Lebanon, Jordan, and Iraq. Only In the crazed imagination of Yousef Makharzah are Europeans “driving” Syrians to Europe.

They brought cattle and beasts into their bedrooms. They have sex with animals and beasts more than with humans.

“Sex with animals”? The only religion whose clerics have solemnly considered sex with animals, and has carefully set out the “rules” that should govern such sex, is Islam. It was that most learned of Shi’a theologians, Ayatollah Khomeini himself, who set out the dating Do’s-N’-Don’ts for Muslims having sex with sheep, cows, camels. Here is what he wrote in his “Tahrirolvasyleh,” fourth volume, 1990:

A man can have sex with animals such as sheep, cows, camels and so on. However, he should kill the animal after he has his orgasm. He should not sell the meat to the people in his own village, but selling the meat to a neighboring village is reasonable.

Good to know, because otherwise you might commit the unpardonable faux pas of serving the meat of a camel — or of a cow, or of a sheep — you have just sodomized, to people of your own village, and that, as Ayatollah Khomeini reminds us, would never do.

Yousef Makharzah continues:

This filthy civilization that is invading us is the Western civilization. Our leaders and our intellectuals were enticed by this bestial civilization. It is an inferior, asinine, and racist civilization, that causes a man to oppress his brother and kill him with no justification.

The civilization of the advanced West fills so many Muslims with wonder and envy, as it is so obviously superior to that of the Muslims, and this sends the troglodytic Makharzah into a fury. He knows – the Qur’an tells him so – that Muslims are the “best of peoples”(3:110) while the Infidels are “the most vile of created beings.”(98:6) Therefore he insists, though without any evidence, that Western civilization must be “inferior, asinine, and racist.” If it is “inferior,” why have tens of millions of Muslims flooded into the countries of the West, with millions more trying desperately to enter in order to settle deep within that “inferior, asinine, and racist” civilization? And why is that pull felt most keenly among Muslim “leaders and intellectuals,” who presumably have the best opportunity to study and compare the Muslim and the non-Muslim worlds? Could it be because they find that civilization not at all “inferior, asinine, and racist,” but in every respect superior to the Islamic civilization that they with great difficulty are tasked with defending?

When they came to our country, they made us more ignorant and shallow, so that we could become a consumer market for their industry. Through their Muslim leaders-for-hire, they prevented us from innovating. They prevented us from [developing] industry and improving our lives.

So the explanation for Muslim backwardness has nothing to do with Islam; it is the result of a deliberate plot by those who “came to our country” (dar al-Islam) to make us “more ignorant and shallow.” Goodness, how weak Muslims must be, to be used in such a manner. The European reentry into the modern Middle East began with Napoleon’s invasion of Egypt in 1798, but the Middle East and North Africa would remain under the rule by fellow Muslims, Ottoman Turks, for at least another century. And for more than 75 years, no Muslim land has been under non-Muslim — European — rule. Yet Muslims such as Yousef Makharzah must blame the Europeans for all that has gone wrong in their wretched, backward lands.

How did those Europeans make Muslims “more ignorant and shallow”? The French remained in both Morocco and Tunisia for a very short period, about 40 years; only in Algeria did the French have a full-fledged colony, with a large transfer of French colons, that lasted from 1830 to 1962. The Italians held Libya only from 1911 to 1940. All over North Africa, even in that short time, the Europeans did much good. They built the first modern school systems, to replace the madrasahs. They allowed girls to go to school. They built the first universities. They modernized agricultural production. They built hospitals and clinics; as a result, infant mortality plummeted and life expectancy lengthened. They built roads, bridges, ports. They did not make Muslims “more ignorant and shallow.” The Europeans did more to educate the Arabs who were under their rule in North Africa than had been done by the Ottomans during more than 600 years of rule.

In the Middle East, the Europeans — Britain and France — were present not as colonists, but as holders of League of Nations’ Mandates. Britain held those for Iraq, and Palestine, and having sealed it off from Mandatory Palestine, for Jordan as well. The British helped to set up the Hashemite monarchies in Iraq and Jordan, and provided arms and training to their armies, but little else. The French, who held the Mandate for Syria and Lebanon, did a great deal to set up a system of secular schools and, as part of its mission civilisatrie (“civilizig mission”), introduced French-language schools for the Lebanese elite, for whom French became more popular than Arabic, for it was the second language of the enlightened West.

If most Muslims remained “more ignorant and shallow,” this was not because of the Europeans, but because Islam itself encouraged submission to authority, and discouraged, even punished, skeptical inquiry. This habit of mental submission kept people “more ignorant” as they rejected, for example, new scientific theories, and the True Believers clung to the belief that all knowledge could be found in the Qur’an, which dampened any desire to learn more..

Yousef Makharzah claims that “through their Muslim leaders-for-hire, they prevented us from innovating.” There are several things wrong with this claim. What “Muslim leaders for hire” were there? Not Hafez nor his son Bashar Assad, the Syrian despots who despise the West. Not Gamal Abdel Nasser, nor Saddam Hussein, dictators who embodied anti-Western pan-Arabism. None of the rich Sunni Gulf states, such as Saudi Arabia, the UAE, Kuwait, Qatar, and Kuwait, were “Muslim leaders-for-hire”: it was they who paid, and still pay, Western politicians and P.R. firms to do their bidding in the capitals of the Western world.

It was never the West that “prevented us [the Muslims] from innovating.” It is Islam itself that warns Muslims of the dangers of innovation, or bida. Innovation in any aspect of life is a danger for Muslims, because it might lead Believers to want to “innovate” in matters of faith, even perhaps seeking changes in the tenets and teachings of Islam, iand that would never do.

Yousef Makharzah has made wild charges about the West that do not withstand scrutiny. He rants against “this filthy civilization that is invading us is the Western civilization. Our leaders and our intellectuals were enticed by this bestial civilization. It is an inferior, asinine, and racist civilization, that causes a man to oppress his brother and kill him with no justification.” In what respect is Western civilization inferior to that of the Muslims? In its scientific achievements, in its political framework, in its art, its music, its literature, its philosophy? In its equal treatment of men and women, and of people of all religions, and of no religion? In what way are Western states “inferior” to such states of high Muslim civilization as Saudi Arabia, Yemen, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Kuwait, Qatar, Syria, Egypt, Libya, Algeria?

As to the charge that Yousef Makharzah makes against our “filthy civilization that is invading us [the Muslim lands]” – to repeat, we are not invading you. You are invading us. Tens of millions of Muslims have already settled in Europe, deep behind what they are taught to regard as enemy lands. Please, we don’t want you here, please go home, back to your wonderful Muslim countries, instead of remaining in our “inferior, asinine, and racist civilization,” where a “man will kill his brother with no justification,” so very unlike what happens in the peaceable kingdoms of Syria, Libya, Lebanon, Yemen, Afghanistan, and so very many more.