VISION FOR ALL

Rahul Kumar

275 Posts

32 comments

648rahul


Reader Blogs are not moderated, Jagran is not responsible for the views, opinions and content posted by the readers.

Sort by:

EMBANKMENT CONSTRUCTION WITHOUT LAND ACQUISITION

Posted On: 29 May, 2016  
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

में

0 Comment

DISCRIMINATORY NEWS POLICY

Posted On: 29 May, 2016  
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

में

0 Comment

KANHAIYA KUMAR IS NOT A HERO

Posted On: 29 May, 2016  
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

में

0 Comment

CONSIDER HARASSMENT OF THAT SO CALLED JUVENILE

Posted On: 24 Dec, 2015  
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

Others में

0 Comment

Laws against Noise Pollution

Posted On: 24 Dec, 2015  
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

Others में

0 Comment

WHEN DENYING CONSTITUTIONAL PROVISIONS AMOUNT TO JUDICIAL TERRORISM

Posted On: 20 Dec, 2015  
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

Others में

0 Comment

Article 359 of the Constitution is itself unconstitutional

Posted On: 20 Dec, 2015  
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

Others में

0 Comment

WHEN AN ACCUSED BECOMES A VICTIM

Posted On: 20 Dec, 2015  
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

Others में

0 Comment

EXTENT OF FALSE COMPLAINTS IN CORRUPTION CASES

Posted On: 20 Dec, 2015  
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

Others में

0 Comment

SALMAN KHAN’S ACQUITTAL:A LEGAL CRITICISM

Posted On: 20 Dec, 2015  
1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (No Ratings Yet)
Loading ... Loading ...

Others में

0 Comment

Page 2 of 28«12345»1020...Last »

नवीनतम प्रतिक्रियाएंLatest Comments

के द्वारा: 648rahul 648rahul

के द्वारा: 648rahul 648rahul

Thanks sir for your valuable remarks. I haven’t gone through the process of evolution which occurred and questions which have been answered and many ‘’whys’’ which are to be answered yet. I have only raised questions against the way of evolution followed by nature by devising sex for procreation because it might have some alternatives instead of interdependency to own species. As I have stated that ‘’sex is not a natural instinct.’’ That’s why what form of sex may be, as per my view, all is unnatural whether ‘’It remains in confines of mutual consent or not.’’ Sir, sorry to say but your one assertion is also contradictory since on the one hand you say that ‘’Humans have always been inventive-be it sex or something else for recreation’’ and in the same breath you state that ‘’ no sex is unnatural as long as it remains in confines of mutual consent. In view of your above both assertions, one can raise question easily that if humans have been inventive and can opt sex or something else for recreation, then why sex is not unnatural for humans because there may be no need of sex for recreation. Product of societal mindset, attitudes and outdated traditions are wrong in mostly cases but restrictions imposed by laws on unnatural acts on ground of societal mindset, attitudes and outdated traditions are right because we should see others on ground of realizations and experimental feelings and for this purpose, it is necessary to stop the quench of sex as far as possible and unnatural acts are only quench of sex. If it has dawned onour Judiciary that ‘’ section 377 has no place in 21st century which understands both biology and psyche of human beings for better than any other time in human history‘’ ,judiciary has committed an error of record and should rectify it because biology of human don’t permit to undergo unnatural sex and so far as psyche is concerned, if we make our psyche such, only then we start to believe that our psyche is favourable for unnatural acts also. So far as homosexual relationship is concerned, I don’t oppose those same sex people who live together but I suggest those to leave the sexual contact. One should live together and can live together with people of same sex for mutual cooperation and understanding to feel good and work freely which ones psyche needs. Going sexually is not need for ones psyche. Thanks for your suggestion to improve my English Syntax and I have started to improve since now as per your suggestion. Please continue to give your valuable suggestions.

के द्वारा: 648rahul 648rahul

Thanks sir for your valuable remarks. I haven’t gone through the process of evolution which occurred and questions which have been answered and many ‘’whys’’ which are to be answered yet. I have only raised questions against the way of evolution followed by nature by devising sex for procreation because it might have some alternatives instead of interdependency to own species. As I have stated that ‘’sex is not a natural instinct.’’ That’s why what form of sex may be, as per my view, all is unnatural whether ‘’It remains in confines of mutual consent or not.’’ Sir, sorry to say but your one assertion is also contradictory since on the one hand you say that ‘’Humans have always been inventive-be it sex or something else for recreation’’ and in the same breath you state that ‘’ no sex is unnatural as long as it remains in confines of mutual consent. In view of your above both assertions, one can raise question easily that if humans have been inventive and can opt sex or something else for recreation, then why sex is not unnatural for humans because there may be no need of sex for recreation. Product of societal mindset, attitudes and outdated traditions are wrong in mostly cases but restrictions imposed by laws on unnatural acts on ground of societal mindset, attitudes and outdated traditions are right because we should see others on ground of realizations and experimental feelings and for this purpose, it is necessary to stop the quench of sex as far as possible and unnatural acts are only quench of sex. If it has dawned onour Judiciary that ‘’ section 377 has no place in 21st century which understands both biology and psyche of human beings for better than any other time in human history‘’ ,judiciary has committed an error of record and should rectify it because biology of human don’t permit to undergo unnatural sex and so far as psyche is concerned, if we make our psyche such, only then we start to believe that our psyche is favourable for unnatural acts also. So far as homosexual relationship is concerned, I don’t oppose those same sex people who live together but I suggest those to leave the sexual contact. One should live together and can live together with people of same sex for mutual cooperation and understanding to feel good and work freely which ones psyche needs. Going sexually is not need for ones psyche. Thanks for your suggestion to improve my English Syntax and I have started to improve since now as per your suggestion. Please continue to give your valuable suggestions.

के द्वारा: 648rahul 648rahul

Well Rahul, the question raised by you on evoution of certain procesess involved in the natural expansion of the species. Even Darwin did not raise such question which you ostensible raise on account of some personal dillemma. To that extent I would like to compliment you but the evolution theory is a big gamble and many "whys" are yet to be answered by scientists and the anthropologists. As regards your last one which ends on a personal note, but sorry to say that your assertion here is contadictary since on the one hand you say that "sex is not a natural instinct" and in the same breath you state that you are trapped in so called unnatural sex. Well my friend no sex is unnatural as long as it remains in confines of mutual consent. Yes of course, nature may have devised sex for recreation and that's true with animal world but as regards humans they have always been inventive - be it sex or something else. I dont know how you bring Section 377 while raising a very fundamental question. Its like climbing down from Everest to the plains. Is'nt it. Anyway, the restrictions imposed by laws on the so called unnatural acts are product of a societal mindset, attitudes and outdated traditions. You know about the favourable court case re: Section 377. At last it has dawned onour judiciary that these useless (and also draconian laws) has no place in 21st century which understands both biology and psyche of human beings far better than any other time in human history. By the way your english syntax is very very poor, so I suggest you to improve on that score. With my best wishes and regards: oppareek43.jagranjunction.com. .

के द्वारा: O P PAREEK O P PAREEK




latest from jagran