Pinnarayi and Yatish Chandra are really women: Kerala Govt
That said, let me post in chaste non-Pingreji Angreji suitable even for "non-Member" readers of BRF whose delicate feelings are offended by such terms as BB.
1. As I understand, the "Bharat" in "Bharat Rakshak" refers to the nation presently known as India, which is about what remains of the Bharatavarsha from the days when the rain that fell east of the Caucasus and west of Mt. Fuji all flowed through Akhand Bharat.
2. Said India has a Constitution.
3. Said Constitution provides for a Court System to resolve questions and disagreements about what is correct under the Constitution, and maybe, just maybe also use some brains to decide what is Right (as in Just, not non-Left) as well as Correct.
4. Said Court System is led (if that word can be used without
) by the Most Honourable and Respected Supreme Court of India. Hereinafter referred to as "SC".
5. Said SC has ruled (while they had a break from fact-finding visits to bars to specify the length of undies to be worn by nude dancers) on a case brought before it (apparently without having gon through all the lower courts, which I thought was maybe limited to Nude Bar Fact-Finding Opportunities). The ruling was 4 to 1 as I understand but it would be exactly the same in effect as if it were 2.51 to 2.49. The ruling was that women of any age have the right to enter the Sabarimala Kshetram for the purpose of worshipping, provided they observe all the penances etc required of all other worshippers (I am not sure if 2-year-olds are required to not shave for 41 days, but that is for other experts to comment).
6. Review Petitions have been filed - dozens or hundreds of them - regarding everything that the SC has ever "decided", but some that are 80 years old are still "pending" so that may be a bit of a wait.
7. The SC specifically declined to "STAY' their ruling in #5 until any such Petition is heard and decided. In other words, the ruling in #5 IS THE LAW OF THE LAND under the Constitution, and as specifically stated by the Supreme Court.
8. Given the above, those who not only refuse to obey the ruling, but obstruct those who are exercising their rights, and even resort to physical violence or threat of that to intimidate those trying to exercise their rights, are very clearly
***O U T L A W S**** Does not matter whether they are most Devout and chanting "prayers" while obstructing citizens exercising their rights. They are still
***O U T L A W S****.
9. The State Government is pledged to respect the Constitution, and carry out decisions of the Supreme Court.
***************************************
Now for (my) personal opinions:
1. I am not happy about what happened in the SC. At the end of the day, post-mortem review suggests that the lawyers representing those who insisted on denying women of a certain age group access, did an incompetent job of articulating the issues. The other side argued clearly and under the Constitution.
2. The Denyers (I am most certainly not describing them as "Hindus", let alone "Sanatana Dharmis" for reasons explained below) resorted to arguments based on
{The Deity has said that}. This is garbage. I as Hindu, SD proponent etc, do not recognize any such Middleman Authorities who have the exclusive WhatsApp Number of The Deity to be told these things that the Deity does not choose to reveal directly to TheirHonners' intracranial spaces. I don't subscribe to Witch Doctors, Aryan Supremacists, KKK, Al Qaeda, RollsRoyce Sex-Swamis, (Sri)^4, Beehive Hairdo Swamis, ppl wearing thick golden robes and aircraft-carrier superstructure on their heads, in Kerala humidity, or others who claim to have Direct Line to the Almighty. All Pretenders. Need to be kicked out like the MoneyLenders from the Temple, or Rakshasas from Yagas.
3. The court case may have been brought by people with ulterior motives far removed from the Right To Worship. It was up to the weanies representing "Hindus" to do basic due diligence and bring out those facts in the trial, not
about it afterwards.
4. At this point, the best bet is a Uniform Civil Code guaranteeing access to **ALL** designated places of worship to **ALL** who observe the REASONABLE, Constitutionally valid rituals and disciplines for access. Lack of control over bodily functions may be grounds for special treatment/provisions under the Differently-Abled Persons laws. Access for children below a certain age like 5, or old folks above, say, 120, may be ill-advised because of physical risks in being stuck in a crush, unable to breathe and likely to be stampeded.
5. The argument "Government Out Of Our Holy Places!" is being advanced as some form of "separation of Church and State". BS. Government is obliged to respect the rights of all to their Right to Worship.
6. "Devotees" many be rightfully upset at Polis in cow-leather boots stomping inside the sacred premises. OK, so protest THAT and ask the court to ban that. Surely the polis can be provided blastic balloons to wear on their feet if needed? Or wooden shoes?
7. Some posts are veering uncontrolled into such things as questioning the religious affiliation or beliefs of specific police personnel as Qualification Check to be allowed to go near the temple. BS! I cannot believe Bharat Rakshak tolerating that - a very sad decline in standards indeed. Did you ban non-Hindus from scaling the peaks of Kargil into the teeth of Pakistani machinegun fire? Did Havildar Abdul Hamid do a ghar-vapasi before standing his ground and destroying Pakistani tanks in 1965?
Admins here should be ashamed of the example that they are setting in this respect.
I hope I have not inadvertently used "cryptic" language or otherwise offended the sensibilities of the Intellectual Believers here. If you don't like the fact that you are caught arguing for outlaws, tough. Eat it.
Revelation: THIS was always my role in BRF. Kicking Pakis when opportunity presented itself, but otherwise, keeping the Holy Blood of the Holies, well, warm. I have done Ghar Vapasi!