Talk:Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code/Archive 1
 | This is an archive of past discussions about Section 377 of the Indian Penal Code. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 1 |
Untitled
Pakistan
Is Pakistan's Section 377 included as part of India's for the purpose of Wikipedia's entries on this subject, since it started from when Pakistan was still (mostly) the Punjab region of India?
- Here is the disambiguation page for various instances of section 377. Right now there is no such article on Wikipedia for Pakistan's, but if someone has sources about it then I would love to help make this article. Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:22, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Comments
Things to add:
- Was the section involved any time
- Opposition and criticism needs more detail
--Redtigerxyz Talk 13:21, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
Supreme court appeal
This page is not entirely accurate. The Delhi High Court is just an intermediate constitutional court, and its decision was appealed. The Supreme Court of India is hearing the appeal on April 19, 2011. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 146.243.4.157 (talk) 18:33, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
- I see nothing on this article which conflicts with what you are saying. What inaccuracy are you seeing? Blue Rasberry (talk) 19:22, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Vague law
How do we know for certain that "offences against the order of nature" include homosexuality? The law here is vague and could be used in any number of ways. 68.37.254.48 (talk) 20:21, 17 February 2014 (UTC)
Sexual offences
Sexual offences, reason and solution Parveen law (talk) 20:10, 6 March 2017 (UTC)
Misleading citation under "Public Perception", sub-heading "Opposition and criticism"
The opening sentence seems to indicate that it was the Home Ministry which linked the cases of prosecution under Section 377 to the blackmail of LGBT people. The cited page, however, does not make the same assertion; it uses the data from the ministry to make its own assertions about the possible increase in cases of blackmail. In fact, the Home Ministry backed the upholding of Section 377 -- it was the Health Ministry which opposed it [1][2]. I'm editing the section correspondingly. -- Nack314 01:56, 24 September 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikicontributor0 (talk • contribs)
Merge Section 377 page here
- Agree with the merge suggestion because this page is more comprehensive even if it needs better sectioning and clean up Vikram Vincent 12:57, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
- The only problem of it is that the section exists in other countries (Malaysia, Singapore, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Myanmar, and Jamaica). Euro know (talk) 22:56, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
I agree to the merge, Section 377 has little detail and some which duplicate information related to India. AussieWikiDan (talk) 01:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)\\
I don't think the pages should be merged since the Section exists outside of India, so the Section 377 article just needs more expansion. Xicanx (talk) 20:16, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
- An alternate proposal would be to move the related pages to section 377 as subsections. VV 06:17, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
- I would agree with that, as above, section 377 is wider, the article just needs expanding. Especially as Section 377A of the Penal Code (Singapore) exists. -Kez (talk) 09:44, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
- As consensus suggests, in the reverse direction,
Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 18:30, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Prgopalan.
Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 09:18, 18 January 2022 (UTC)