Question: Isn't the practice of barring entry of women discriminatory?
Answer: First of all, millions of women do visit the temple every year. The restriction is only for women of age group 10 to 50 years.
It would be discriminatory, if we had a significant population of women who honestly want to visit and object the restriction. For something to be discrimination, there should be some form of loss/hurt because of the action, or some form of benefit because of its removal. The person may or may not be aware of the loss/benefit, but the loss/benefit must be there in principle.
So, what loss/hurt does the women have in this case? On the other hand, what benefit do they get if this 'right' is pushed upon them?
I would readily admit that it is discriminatory, if I see the number of women who support the verdict that amount to at least 10% of the number of women who oppose.
Answer: First of all, millions of women do visit the temple every year. The restriction is only for women of age group 10 to 50 years.
It would be discriminatory, if we had a significant population of women who honestly want to visit and object the restriction. For something to be discrimination, there should be some form of loss/hurt because of the action, or some form of benefit because of its removal. The person may or may not be aware of the loss/benefit, but the loss/benefit must be there in principle.
So, what loss/hurt does the women have in this case? On the other hand, what benefit do they get if this 'right' is pushed upon them?
I would readily admit that it is discriminatory, if I see the number of women who support the verdict that amount to at least 10% of the number of women who oppose.
No comments:
Post a Comment