Individual rights and the moral police

I was reading this article recently and was going through the reactions of the readers. I didn't exactly do a count, but it did strike me that people are about evenly divided between condemning the fine and accepting it.

The real question, it seems to me, is not whether kissing in public is to be allowed or not; the more pertinent question is, who decides what's decent in a public place? I would think that the decision about decency would be made by individuals, and not anyone claiming to be enforcers of the law. If you're in a public place with your partner, and there are no "impressionable" (in your judgment) young ones (or old ones, for that matter) around, then go right ahead and do your thing, as long as it is love that drives you to do so. Don't do it out of a feeling of defiance, to prove that you don't care what others think; to show your parents and others who controls your life.

The reason I even have to add the clause about impressionable young (or old) people around is that in India, kissing, holding hands, etc. are simply not acceptable to many people. I suppose there was a time when the same situation existed many decades ago in England and other countries in Europe. And I'm equally sure that the first couple to have kissed in public would have raised a lot of eyebrows. But now, the people over there have gotten to a point where such things are common, and may cause embarrassment only if there is an old person around. Especially one who is staring!

We're still a young country in the post-British era, and we're experimenting with societal changes now. Yes, it's going to be painful for some of us to accept certain things, and everyone is welcome to express his / her opinion for and against the topic, but in the absence of a consensus, penalising such public displays of affection seems not only crude and totalitarian, but also irrational.

Bangalore, the IT capital of India?

Note: I have since learned that the riots following Dr. Rajkumar's death were incited by politicians with the help of their cronies, and the actor's fans didn't, in reality, have anything to do with it. I apologise for the allegation.

I have regretted most of the time spent outside my office here in Bangalore. The roads are bad (this is worth repeating), the traffic is worse, and there is no public transportation system worth its name (the proposed Metro is going to be operational by 2008 at the earliest, though I feel that's being overly optimistic), and the city goes to sleep at 9 p.m.!!

The day before yesterday, the popular Kannada actor, "Dr." Rajkumar, passed away due to a cardiac failure that's not uncommon for someone of his age. Going by the way the people of this city reacted to it, you'd think that the Chief Minister of the State or the Prime Minister of the country was assassinated. There was violence on the streets (several vehicles were burnt), shopowners all over the city drew their shutters down at 4:30 p.m. fearing the rampaging mob, and bus services within the city ground to a halt. Why, every mode of transport coming into and going out of Bangalore (except the airways) stopped functioning. It was not until this morning that normalcy of life resumed.

My friend, who kindly provided me shelter for that night (since there was no way I could have reached my hotel amidst the riots) knew enough about the people to realize that the bus ticket that he had purchased for travelling back to his hometown would not be worth the paper it was printed on, and took the earliest flight out of the city yesterday, paying such a huge sum that I felt aghast! All because the pusillanimous Chief Minister and the city's finest couldn't come down hard on the rioters and tell them that their favourite star may have died but that's no reason for life in the city to come to a standstill!

IT capital of India? Puh-lease!