I disagree with the views expressed in the article, “Ways to read the Constitution” (Editorial page, August 28). The Sabarimala case is no test case — either for the freedom of religion and women’s rights, or for ushering in what the writer calls ‘transformative constitutionalism in jurisprudence’.
It is a test case for people to judge if a secular court can resist an unjustifiable temptation to make use of a secular Constitution to strike down a time-honoured religious practice.
S. Jagathsimhan Nair,
Thiruvananthapuram
The specific argument over the applicability of Article 17 in the Sabarimala case does not qualify itself to be ascribed as a question of originalism versus living tree. The writer is right to posit that Article 17 should be interpreted to include women, but it is factually and objectively incorrect to equate the custom of the said temple to untouchability as practised in pre-constitutional India. By drawing parallels between untouchability and the said custom, saying the effect of exclusion is common to both, the writer is trivialising an atrocious social evil.
Sreerag Raman Sreenivasan,
Thiruvananthapuram
The article has shed light on aspects and perspectives with regard to the belief system of the religious in the context of a constitutional framework.
However, the belief system and restriction on women of a certain age that relates to Sabarimala have been in place for a very long time when compared to the Constitution that came into effect in 1950. Every religion in this world has merits and demerits or limitations. Some things are best left as they are. The aim of the belief system is not to discriminate against or degrade women but to ensure sanctity. There are many who feel that the existing faith system should not put to the test as it is a temple of yore.
Viswanathan. S.A.,
Chennai
The rigid approach to interpreting the Constitution should be dropped. Social customs will and should change according to the needs of society. There is no way the makers of the Constitution would have foreseen the peculiar situations that would arise years later and it is we the people who should think dynamically.
B.P. Srikanth Kalyan,
Anantapuramu, Andhra Pradesh