A Libertarian’s View On Women’s Entry To Temples & Mosques.
I wrote this more than a year ago, on Quora. At that time, my descent into the world of classical liberalism was a new avenue to me, and that time the Sabrimala issue was raging too, so I thought why not look at this issue from a legal, and constitutional point of view? Our country is not a free state, but a rigid, authoritarian state, you can infer that from the constitution itself, the Indian state practices a pseudo kind of secularism, where they control the management of Temples through extra constitutional governmental bodies except other institutions, other religious institutions have special privileges like managing their institutions by their own elected body even though the state funds the said institution, but not Temples, specifically Hindu Temples. You might want to read about this in more depth, specially the articles from the constitution of India, which make these discriminatory practices constitutionally legal, like article 25‐30. Now, to the main topic.
I believe there shouldn't be any law, at any Public Institution, Public Place, Recreational Place or a Public Place of Worship, barring women to enter the premises of the said place. That should be a no brainer.
Women Or any group of people [LGBTQ+] shouldn't be discriminated against for their Free Associations, at any Public Place.
Let's get this clear; I'm talking about any public place, owned by the state or any department or branch of the state. In this case, the Sabrimala Temple is owned & maintained by a state institution. Thus; whatever they want they can enact, if they think Women should be allowed then no one should be discriminated against this decision. By the way, the deity in Hindu Temples is a legal person, having some rights under the constitution of India. From the journal Indian Legal Services: "In the famous Sabarimala Case (Indian Young Lawyers Association & Ors. vs The State of Kerala & Ors, 2018), it was argued that allowing women of menstruating age into the temple would violate the right to privacy of Lord Ayyappa who is eternally celibate. However, the Court ruled the though deities have property rights, they do not enjoy any fundamental or constitutional right."
Now coming to the second part; if the places are privately owned then the State shouldn't have any qualms about what should be done & what shouldn't be done. The state shouldn't coerce the private entity to enact some state law. It's owner's choice if they wanna open their place to only Transgenders & Gays Or only to Women. [Footnotes at the bottom]
Thirdly; The Marginalised; Women & LGBTQ Community should take the task in their own fucking hand with the help of Free Market Associations & Entrepreneurship, build their own places of recreational activities, places of worship Or any other place they deem necessary & cool. They should enact their own rules, if they want to bar other groups they should be able to do so, if they want to make their place a Gender Specific place then they should go on with that decision. No state authority should be given powers to coerce them to run under the state laws. Simple. If our country value Freedom, Free Will, Liberty, & Self Ownership then they shouldn't interfere with private matters.
Above arguments are taken into consideration from a Libertarian & Classical Liberal perspective Or Point of View. You may disagree or agree with the arguments presented, hope it helps.
