RSS supports homosexual and transgender rights, frowns on live-in relationships

New Delhi [India], Sept 20 (ANI): In a major boost to homosexual and transgender rights, the Rashtriya Swayamsevak Sangh (RSS) has thrown its weight behind their cause but has fallen short on extending support to same-sex marriage.

The Sangh has also frowned upon the practice of live-in relationships being practices in the contemporary 'fully functional Indian families'.

The views were expressed in a book titled, 'The RSS Roadmaps for the 21st century', scheduled to be released by the Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat on October 1.

Written by Akhil Bharatiya Vidhyarthi Parishad's national organising secretary Sunil Ambekar, the book holds significance as it is the first such publication expressing RSS's views on contemporary issues.

In the chapter 'Family and Emerging Modern Relationships', Ambekar quotes RSS 'sah sarkarvyah' Dattatreya Hosabale: "I don't think homosexuality should be considered a criminal offence as long as it doesn't affect the lives of others in society. Sexual preferences are private and personal."

The author mentions that Hosabale has further clarified that "gay marriages should not be institutionalised for it will institutionalise homosexuality. So it should be prohibited."

Ambekar, however, opined that inclusion is a key concern and quoted Sarsanghchalak Mohan Bhagwat where he said: "Society is changing and we need to accommodate everyone so they do not feel isolated."

On transgender rights, the author pointed toward their existence even during the Ramayana era. He goes on to state that for the first time 'kinnar (eunuch) akhara' was allowed a ceremonial procession in Kumbh 2019.

The Sangh, however, has stuck to its earlier views on live-in relationships and has felt that was suitable for Indian society.

"Evidence shows that live-in relationships do not culminate in marriage but lead to separation with physical and psychological ramifications. In conclusion, they are a negative role model for society," it says.

The author goes on to point out that this type of arrangement is understandable in countries where strong family system is absent.