New Delhi: The Supreme Court on Tuesday rejected the central government's petition seeking a review of the apex court's verdict that had declared gay sex a punishable offence.
In Dec 2013, the apex court held that the provision of section 377 of the Indian Penal code would continue to govern non consensual penile non-vaginal sex and penile non-vaginal sex involving minors.
It held that the verdict would hold till the parliament chose to amend the law.
"It is relevant to mention here that Section 377 IPC does not criminalize a particular people or identity or orientation. It merely identifies certain acts, which if committed, would constitute an offence. Such prohibition regulates sexual conduct regardless of gender identity and orientation," Justice Singhvi said, while pronouncing the verdict.
Why Supreme Court's verdict is correct?
According to the court, Section 377 is merely to define the particular offence (Gay sex) and prescribe punishment for the same.
"What Section 377 does is merely to define the particular offence and prescribe punishment for the same which can be awarded if, in the trial conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Code of Criminal Procedure and other statutes of the same family, the person is found guilty. Therefore, the High Court was not right in declaring Section 377 ultra vires Articles 14 and 15 of the Constitution," said Justice Sanghvi.
Here are some reasons why the top court held that gay sex was unnatural.
'''Laws regarding same-sex partnerships in the United States''' 








----
1May include recent laws or court decisions which have created legal recognition of same-sex relationships, but which have not entered into effect yet. 
2Same-sex marriage laws in California are complicated, please see the ''Wikipedia'' article on .




Indiana's  passed a proposed constitutional amendment Monday that would ban same-sex marriage in the state's . Indiana's  already prohibits same-sex marriage. A sentence banning  was removed from the proposal. 

For a constitutional amendment to be approved in Indiana, it must pass both the  and the Senate during two separately elected legislatures, which means there has to be an election between the two sets of votes. The proposed amendment cannot be changed from one voting session to another and cannot be changed from the House of Representatives to the Senate. Once the proposed amendment has passed those hurdles, then the amendment goes to Indiana voters who vote yea or nay on the amendment.

Following the House of Representatives' approval, the Senate passed the proposed amendment, which is known as House Joint Resolution 3, with a vote of 32–17 Monday. Opponents needed eight more votes to stop the proposed amendment from reaching the necessary margin of support.

The proposed amendment already passed both houses in 2011. A change was made this legislative session when the second sentence was deleted first by the House of Representatives and then was passed in a similar form by the Senate Monday. The failure of the second sentence, which proposes to ban same-sex civil unions, could possibly open the door for civil unions in the future. Following the process,  will be reviewed again by the next elected legislature in either 2015 or 2016 to remain in process. 

Although the amended version grants the possibility for civil unions in the future, some in the LGBT (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender) community say it isn't enough. 

"I think it's still bad because it fails to legitimize us as human beings, since it's trying to deny us basic rights,” said Myranda Wanden, program director at , an organization that provides support and advocacy for LBGT teens and young adults. 

Indiana   supported the proposed amendment. Pence, in his "State of the State" speech for 2014, said, “I believe in traditional marriage, and I have long held the view that the people, rather than unelected judges, should decide matters of such great consequence". Pence also called for a civil debate for the matter and to treat everyone with respect. 

“I think the rest of the country is moving towards being more open and accepting about gay marriage," Wanden said. "I think Indiana, which is a conservative red state, saw this and wanted to resist the changing tide. I think it caused fear in many legislators, but I definitely don't think it's reflective of a majority of the Indiana population.”

Indiana is not the only state that prohibits same-sex marriage by law or as proposed by constitution. There are 29 other states that prohibit same-sex civil marriages under their constitutions, while Indiana and three other states prohibit it by statute. The states that allow for some form of same-sex marriage number 17 plus Washington, DC.

Worldwide, there is a wide diversity in same-sex marriage and rights laws. At this time, 17 countries allow same-sex marriage, the most recent being Scotland. Most of the countries that allow same-sex marriage are concentrated in Europe, but there are also countries in South America and Africa, as well as New Zealand, Canada, and parts of Mexico that have legalized same-sex marriage. 
Homosexual sex is legally criminal in at least 78 countries, and punishable by death in five.