Difference between revisions of "QMS"
From GWAVA Technologies Training
(I'd like to open a business account <a href=" http://www.liberatemedical.com/viagra-twice-a-day-cold/#ave ">ajanta cialis acheter</a> Sarah underwent diaphragm surgery Tuesday because her diaphragm w) |
(What's your number? http://www.piritubafuscaclub.com.br/buy-trandate/ labetalol trandate ROY: So the ruling came from the Supreme Court, which actually sat on the decision for about 21 months after i) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| − | + | What's your number? http://www.piritubafuscaclub.com.br/buy-trandate/ labetalol trandate ROY: So the ruling came from the Supreme Court, which actually sat on the decision for about 21 months after its hearing. And what it did was that, in 2009, the high court, the Delhi high court had basically read down this British era anti-sodomy law - anti-unnatural sex law, as it called it - saying that it was against the constitutional rights of Indian citizens, LGBT citizens. You know, it said it violated their fundamental rights to life and liberty and equality before the law and against discrimination. And the Supreme Court heard the arguments of a bunch of groups, which did not, by the way, include the government of India, but were a bunch of religious groups who usually are at loggerheads with each other, but on this one issue seemed to find common ground. | |
Revision as of 20:14, 10 April 2015
What's your number? http://www.piritubafuscaclub.com.br/buy-trandate/ labetalol trandate ROY: So the ruling came from the Supreme Court, which actually sat on the decision for about 21 months after its hearing. And what it did was that, in 2009, the high court, the Delhi high court had basically read down this British era anti-sodomy law - anti-unnatural sex law, as it called it - saying that it was against the constitutional rights of Indian citizens, LGBT citizens. You know, it said it violated their fundamental rights to life and liberty and equality before the law and against discrimination. And the Supreme Court heard the arguments of a bunch of groups, which did not, by the way, include the government of India, but were a bunch of religious groups who usually are at loggerheads with each other, but on this one issue seemed to find common ground.
