I am no expert on religion or the state.
However, when a temple goes all up in arms about women polluting their sanctum sanctorum – it pisses me off. No point in trying to force a revolution though. To me, the issue is simple. Does the state (centre or state) give any funds to Sabarimala temple or the board? Is the government a board member? Is the government providing security at the temple?
If they are – then it’s the taxpayer’s money that is going to support an institution that discriminates on the basis of sex. Against the constitution, isn’t it? Especially because it’s not a minorities institution. (I could be wrong here – but am venturing into murkier waters.) That, is not acceptable to me. Cut state funding. Make sure it becomes totally un-cool to go to a temple that is discriminatory. A private club has the right to deny admission. But if you receive state funding, you are no longer private.
In the end it’s simple. The more resources women control, the more difficult it will be for any institution to alienate them. Because women will merely find another avenue to give or to pray. Religion is flexible enough to allow for dissent. In the end – temples will have to be less discriminatory because of sheer economic and financial reasons.
Why does it matter you ask? Why don’t women just ignore religion? Because religion is inherited wealth as well. No way am I going to give up on any legacy that I have a right to. Women should be able to go Sabarimala or Timbuktoo not because they want to, but because they have a right to.