It is becoming fashionable these days to make sensational statement. Girish Karnard lampooned V S Naipaul for his antimuslim bias. Called himself a professional secularist. How come the professional is quiet now, when Ram Jethmalani calls Lord Rama a bad husband? Is hurting hindu sentiments acceptable? Or Girish Karnard does not have any friend left among hindus?
Why people like Lord Rama, who Hindus believe to be incarnate of Lord Vishnu, be compared in normal parameters of a householder? At the very least, he was a king. He went to the extent of making absolute sacrifice of giving up his married life to please his subjects. Should this not be the ideal for a person in public life? A public person does not have a private life and they have to cater to the whims of his constituency. Lord Rama did exactly that. That is why we call his tenure as Rama rajya. I wish our leaders were less inclined to benefit their kith and kin. Our India will be different and better if every person in position of power, would not go about benefitting their sons, daughters, wives etc.
If lord Rama was a bad husband, would he go about finding mother Sita to Lanka when she was abducted by Ravana. If he was a weakling and a coward he would have given up his search a long time before. Finally, why consider mother Sita such a weak woman. She set an example about how every man must behave with his wife. If a man cannot trust his wife, then he does not deserve her. Sita raised her sons by herself. She even refused to accept lord Rama. I think we should look at these personalities not from our standards, but look at the standards they set and try to emulate them if we can. If we cannot follow their ideal, then best thing we can do is leave them alone.