Strokes on Sabarimala

The Sabarimala temple controversy has hogged much attention and debate of late.
It is another manifestation of the Religion v/s Rights dilemma that the modern world finds itself in.
I have read many a passionate advocacies of the ban on the young women in the Sabarimala temple.
But what I feel is that no matter what faiths, passions and beliefs you breathe in, the stratosphere has to be of Laws and Rights. Religion is personal but Justice is not. And Justice just cant walk if it is made to drag the burden of everybody's faith and beliefs along. Such an attempt is foolish and naive. While the democracies the world over easily give the masses the right to choose their government, the Constitution of each country has been designed by a group of learned and wise men. It would be ridiculous to give the people the right to make their own rules. Can you even imagine the chaos that would prevail if that were to happen? That country would become ungovernable!
Countries and societies can be governed only with discipline. Of course, the system should respect the voice of each citizen, and it should be heard, and heeded. But, the foundation has to be of Discipline.
Pampering a section of the citizens by bending over backwards to cater to their "sensitivities" or "opinions" opens a Pandora's Box......who should you listen to? And who should you not? And to what extent? And by pandering to someone's beliefs, you are probably earning the disapproval of someone else.....so the government thats blessed by one section of the citizenry, is labelled as 'partisan' by another. And that disapproval, when tempted to its extremes, can become anger against the "unjust" government. The "pampered" citizens cant understand the "anger" of the other sections.....the whole thing just divides the society into different camps, each hostile to the other.
"Belief" is one thing that is deeply personal. There can be absolutely no generalisations about it. No one can say with confidence that "So and So group of people believes in such and such things."
And so, it is impossible to frame social policies and laws on the basis of belief.
What then should be the basis?
Basic principles of human justice, of course.
When the Britishers banned Sati and legalised widow remarriage, would there have been no protests then? Wouldn't religious sentiments been hurt then? Surely, they would have been. But since the iron rod was strict, the people obeyed.
Its a similar case here. The ban is illegal (i feel this, despite the Kerala High Court having upheld the ban in 1990, in favour of the religious sentiments). So, the women should be allowed into the temple.