Infernal Monk Posted March 5, 2004 Report Share Posted March 5, 2004 I just thought this might be something to address, as it seems to have become a trend here in America. Every city seems to be changing its policies. I just wanted to know what you all think about this. I first of all will say that I disagree. I know gay people, and have nothing against them, but I do not approve of them being wed. Firstly I will say that god created man and woman for a reason....I mean the entire concept of human society has been based on our social relations especially with our significant other, i.e. reproduction. Secondly the gays are asking to be allowed to adopt children...again I disagree because a child needs the love of a mother and a father (A child needs both halves to understand how society operates. Such families also provide a more stable environment for the children). Now, I'm not a psychologist, but I am aware of studies that relate the importance of mother and father in how children turn out: are they more likely to commit crimes, be less ethical etc.. However, I will say that I respect others right to do what they feel is right. I just do not agree with them having to get "married." Keep your affair private,, as already stated this will change the face of society. This brings to mind another question..how come that animals tend not to display homosexual tendencies? Just thinking about this makes me feel that this whole concept is against the laws of nature. Sorry about the spiel, eagerly awaiting your comments. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lil_princess Posted March 5, 2004 Report Share Posted March 5, 2004 actually about 10% of animals are gay.. similar to the human population if not more! i think gay people should have any right to get married, let them, they love each other, you are only sayin most of these things because socially u've been told to think this way, you have been conditioned! (and yes maybe ive been conditioned to say that ?! lol ) ok well back to the point i am not gay.. but i totally have friends and people i know that are, and they are human, and yes its natural to reproduce, but i think gays are intitled to show there affection, after all u don't need marriage to have kids, you need sperm and eggs... thats it! you don't need no paper! but if culturally marriage is acceptable to show totaly commitment and affection, let them show it!!! And god also created gays and lesbians, god made a lot of things, but we have to deal with many other things as well.... im just saying what i believe in and thats equality... it doesn' t matter who u are, u shud be able to do things that anyone else can doo.. so let em! one 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted March 5, 2004 Report Share Posted March 5, 2004 i agree totally with lil_princess. I've had the same discussion with friends who absolutely abhore the concept of homosexuality. I think a lot of it has roots in one's perception of the role of (in our case) Sikhi in their lives. I personally believe that Sikhi is the conduit for us to attempt to become one with Akaal. Why can't a gay/lesbian person not be allowed this? (Not that anyone said this here). In fact, who are we to say that God is only accesible to some and not to others - lol! Incidently, there's a certain species of monkey where the dominant male monkey will rape all the other male monkeys to preserve his dominance! (Source: The Beast's Handbook of the Bizarre. ) 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Khalistani Singh Posted March 6, 2004 Report Share Posted March 6, 2004 Gay people are not bad, and I look at them as equal. But my theory on the gay phenomenon is that, people are just "curious" or try to runaway from their problems by becoming gay. If you think about it, there weren't as many homosexuals as there are as now. Why? Cause our society has grown to liberal and corrupt. We allow way too much to happen. I truly, honestly believe that a few REAL gay people may have existed, but now it just seems like a trend to do. Like if you don't fit into society, its like become gay, and you'll be accepted. God has not created gays and lesbians, society has. God gave men and women two totally different types of reproductive organs, two different hormones. Yes, respect gays equally and treat them as you would treat yourself, but if man had been genetically gay since the world was created, we wouldn't be in existence. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 6, 2004 Report Share Posted March 6, 2004 Interesting, so far no one who has responded has mentioned the place of 'Kaam' in Sikhi, assuming we are of course discussing rights of 'Sikh' gay people right? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted March 6, 2004 Report Share Posted March 6, 2004 If you think about it, there weren't as many homosexuals as there are as now. Why? Cause our society has grown to liberal and corrupt. We allow way too much to happen. I truly, honestly believe that a few REAL gay people may have existed, but now it just seems like a trend to do I see where you're coming from, but remember that nowadays the media is a much more powerful machine. It 'appears' that there are a lot more homosexuals because we are exposed to it to a much higher degree in the media. 'Liberal' and 'corrupt' are two very different words. I don't know about the States, but the UK is much more liberal but no where near as corrupt as many years ago. Gay people have always existed, but todays liberal, and in the case of the UK, uncorrupt society has made it easier for them to be accepted for what they are. In the UK a TV presenter called Michael Barrymore is a prime example. Also, this goes back to your first point where there 'appears' to be many more homosexuals. Like if you don't fit into society, its like become gay, and you'll be accepted lol - so if I wasn't feeling accepted by society I would suddenly start walking with a floppy wrist and start talking with a higher pitched voice!! (And wearing really tight jeans and tight low cut t-shirts, preferably pink!) God has not created gays and lesbians, society has. God gave men and women two totally different types of reproductive organs, two different hormones. Yes, respect gays equally and treat them as you would treat yourself, but if man had been genetically gay since the world was created, we wouldn't be in existence. You're first point is totally, totally wrong. Look at the first post by lil'princess. If your first point in this quote was true then are you suggesting that animals become gay because of the social circles they keep? lol. A lot of what you are saying is linked to the creationist vs evolutionist argument. ie Did God create man explicitly or did God create the conditions for man to exist? I think that a person's answer to this question heavily influences their perception of gays. Yes God did give humans two different hormones generally, but what about those people you have discounted, eg 3rd genders (since this is a popular term!)? Also, some people believe that to reach a very high spiritual level we cannot get married/take a sexual partner. Well if we all did this then we would all die out. Also Khalistani Singh, there's a lot of cases out there where men have been happily married for years but deep inside had a secret desire to become women and in the end become tranny's. Remember, Alexander the Great (ie Sikander) had a male lover which was the norm in that time in Greece. It didn't mean that he hated women, it was just the way society was structured at that time (he would have married one later in life if he hadn't died). I get the feeling that you couldn't have read the first three posts properly Khalistani Singh, because they should have had some effect on the contents of your post. (btw that was not a personal attack, a lot of readers here would almost certainly agree with a lot of what you said) Interesting, so far no one who has responded has mentioned the place of 'Kaam' in Sikhi, assuming we are of course discussing rights of 'Sikh' gay people right? Not everything has to be connected to lust Saihajleen. Have you never watched Wayne's World? tut tut. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 6, 2004 Report Share Posted March 6, 2004 No offence, but I don't associate being 'gay' with spirituality. I associate it with having sexual intercourse using different genital areas than heterosexuals, ever studied anatomy? Tut tut. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted March 6, 2004 Report Share Posted March 6, 2004 lol. Like I said, watch Wayne's World. Btw, I have studied anatomy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted March 6, 2004 Report Share Posted March 6, 2004 No offence, but I don't associate being 'gay' with spirituality. I associate it with having sexual intercourse using different genital areas than heterosexuals, ever studied anatomy? Tut tut. Does that mean that not being gay is associated with spirituality? I think this may have links with another sort of debate: Would a spiritually high person who is in complete control of his/her kaam be able to maintain their spirituality if they also had regular recreational sex with their respective partner? That old guy from Lord of the Rings is gay (Sir Ian McKellen, Gandolf). If we assume that physiologically he shares the same attributes as all other men his age, I doubt whether he could be more sexually active with his partner than the typical pensioner would be . So how does his 'gayness' interfere with his relationship with the Akaal? btw, I'm directing these questions to all on the forum, not just Saihajleen Kaur Khalsa. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 6, 2004 Report Share Posted March 6, 2004 I just think Bro, that being gay is a way to describe someone who has a particular sexual preference, as is heterosexual. I don't have to be gay to love a person who happens to be a woman, you get me? The fact of the matter is that biologically it is unnatural, and unless you think Sikhi allows experimentation which is against nature, then we have to say being 'gay' is something which can be a curse or comes from going to extremes in 'Kaam'. I mean, without getting too explicit here, the anal passage is created to excrete human waste, not for sexual pleasure 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Beast Posted March 7, 2004 Report Share Posted March 7, 2004 lol The reason why I said to watch Wayne's World is that there's a scene where two men are in love with each other, bit only plutonically. Although this is a spoof film (and a crap one), it did highlight an important issue ie there exists those homosexuals who do not necessarily cinsumate their relationship by buggering each other. I even had an argument abt this with a mate over a few drinks. He was surprised when hearing abt Sikander. Maybe he consumated his relationship with his partner before marriage by err...putting him through a bit of pain, or maybe he was just intimate in a plutonic way (i'm on abt Sikander by the way, not my mate). Also, have any of the things said so far in this thread made any impact whatsoever on the reader's feelings towards homosexuals? Since I've been a member here I have noticed time and time again that people will stick to their guns no matter what. http://www.sikhawareness.com/sikhawareness...ighlight=#27207 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infernal Monk Posted March 7, 2004 Author Report Share Posted March 7, 2004 Actually my entire reason for posting what I did was so we could discuss it, and in doing so perhaps learn more about the topic and why we think the way we do (Socratic way of learning, since we are going on about the Greeks, lol). I have been reading all of the replies and have been taking them in. I posted my opinion and want to see what others think to gain another prespective. I'm not going to argue my initial post because doing so would be ignorant and a waste on my part, plus I'm not an expert on this..just posted and now waiting to read other opinions...so I don't think I'm sticking to my guns...lol 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tSingh Posted March 7, 2004 Report Share Posted March 7, 2004 I find this discussion fascinating, especially when the word 'unnatural' is bandied around so much. To start off with, the person who made the statement that homosexuality and spirituality are two words that are not thought to go together, needs to read 'The Essential Gay Mystics' book by the foremost british mystic (who happens to be gay), Andrew Harvey. This book identifies historical mystics who were gay from a number of traditions. He talks openly in his book 'The Direct Path' about his relationship with his husband, and how he was made to decide between his sexuality and his spiritual teacher, by his teacher. He doesn't read like a randy pervert, as some might think, but an enligthened, loving person (not suprisingly)! So perhaps we need to tackle what we mean by homosexuality. The term obviously encompasses feelings of platonic love and sexual feelings. The Beast's point about the platonic feelings between men is an interesting point. From the perspective of ustads/gurdevs...however, I'm more inclined to suggest that that relationship most of the time exists on a father-son relationship, however I'm sure it might spill over into another type of relationship. I'm sure some of you are aware that certain religious institutions in Punjab are reknowned for homosexuality. Now the issue of it being unnatural. This is interesting. Being renunciate is evolutionary suicide, unnatural. By Richard Dawkin's thinking, becoming shaheed would also be totally unnatural. Not eating meat is unnatural. And as someone has already stated, homosexual relationships are noted in animals, such as the incredible bonobos. These are actual relationships, not erratic sexual appetitte. So on what criteria are we deciding what is natural and unnatural? Genetic? Evolutionary? Moral? Cultural? Christian 'Natural Law' argument? etc 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted March 7, 2004 Report Share Posted March 7, 2004 From the Charitropakhyan we get a very clear idea that masculine homosexuality is not the most ideal of relationship which does not equate explicit condemnation. Certain charitras mention male sodomy as a form of humiliation. Having said that female homosexuality, especially in the context of a polygamous marriage (or even outside) is not condemned at all and even endorsed. This is in total harmony with the kshatriya life style. Again I am not expressing my own views but I am only stating what the Charotropakhyan contains. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 7, 2004 Report Share Posted March 7, 2004 Yeah, lol, I thought you would say that Lalleshwari Ji, kidding. JtSingh Ji, Im assuming you're referring to me as 'the person'. Anyway, all I was TRYING to say was that when someone says a person is gay, I don't associate that with his spirituality, but his sexual preference, so how is the label 'gay' related to spiritualism? Whether gays are spiritual is beyond me, I wouldn't know, and I am not ruling it out either. I used the word unnatural JtSingh Veer Ji, because every body part has a general function which is decided by nature or Vaheguru. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted March 7, 2004 Report Share Posted March 7, 2004 SKK wrote: I used the word unnatural JtSingh Veer Ji, because every body part has a general function which is decided by nature or Vaheguru. very good point bhen ji Your point makes total sense especially on the issue of sexuality and pleasure! To those who think that sexuality is only for reproduction one can easily answer back: well, why did Akal Purakh give women a clitoris as it is only designed for pleasure! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr §ingh Posted March 7, 2004 Report Share Posted March 7, 2004 One can ask, if God resides in all, then why did God allow a 'shaver' and 'razor' to be created/made ? :roll: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lil_princess Posted March 8, 2004 Report Share Posted March 8, 2004 most people have been saying that being gay is UNNATURAL and genetically it isn't possible, etc. etc.. well do u think down sydrome is something god created? Lots of things can lead into genetics, and im pretty sure people who are gay have the same thing! and i don't think anything is unnatural!!!! the world is a crazy place, the universe is crazier! and i don't think at all that gays are unnatural, as i said before they are proven to show in animals. And sexuality has to do with heteroseuxals too!! so i don't know why lust has to be involved! i personally know some gay people, and i bet most of u won't know they are gay! its just culturally not exceptable (which is sad) and not all gays wear tight pants..etc.! ok many of u prob thinkin im lezzie but i ain't! i juz think lots of people are misunderstanding and stuck on one side! be open people! WE can go around in circles in it why people are gay..... then i could say the same thing about you.. why are you heterosexual, why do we reproduce, whats the point of reproducing when clearly the human race has overpopulated and dominated the world, forget reproduction! lol its about why we are here... and there is no answer for a solution (lol) sorry forget my rant and go do ur hw! one! ps. i ain't targeting no oneee 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Infernal Monk Posted March 8, 2004 Author Report Share Posted March 8, 2004 Nice to hear both prespectives. Oh and just to clear this up, I have nothing against gays.. I do have a gay friend, and he is a very nice and funny person..lol..and princess you are right we will go back and forth in circles, this is why I'm not arguing my point further (that and I could just as easily be wrong)...lol. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 8, 2004 Report Share Posted March 8, 2004 I love Will & Grace, please note that down. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amrikingh Posted March 8, 2004 Report Share Posted March 8, 2004 will and grace is phat 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 8, 2004 Report Share Posted March 8, 2004 Karen and Jack are so dysfunctional that it kills me. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Javanmard Posted March 8, 2004 Report Share Posted March 8, 2004 MrSIngh wrote: -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- One can ask, if God resides in all, then why did God allow a 'shaver' and 'razor' to be created/made ? so according to you people who shave a sinners? what about non-SIkhs then? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Amrikingh Posted March 8, 2004 Report Share Posted March 8, 2004 people are jealous of gays becoz they cant reproduce so they have a excuse to use there parts for sexual pleasure :stupid: 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr §ingh Posted March 8, 2004 Report Share Posted March 8, 2004 Well for Sikhs it is 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.