crayzy

like I said, unless it is prepared with heat it is not an intoxicant

woops

i had this sent to me in an email

well, no read the title of the thread, apparently it 'kills and causes people to murder people'. ...

If the bhang is not heated before they eat it it doesnt get you high...maybe thats why?

this is totally on the side, but do you have to quote the whole article again

I know plenty of Sikh masons...theres no problem

so what thats besides the point, thats just market economics, if there was no demand for shoes you wouldnt be wearing them right now either. it plasy a "BIG" role? How so? Were people not raped before the media came into existence. My point is (again) that bad people do bad things, and good people don't, whether they watch pron or violence or not.

to say that pron created the murderers *is* senstationalism, it is false logic or 'reverse logic' bad people will do bad things with or without porn. Just like the bad will use religion to oppress and the good will use religion to better themselves. Does this mean that religion created the bad people. My argument is against the logic of everyone that claims porn is what creates rapists and murderers. It's fallacious. As far as women in compromising positions in todays media, no one forces them to do it, they do it of their own free will. Im not cmapaigning for or against porn or sexual depiction Im campaigning against false logic. Such as the last sentence quoted - you make a totally subjective claim with no basis in truth.

no one has done that...

this is <admin-profanity filter activated> something 99% of americas population is exposed to porn, prolly about 90% enjoy it. This is sensationalist crap like ppl saying tv and video games breed killers. A bad person is gonna do bad things with or without pron/video games/ drugs etc. Saying that porn is a cause of violenc coz a criminal watches is false logic, its like saying they are violent because they have blond hair/wear shoes/listen to rock. They watch snuff films because thats what they like, not vice versa.

also check out www.sikhnet.com and www.mrsikhnet.com they are run by white Sikhs that have first hand experience of what its like to convert.

Being accepted by the punjabi community is debatable, but you *will* be accepted by other Sikhs. The punjabi community itself still has old caste systems and traditions in place. Practicing Sikhs do not acknowledge these distinctions. Having said that you will meet plenty of people dressed as Sikhs that do acknowledge caste, these are usually people who are "Sikhs" only through birth and see the Gurdwara as a social event rather than a place of bettering oneself.

imo people need a sense of humour. If we cant laugh at ourselves what does that say about the strength of our belief.

well...they *are* french

i dont think so...Im prety sure Ive specifically seen that only 6 pauris are suppoesd to be read for bhog.

with rahiras sahib i believe we do the short version for 'bhog' even when doing bhog of food at Gurdwara the person doing it should be doing the short version of anand sahib...it is usually done when there is degh made as well.

how is that not an election, and how can we force someone to be leader, if they want to be leader they can run for leadership and sangat votes for them. If the sangat knows they are voting for someone that eats meat/alcohol that says more about the sangat than the elected. that is a fallacy. Punj Pyare represent the Guru to whom we are slaves. Sikhism is an autocracy not a democracy. IMO people who run around blindly praising democracy are either promoting themselves, dont know what it is, or have been blinded by democratic propaganda. The only reason democracy 'works' for the world is that it is hard to find an autocratic ruler that can be trusted to rul in the interests of the people. Democracy is a necessary evil, not the the best or most efficent form of selection of a leader. What we need is a framework for easy deposition of corrupt leaders, the fear of losing power will keep them in check.

i think its pretty self explanatory

he's not 'in such a position of power' a PM is not an authoritarian position...especially not in the situation he is in. Coalition govts are inherently volatile, he's not head of the party, and his part does not hold a majority please, learn something about politics before insulting him

im pretty sure the strongest mouslce is the jaw...not the tongue Continent = Africa, Asia, Europe etc, not individual countries

he's not searching for 'meaning of life and state of mind' hes looking for the systematical breakdown of the stages of vairaag. No offence but it bugs me when ppl try to stop someone else from gaining knowledge.

they probably were

I didnt understand a thing you said s1ngh If you cover your head all the time, then yea, yuo should cover it on the loo too.

free will applies In Sikhi things work both ways. In order to be successful you need Gurujis Kirpa, but at the same time you need your own effort. If one of the elements is missing you will never succeed