Jump to content

Search the Community

Showing results for tags 'morals'.

  • Search By Tags

    Type tags separated by commas.
  • Search By Author

Content Type



Find results in...

Find results that contain...

Date Created

  • Start


Last Updated

  • Start


Filter by number of...


  • Start



Website URL



Found 5 results

  1. What is causing all the root problems for Sikhs? From weak leaders who can't run Punjab. To society issues in the Punjabi Sikh community back home and in the west Let's look at some main issues. Broken marriages/divorces, domestic violence, crime, sexual offenses/rape adultery,physical and mental health problems, family break downs, money,low morality,ethics and values and the list goes on ect. Feel free to add more issues affecting us. Can we pinpoint a root cause for all the above? I have a theory why Sikhs are failing not just in the west but in more importantly our own homeland Punjab.
  2. I have heard and read this expression from atheist's who argue you don't need to follow a religion to know the difference between what is right or wrong thing to do or have morals. I would strongly disagree because: 1) Without a good religion (such as sikhi) you could be indoctrinated to follow some other ideology which could tell you its ok to commit murder, rape, robbery against the person who isn't from your group. 2) What is right in one religion/ideology can be wrong in another. E.g.slaughtering an animal in agnosing death then eating meeting its meat such as beef is perfectly fine in judaism/Islam. However in hinduism killing a cow is a sin and wrong and slaughtering animals inhumanely is wrong other non-abrahamic faiths. E.g Its wrong in islam to worship more than 1 God other than arab pagan moon God Allah however in hinduism it's not wrong and you can worship millions of Gods. 3) Evolution theory which atheists look too for existence of everything see's no right or wrong when it comes to genociding/extincting whole species/races of people. Because its the survival of the fittest if your group is not strong enough to out compete those who are trying to undermine or harm you then you do not deserve to exist as per the evolution theory. It is only a firm adherence to sort of civilized belief systems, a religion that has kept humanity from destroying each other to the point of existence as was the case when modern humans fought with other human species (such as Neanderthals) where eventually those others died off due to genocide.
  3. I'm having trouble on what to do in situations where others people's stupidity is costing them a lot, and if i let it happen im gaining a lot (at little loss to them), but if i stop it (which i kind of feel is the right thing to do), i gain nothing at then no loss to them. When people be idotic, for example if i buy something and the guy says itll be here sunday (and today is friday night and they dont deliver on a sunday), and i then say ok but if its not here by sunday then unfortunately it will be too late and i cant pay you for it (this has cost them shipping costs remember but they dont seem to care, they are also asking for payment after i recieve the item). Actually let me tell you the full story. i met a guy who wanted to sell me something, and he said he only wants bank transfer, i said no because its not secure for me, so he said he will send me the item first. He was super shady, wouldn't send me any better pictures of the item, and told me on a tuesday night that i should recieve the item from overseas by the next day (it arrived friday, today).i offered him 15 quid for the item, but when i asked him later how much, he said 10 quid. I said ok (was this wrong, considering i offered him higher earlier and maybe he didnt read it or maybe he is just not bright at all?) Anyway, the item came - had a fault and he said bin it ill send you another one. The item is worth £10 and shipping costs £3.20. I managed to fix the item by taking it apart and doing some stuff to it. So anyway, now he is sending me ANOTHER item (consider this has cost him too lots of this item, im only gonna pay him £10 in the end anyway, and shipping costs £3.20 on its own), and said it will arrive by sunday. I tried to stop him (not directly though, is this wrong?) i said I urge you not to send if i wont recieve it by sunday because im in a hurry to get it. Does he not know that nobody posts things on a sunday? On paper, im right, and im playing the game of life - hes not bright so hes missing out. But morally, is what im doing correct? I feel like i should at least reinburse him the shipping costs after all this (even though none of this is at fault of my own, i should be losing out but im still winning???) or im just so confused. Like bruh you've almost spent the cost of the item on shipping and how do u not even know that they dont post things on a sunday?? I feel really bad for him. But hes gonna get ripped of so much more by other people than me who have no morals. I wish i could save him but theres nothing i can do.. Help.
  4. Guest

    abstinence celibacy

    Hi this probably wont be a popular thread at all, but just some food for thought. In the ancient text 'Yoga Sutra', is describes how brahmacharya (freedom from sex) denotes true manhood. The same would apply with womanhood. In older times, both genders would consider brahmacharya the normal state (until marriage). Nowadays it seems sexuality is equated with manhood and womanhood, mainly through media brainwashing. However, even the most foolish and immature teenagers could engage in sexual behaviour. (Hence the previously stated attitude is clearly erroneous). Also implied by the media is that sex is a need. Sex may be a desire, but it is not a need. The Latin word for man, 'vir', is the root for the modern word 'virtue'. This does well to imply it is your virtue, not sexual acts, that determine your manliness/womanhood, characteristics such as self-restraint, bravery, mature attitude, patience, perseverance, integrity, humility etc. Another debasing attitude is the reduction of woman, in the mass view, to sex objects. Even women themselves are being brainwashed to believe this. The idea that sexuality equates with female power is incorrect, since biologically women always partake the passive role in sex. By the dictates of nature, intercourse ends as soon as the male reaches orgasm, indifferent to the female. The female takes a servile role. And once the man climaxes, he often feels (by biological impulse) repulsion to his partner. How then is it in the interest of a female to partake in the sexual act with a person without a contract of marriage (whereby the man cannot ordinarily cannot leave until she agrees without violating an oath)? Likewise, on the male's side, you are willing engaging in exploiting a woman purely for pleasure, fully aware that your attraction to her will end when you climax. Deception. The whole servile aspect of the sex act, how is that something that invites a sense of pleasure? Does it not, in a wanton context, donate lack of self-esteem? Also unfashionable is the idea that 'sex is dirty'. But contrary to what the media are duping your brain into believing, sex is dirty. If you want proof, think about (both men and women) performing sex acts with someone you do not find attractive. Another lie is that sex is romantic. Whereas in truth, it is either mutual masturbation or else one person acting servile to the other. I think that both men and woman who have pre-marital sex are being unfaithful to their future marriage partner, due to the physical intimacy of the act. You are exposing yourself to somebody. It is likely you feel a connection to them in that sense even after the relationship ends. It is kind of like you married them. Just some thoughts.
  5. So here's a news story that got me thinking alot this week, and its a story that seems to be getting bigger and stranger daily given today's revelations of Katie Price's (Jordan) freindship with the German peadophile concerned. http://www.vancouverdesi.com/news/british-father-arrested-for-allegedly-killing-man-with-a-single-punch-caught-filming-his-daughter/844704/ Basically, last week, I read in the Wolverhampton Star and Express how a man with a Sikh name : Davinder Singh Kainth, beat to death a disgusting German predator peadophile who was consistently photographing and filming Davinder's 7 year old daughter. http://www.expressandstar.com/news/uk-news/2015/02/09/briton-kills-man-who-filmed-girl/ I read that a few days ago in the Wolverhampton paper and I started to feel so much empathy with Davinder. I started to think how awful it must have been to find a man filming obscene images of your little daughter and how Davinder unknowingly did such a great thing by ridding this world of a notorious predator. Later news articles have started to reveal more about Davinder's lifestyle and it got me thinking. Me and you don't find ourselves in situations like this just as me and you don;t find ourselves in situations like gagandeep singh of Sikh TV found himselves in. These kind of random things don't happen to us because our lifestyles dicate that we don't place ourselves in such situations. Doesn't secret badness and open badness always meet each other somehere along the line ?
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use