Jump to content

Homosexuality


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

As Sikhs we are not to persecute homosexuals or think of them any less as humans but to go as far as saying that their lifestyle in perfectly okay with Gurmat is ludicrous. If we as Sikhs accept homosexuality as being okay with Gurmat then where do we draw the line? is pedophilia, necrophilia and incest also acceptable to Gurmat according to you?

Are you honestly comparing homesexuality to pedophilia and necrophilia? Wow :blink2:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I am. These are all considered paraphilias.

No. Clearly the desire to do things with children or dead people is different to the homosexual attraction to the same gender. Paraphilia is characterised by an arousal to:

  1. Non-human objects
  2. The suffering or humiliation of oneself or one's partner
  3. Children
  4. Non-consenting persons

Homosexuality was considered a paraphilia until 1973, but it no longer is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are you honestly comparing homesexuality to pedophilia and necrophilia? Wow :blink2:

Some people have no problem with incest, but there are laws against this kind of behaviour. Is this not discrimination? Homosexuality is no different than incest. People are attracted to a lot of manmat stuff and rest of humanity need to help them out of their deviant behaviour, instead of humanity going down to their thinking.

Compassion does not mean letting a person commit a wrong action. Compassion is helping people relief themselves of their deviant behaviour.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some people have no problem with incest, but there are laws against this kind of behaviour. Is this not discrimination? Homosexuality is no different than incest. People are attracted to a lot of manmat stuff and rest of humanity need to help them out of their deviant behaviour, instead of humanity going down to their thinking.

Compassion does not mean letting a person commit a wrong action. Compassion is helping people relief themselves of their deviant behaviour.

Fanatics use the same argument when commiting atrocities on "unbelievers" ...

U think aurangzeb was converting kashmiri pandits for time pass ? no , deep down he wanted these kaafirs to go to Jannat (heaven) ... He thought he was right and kashmiri pandits were going to hell for not following islam and thus considered it ok to force them to convert to islam , because converting them would prevent them from going to hell.

So aurangzeb was just thinking for good of people .... could you justify aurangzeb's zulm on this argument ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Due to political correctness of the modern world homosexuality was taken out of the lists of paraphilias in the early 70s because homosexuality began to be widely accepted by the mainstream American society. This is a case of science being influenced by political correctness. Homosexuality is a sexual deviation no doubt. Some sexual deviations like padophilia, necrophilia are banned while some like homosexuality are allowed.

For argument sake, let us say for example that two consenting adults(same sex) want to have a sexual relation with each other, according to you it is okay. Does that mean that incest should also be approved? if a brother-sister, father-daughter, mother-son want to have sexual relations with each other just as long as they are adults is that okay? if not then why is homosexuality okay for you while incest is not?

Gurmat does not agree with everything modern American society does. Ask any Sikh scholar or Mahapursh, no one will agree with homosexuality as being inline with Gurmat. Marriage in Sikh tradition is only between man and woman, not man-man, woman-woman, human-animal, elderly-child, brother-sister etc.

Veerji , You have absolutely NO BASIS in sikhi which says homosexuality is bad ! yes , nothing ! Quran and bible has LOTS of verses prohibiting homosexual behavior . Bible even says in "levicitus" that gay men should be put to death and their blood is on their own hands .

sahib SGGS has nowhere condoned/condemned homosexuality even when such people were present during Guru sahib's time . Even if not , u think Guru sahib didn't knew about same-sex desires .. If u think so , u are insulting Guru sahib's omniscience ..

As to why incest is not allowed , well incest or sex between relatives leads to genetic diseases . It leads to abnormal children being born . You will find lots of such cases in some middle-eastern communities where cousins marry (jews/muslims ) .

So , there is a scientific basis for prohibiting incest ..

I am NOT saying sex between men is not unhealthy . Even sexual relationships in wrong orifice ( which is practiced esp by gay men ) leads to several problems like haemorrhoids , anal sphincter problems , anal cancer and such ...

Still , discriminating on basis of sexual orientation and hate crimes against LGBT shouldn't be tolerated

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It will not be too long, when someone in Canada challenges the incest law (most likely Muslims) on a mass scale and the only reason the law to bar this kind of behaviour will pass is because to society allowing incest will create a higher health care bill (make society worse off). There are high health care cost associated with homosexual behaviour as well, but due to political pressure, the law to bar marriage between same sex was dropped.

The same reasoning can be used to allow incest into society as is used for homosexuality. Sikhs need to wake up to these discussions and understand the reasoning behind them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Fanatics use the same argument when commiting atrocities on "unbelievers" ...

U think aurangzeb was converting kashmiri pandits for time pass ? no , deep down he wanted these kaafirs to go to Jannat (heaven) ... He thought he was right and kashmiri pandits were going to hell for not following islam and thus considered it ok to force them to convert to islam , because converting them would prevent them from going to hell.

So aurangzeb was just thinking for good of people .... could you justify aurangzeb's zulm on this argument ??

Can you tell me what compassion means in Gurmat terms? If you do, then you can see how irrational your reply is. This is a Gurmat forum not a Muslims forum. Try again.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share


  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt
  • advertisement_alt


  • Topics

  • Posts

    • yeh it's true, we shouldn't be lazy and need to learn jhatka shikaar. It doesn't help some of grew up in surrounding areas like Slough and Southall where everyone thought it was super bad for amrit dharis to eat meat, and they were following Sant babas and jathas, and instead the Singhs should have been normalising jhatka just like the recent world war soldiers did. We are trying to rectifiy this and khalsa should learn jhatka.  But I am just writing about bhog for those that are still learning rehit. As I explained, there are all these negative influences in the panth that talk against rehit, but this shouldn't deter us from taking khanda pahul, no matter what level of rehit we are!
    • How is it going to help? The link is of a Sikh hunter. Fine, but what good does that do the lazy Sikh who ate khulla maas in a restaurant? By the way, for the OP, yes, it's against rehit to eat khulla maas.
    • Yeah, Sikhs should do bhog of food they eat. But the point of bhog is to only do bhog of food which is fit to be presented to Maharaj. It's not maryada to do bhog of khulla maas and pretend it's OK to eat. It's not. Come on, bro, you should know better than to bring this Sakhi into it. Is this Sikh in the restaurant accompanied by Guru Gobind Singh ji? Is he fighting a dharam yudh? Or is he merely filling his belly with the nearest restaurant?  Please don't make a mockery of our puratan Singhs' sacrifices by comparing them to lazy Sikhs who eat khulla maas.
    • Seriously?? The Dhadi is trying to be cute. For those who didn't get it, he said: "Some say Maharaj killed bakras (goats). Some say he cut the heads of the Panj Piyaras. The truth is that they weren't goats. It was she-goats (ਬਕਰੀਆਂ). He jhatka'd she-goats. Not he-goats." Wow. This is possibly the stupidest thing I've ever heard in relation to Sikhi.
    • Instead of a 9 inch or larger kirpan, take a smaller kirpan and put it (without gatra) inside your smaller turban and tie the turban tightly. This keeps a kirpan on your person without interfering with the massage or alarming the masseuse. I'm not talking about a trinket but rather an actual small kirpan that fits in a sheath (you'll have to search to find one). As for ahem, "problems", you could get a male masseuse. I don't know where you are, but in most places there are professional masseuses who actually know what they are doing and can really relieve your muscle pains.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Use