Hypothetical New Sikh Sect That Accepts Homosexuality

[Kira]

I can see the logic in your definition. I'd just be careful in blurring the lines between lust and something like ambition and drive. Lust, by mere definition, has negative connotations in my mind at least. You could talk yourself out of pursuing a noble hobby, achieving a career, or anything else which requires single-minded concentration and desire to succeed, particularly if lust encompasses obsession in the way you describe. As always it's about balance.

Yes of course. My apologizes, that is what I meant but my wording was slightly off.

[Kira]

I didn't say whether it was a choice or not, what I said was people are born with Kaam, you're still over-defensive. Plus lots of people who thought they were gays now live in happy straight marriages.

You should read up a bit more about sexuality. It isn't defined by labels, its more like a scale or waveband we all fall under.

[KhoonKaBadlaKhoon]

I didn't say whether it was a choice or not, what I said was people are born with Kaam, you're still over-defensive. Plus lots of people who thought they were gays now live in happy straight marriages.

The amount of people who pretend to be "cured" is ridiculous. Its just Christians who want to spread the idea that homosexuality can be cured.

[Akalifauj]

edit

[jkvlondon]

Did I not speak about mutual consent in the post you just quoted? Of course I don't support marital rape. I'm against non-consensual activities of any sort. What did I say that prompted such a question?

I'm defensive of gay people because gay rights is a cause I care about.

Marriage should be predicated on love, first and foremost. But I can't exactly stop those who wish to get married for the wrong reasons.

You support gay rights because you have been taught that all decent people should be advocates for that subliminally on billboards new media and films ...it is part of the elites distraction agenda . Sikhi doesn't give two hoots about sexual orientation because that whole enchilada is a distraction from the true mission ...earning kirpa ...Yes Marriage is supposed to be about love ,true love : Love for Akal Purakh that's why it is an institution in every faith.

Sikhi is homosexuality neutral neither for or against but it is definitely Con-Kaam and Pro-Naam . A homosexual could be an Amritdhari but he/she would have to give up on that aspect of life as it would clearly be leading to increasing Kaam even married folks will find that Naam lessens need for Kaam .

[Kira]

If you prepare for test in this manner. How come you couldn't simply tell what X was. X, being to remember what Sri Guru Teg Bahadur Sahib ji said to Sri Guru Gobind Singh Sahib ji? This shows, who is more concerned with presenting Gurbani as is.

X being a fact and then applying that fact to a set of rational problems that are presented. You're looking to take the literal word of the Guru sahib when there is usually a hidden message behind everything the Guru writes. They weren't dictators, they were guides. You're making the Guru Granth sahib and our guru's seem more akin to the Quran or the Bible which is more a set of rules rather than Spiritual advice.

Again you simply cannot even remembering what the Guru said to his son and repeating it here. First learn to remember what the Guru says and the second test is to apply what the Guru has said. Yet you have a deep burning desire to add your thoughts into Guru Sahib`s advice to his son. Guru Sahib didn`t imply anything. He already told you what he wants from his son very clearly; with your wife, increase your relationship, but don`t go to another woman`s bed even in your dream. The word used by Sri Guru Teg Bahadur Sahib ji for how to relate to the wife is ਸਾਥ. Guru Sahib says to increase ਸਾਥ.

A burning desire to add my own thoughts into the Guru's words? Our founder Guru Nanak started his life asking questions, looking for answers. Our Guru Sahib has always used poetry,metaphors to convey a point. Every Piece of advice our Guru gives us has a meaning, it isnt wrong to explore that. If we take the literal part of everything we would all end up very confused.

Sath means together. Increase togetherness with ones wife? sounds like sound advice from Guru-ji. But the word Love is also mentioned there. Have a look at this video.

If marriage is the union of 2 souls. Why are you making one of the basis for marriage sexual inclination toward the same or opposite sex? All along I have said the Guru said through Gurbani; marriage is between a man and a woman. It is your camp, who says sexual inclination toward the same gender should be accepted in Sikhi.

How is it so hard for you to understand. Heterosexuality is sexual inclination towards the opposite sex, Homosexuality is the sexual inclination towards the same sex. How on earth can you say that their not basically the same except for the obvious difference in preference. Marriage is the union of 2 souls, thus I have no objection to either Homo or Hetro relations.

Now you're putting words in the Guru sahib's mouth. Many times the word "Spouse" is used instead of wife. Spouse implying you're life partner.

How can there be a homosexual couple, when there is no such thing as couple outside of marriage in Sikhi? Homosexual couple basis is on sexual inclination toward the same sex. Add the word couple to it and now you have a relationship based on sexual attraction between two same sex individuals.

So when I say a couple of people living together I must mean they're together physically right :happy2: . Homosexual couple is based on sexual inclination towards the same sex. Just as Heterosexuality is sexual inclination based towards the opposite sex.

I don't think you quite understand the definition of Heterosexuality or Homosexuality. In both cases it's more than just "sexual" It's to do with love. The love of a woman or a man. Love is not restricted by sexual desires, there doesn't need to be a physical relationship between individuals for them to be in love.

The same SGPC you bash are the one's who said women can be in the Punj Pyare. According to western thinking, which you hold dearly, this SGPC of the 1930s was 'forwarding' thinking and gave 'freedom' to women. You shot yourself in the foot. Nice, very nice!!!!!

Let us review what I said.

What has that got to do with anything? The Guru's accomplished many great social changes in their times. But that has nothing to do with the Rehet maryada which was written up a good few decades ago (1950s) I believe. It was created by the Sikh Sangat and many takhsals have their own variations. That only proves my point that social factors would influence it greatly as even during that time the SGPC were in the pockets of India. They still are, they've never ever gone against them. Their still afraid of the word Khalistan and even struggled to point the finger at indra Ghandi for her acts of pure evil.

I never said they were "forward thinking". Anyone who thinks the 1930's western world was "forward thinking" is deluding themselves, It was still a time plagued with inequalities. Look at America where Blacks were struggling for rights. It took till 1928 in the UK for woman to get the right to vote on the same terms as men. Rather than putting words in my mouth, please counter my points properly. I never said the West was Forward thinking, far from it. I never said the SGPC was forward thinking.

They let woman be in the Punj Pyare. So what? Guru Sahib never stopped them. When Guru ji stood out the open and asked for a head there were woman present. It was an open Diwan. Most people struggled to let that tradition go because the Original Punj Pyare were men, in actuality it was the 5 virtues they represented that were the symbolism behind them.

Is this what you call holding a different view; misrepresenting Gurbani by not being able to repeat what the Guru said, discounting the importance of Gurbani on this topic, and mixing your thinking with Gurbani and writing the whole statement off as Guru Sahib's wisdom?

By you're logic anyone coming to a different conclusion from Gurbani than your own should be executed for actually thinking. Thinking being something our Guru-Ji encouraged. I'm not misrepresenting anything. So far you've added multiple statements into my mouth and bring up subjects that aren't even related to the debate.

[SadSingh]

im just curious is this a big problem in our community, gay people not being able to marry or are we just talking about a hypothetical problem.

is there any articles i can read where gay people were not able to marry in gurdwara

is this topic even relavent, why do we waste time on things that arent even a problem in our community

it seems like we bring controversial topics just to fight for no reason

[jkvlondon]

I think everyone can be at least bisexual if they really tried to some extent.

hmm ? OK it's nuture or nature but sure you can persuade people don't mean it's a desirable thing to do .

[Balkaar]

im just curious is this a big problem in our community, gay people not being able to marry or are we just talking about a hypothetical problem.

is there any articles i can read where gay people were not able to marry in gurdwara

is this topic even relavent, why do we waste time on things that arent even a problem in our community

it seems like we bring controversial topics just to fight for no reason

I agree, I think we ought to focus on the problems that truly matter, like whether or not we should have chairs in the langar and be allowed to tie up our beards.

Of course no gay person has attempted to get married in a Gurdwara. They're not idiots, they know it would never be allowed under any circumstances, for the moment (we've all seen that even Muslims are being allowed to marry Sikhs in Guru Ghars). 5% of the human race is gay. From this, we can deduce that 5% of Sikhs are also gay. There are 30 million Sikhs worldwide, and 1.5 million of them are homosexual and suffering in silence. How exactly is this not relevant?

[eduardo]

Just a little something I spotted and thought worth mentioning:

"Two Moroccan gay men have been sentenced to four months each in jail after they were arrested for standing too close to one another as they posed for a photograph in front of a historic site in Rabat. Male homosexuality is widespread in Morocco. Until recently there was a de facto toleration of same-sex relations, providing they were private and hidden. The intensifying repression coincides with more gay Moroccans coming out and the emergence of online gay publications and chat rooms.”

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/jun/22/moroccan-gay-men-four-months-prison-photograph

Just felt the need to mention this, not sure why, probably to back Balkaar's argument up.

I am straight by the way, 100%, I love the ladies.