If Sikhs Were Forced To Marry Gay Couples?

[MisterrSingh]

Did you forget some of my post lol? Because the goal is to have offspring (so they can teach dharm too), and you van only have offspring in a married rishta. Needing a partner for this journey is a bad excuse, considering we have sadhsangat already.

Well you can physically have children outside of marriage.

[MisterrSingh]

Those kids are najaias though, which is paap. Now, mind you I'm not talking about adoption. I'm talking about you (for example) being the father of a kid, and not married to the kids mother. That's paapi.

Who have you been talking to? I'll have you know that child is loved! I've named him Jagdeep Snow.

[garch]

Although I myself am strongly in favour the implementation of an Anand Karaj for homosexuals, the Sikh Panth is a democracy and my opinion doesn't rule.Even I accept that the Panth has to give its consent if something of this kind is to be allowed.

Anand Karaj for homosexuals?

The maryada for anand karaj was set by the gurus, have u heard of a transsexual anand karaj or a homosexual anand karaj from the gurus time?

Of course not, because it never happened.

Was there no transsexuals or homosexuals around then???

Sikhs voting for or ever advocating homosexual anand karaj is paramount to contempt of the gurus blessed anand karaj ceremony.

I am not against homosexuals being accepted by the sikh panth, in fact the opposite. its the first ive heard anybody pro homosexual anand karaj - its a completely thoughtless and dangerous idea!

[garch]

The goal of marriage in Sikhism is to have a partner in your journey to vaheguru. How do same sex marriages not have this?

gurmat being accepting of homosexuals isnt the same thing as promoting a sexual union between two folks of the same sex as being beneficial on the path to mukti?

Guru sahib has only ever been known to have blessed a union (gristi&sexual) between man and woman as being parvaan on the journey to mukti. Thats the example we have to follow.

A homosexual should be open about there sexuality and if they are to have a relationship with another person of the same sex and they are to walk the path to Waheguru then it must be non-sexual - and can not be considered marriage.

Addressing the OP, if sikhs were ever forced to second guess the example shown by the gurus and alter the anand karaj... they should protest.. if this doesn't work they should take whatever steps are neccessary to fight the oppression.

[Balkaar]

What your implying is Guru Sahib (a straight) married because of Kaam?

No, I was turning Preet's logic against her.

I don't believe the same is to be said for heterosexual marriages. I don't believe it is even to be said for homosexual ones.

[Balkaar]

The goal of heterosexual marriages in Sikhi is to have an offspring and to have a paka sahayat/partner who will not leave you, and the goal is not necessarily to enjoy sexual kaam.. If you have an offspring you can teach them dharm, and they will teach dharm to those who ask them as well which leads to giving other kalyan. If you are homosexual in Sikhi, you can have a homosexual partner if you'd like, just not marry because the main goal is to have an offspring in marriage.

**I feel like I am being rude, but I really am not trying to come off rude.

I'm sorry, I didn't see this earlier. Actually this view seems reasonable enough Preeet. Are you totally fine with homosexuals having intimate physical relations outside of marriage?

Don't worry about coming across as rude, you don't. As often as I disagree with the things you have to say, I've always found you to be polite.

[thugger]

gurmat being accepting of homosexuals isnt the same thing as promoting a sexual union between two folks of the same sex as being beneficial on the path to mukti?

Guru sahib has only ever been known to have blessed a union (gristi&sexual) between man and woman as being parvaan on the journey to mukti. Thats the example we have to follow.

A homosexual should be open about there sexuality and if they are to have a relationship with another person of the same sex and they are to walk the path to Waheguru then it must be non-sexual - and can not be considered marriage.

Addressing the OP, if sikhs were ever forced to second guess the example shown by the gurus and alter the anand karaj... they should protest.. if this doesn't work they should take whatever steps are neccessary to fight the oppression.

But did guru sahib prohibit it?

[Kira]

What your implying is Guru Sahib (a straight) married because of Kaam?

No, he's implying that marriage isn't a relationship based on lust. There's sexual attraction and then there is lust which is obsessing over that.

Edit: Again I don't know much about the Anad Karaj and I've never read it, still far to young to consider marriage but it's gender neutral from what I hear, it's the union of 2 souls. Surely since souls don't have genders that shouldn't be an issue? The whole point of Marriage for us as Sikhs is to have a partner to help us attain our final goal. sexual or even sexual practices shouldn't even fall in the same category as this. 2 people can be married and not have a sexual relationship, but still love one another and then use that love to get to the ultimate form of love. Waheguru himself.

[thugger]

Did you forget some of my post lol? Because the goal is to have offspring (so they can teach dharm too), and you van only have offspring in a married rishta. Needing a partner for this journey is a bad excuse, considering we have sadhsangat already.

Also, homosexuals can adopt and raise those kids in dharam too

[garch]

But did guru sahib prohibit it?

Guru sahib prohibited very little, but have told us sex to satisfy kaam(lust)/moh(attachment) only strengthens humkar (sense of 'I'). It is clear what the gurmat answer is here. Its up to each of us decide what acts to prohibit.

If the sexual relationship is for procreation its an action with greater purpose and wouldn't be considered kaam/moh.

To answer ur question plainly because homosexual sex can't lead to procreation and the point of it can only be kaam or moh, therefore it isnt gurmat.

Sex within hetero marriage can also (does more often then not) lead to us straying from the path described as "khandeo tikhi, valo niki".

Yes this would seriously clash with social norms of today... but the path to Waheguru only gets tougher if we judge what is acceptable by comparing against what the rest of the 'civilised' world accepts.