Should We Support Lgbt Community?

[Quantavius]

For those who do not understand why incest is wrong, they should know that Incest increases the chances of producing children with genetic deformities, creates severe internal family problems and often involves rape/child abuse. For that reason, incestuous relationships are very selfish and harmful. Gurbani does not need to explain that paedophilia, rape or murder is wrong because human’s moral judgment is based on what is harmful. Humans should be smart enough to understand this.

Dasam Granth mentions Kalyug’s worsened stages before Kalki Avatar where there is an increase of incest and infidelity. And I guess that’s why some users here are being confused to compare homosexuality to incest because they think accepting homosexuality will lead to accepting other sexual activities even though homosexuality is currently just as prevalent as incest. However, homosexuality wasn’t mentioned at all in Dasam Granth. The message that Dasam Granth has brought forward is that there is an increase of kaam, cruelty, selfishness and the absence of true love, just as it is occurring now where people are becoming promiscuous due to their obsession of having fun. People, whether they are straight or not, are losing the concept of love and increasing the chance of producing diseases and creating unstable families. Similarly incest and infidelity destroys families and is based on false and selfish love.

Whether homosexuality is allowed in sikhi or not, people should always be supportive of homosexuals and not treat them like they have a disease. Straight people can have just the same amount of kaam as a homosexual person. It is all animalistic behaviour. Sikhs are instructed by Guru Sahib to be compassionate and see Vaheguru in everyone. There is no reason to resent homosexuals as they are not causing harm. Being hateful would only deter people from sikhi and makes us appear ignorant and unapproachable. How would a homosexual feel if a sikh told them their behaviour is equivalent to criminals like paedophilia etc. Guru Sahib did not speak ill of homosexuality, so what makes us think we are in a better position to do this.

Everybody knows the ill effects of incest. The argument on incest was used as a comparison to homosexual sex. If one can be justified why not the other? Per my limited understanding, homosexual sex, it is also very detrimental to ones health. You should read what is actually written and not jump to conclusions.

Nobody cares what homosexuals do in their time so you can take it easy here. No damsel in distress for you to save here. LOL! So many like yourself are so brainwashed that any criticism leveled at Gays and it is immediately perceived as an 'attack' and thus a superman savior like yourself is needed. LOL! Please actually read the points and stop blindly assuming and judging.

The issue here is on gays reinventing the institution of marriage.

[Quantavius]

What about the sexual fluidity of some women who when they reach a certain age and have not found themselves a man become lesbian?

There might be some truth to that. I've met a divorced woman with a kid who subsequently became a lesbian.

[KhoonKaBadlaKhoon]

@Balkaar

On the the ToE, prove it. Make a monkey into a human being. Otherwise it's nothing but a theory.

You are contradicting yourself. How can you 'rape' without having any attraction to the same sex in the first place? Are you saying that if I locked you up with another dude and threw away the key, you'll rape him or be allowed to be raped? LOL!!!!

Personally I don't believe it's a conscious choice but I also don't believe born this way theory. The answer is somewhere in between and conditioning does play a part.I'll resign to the fact that we don't have all the answers.

Yadda, yadda, yadda....The question is can you prove it? No, you can't. Therefore it's nothing but a theory period, end of story.

It's irrelevant what the reasons are for 'prison rape' as it is still a homosexual act. Who cares what the reasons are. Remember your original contention, Gays are 'born this way'. Just answer the question, if you were locked up with another dude in a prison cell, would you indulge in homosexual sex with him?

You are not an animal but a human being thus a higher sense of behavior and responsibility is expected of you from society. Dogs also lick their balls. Will you know indulge in it since animal do it as well? If you put 2 male dogs with 2 female dogs, both males would still try to hump the females and not each other.

Are you kidding me?... You really believe these are good points lol? These men prison are not actually gay, like Balkaar stated after being locked up for years and years they will eventually pick some weaker inmate, simply for the sake of engaging in sex, out of desperation. They'll often go out of their way to make their victim as feminine as possible as well. Its not nearly the same thing as gay men in free society. I think you're either really sheltered or just pretending to be ignorant to get this "point" across.

Oh and FYI, animals very often engage in homosexual acts. Fact.

[Quantavius]

@Khoon

If you a man can have sex with another man, you're a homosexual. It's that simple. Why are you so confused? Is a homosexual a different race? Nope. A different ethnicity? Nope. Who and what is a homosexual? It's someone who has sex with their own gender. It's as simple as 1+1 = 2 yet all of you are so confused.

If I robbed a bank out of 'desperation', does that mean I'm not a thief?

Animal also lick their balls and eat their own feces. Are you going to that also?

Just answer the question I asked Balkaar to which he refuses to answer. If you were locked up in a jail with another man, will you be having homosexual sex with him (assuming you're male also)?

[Jonny101]

Quantavius has again brought in excellent points to this discussion. It's really strange how many here are saying prisoners who perform homosexual acts are not homosexuals. That's like someone saying a brother having incest sex with his sister out of sexual desperation is not a incestuous person. If you initiate homosexual sex, that makes you a homosexual. There are not two way of looking at this. The fact that prisoners do it who were previously not homosexuals proves this is something that one is nurtured into. It is nurture not nature that is the culprit here.

[KhoonKaBadlaKhoon]

Quantavius has again brought in excellent points to this discussion. It's really strange how many here are saying prisoners who perform homosexual acts are not homosexuals. That's like someone saying a brother having incest sex with his sister out of sexual desperation is not a incestuous person. If you initiate homosexual sex, that makes you a homosexual. There are not two way of looking at this. The fact that prisoners do it who were previously not homosexuals proves this is something that one is nurtured into. It is nurture not nature that is the culprit here.

The ACT is gay, the prisoners may or may not be gay. Is the one being raped gay too since he is involved? There are literally guys out there who will perform a gay act out there if large sums of money are involved, they don't care if they will be called gay as long as they get their money, but they are not gay. Homosexuality is being attracted to a fellow males, you dont need to have attraction to engage in a homosexual act. Come on guys, this is common sense. Also, Im not even going to bother with that ridiculous incest comparison.

[KhoonKaBadlaKhoon]

@Khoon

If you a man can have sex with another man, you're a homosexual. It's that simple. Why are you so confused? Is a homosexual a different race? Nope. A different ethnicity? Nope. Who and what is a homosexual? It's someone who has sex with their own gender. It's as simple as 1+1 = 2 yet all of you are so confused.

If I robbed a bank out of 'desperation', does that mean I'm not a thief?

Animal also lick their balls and eat their own feces. Are you going to that also?

Just answer the question I asked Balkaar to which he refuses to answer. If you were locked up in a jail with another man, will you be having homosexual sex with him (assuming you're male also)?

Homosexuality is not just the act of having sex with another male, its being ATTRACTED to another male. If a man is attracted to other males, but dies without having never had sex with another male does that mean he was not homosexual?... Incest and robbing are ACTS, homosexuality isnt just the act sex, its more than that! Im not confused at all, bud.

[Jonny101]

The ACT is gay, the prisoners may or may not be gay. Is the one being raped gay too since he is involved? There are literally guys out there who will perform a gay act out there if large sums of money are involved, they don't care if they will be called gay as long as they get their money, but they are not gay. Homosexuality is being attracted to a fellow males, you dont need to have attraction to engage in a homosexual act. Come on guys, this is common sense. Also, Im not even going to bother with that ridiculous incest comparison.

I understand the point you are trying to make here. But I am not speaking of prostitutes. I said the prisoner who willingly INITIATES the homosexual act is homosexual. The straight victim of this rape is obviously not since he did not willingly become the participant of the rape.

And yes rapist is a homosexual for the obvious reason that he willingly initiated a homosexual act. I mean if lets say a grown man rapes a child just to show his dominance or out of desperation(like the homo prisoner) then obviously he's a pedophile because he willingly performed an act of pedophilia. Similarly if one sibling rapes another sibling just to show dominance or out of desperation(like the homo prisoner) that makes him incestuous doesn't it?

If the pedophile and the incestuous person in this scenario rightfully labelled as such then why is a person who performs homosexual acts for the same reason exempt?

[Balkaar]

Yadda, yadda, yadda....The question is can you prove it? No, you can't. Therefore it's nothing but a theory period, end of story.

Are you a creationist? How do you explain the abundant diversity of creatures?

The proof is in there in the fossil record. The organisms whose remains litter the lower, older strata of the earth are much simpler than those whose may be found further up in the newer strata. Study of the genetic composition of Homo sapiens has shown that it is extremely similar to that of the great apes, quite similar to other less advanced mammals, and much less so to reptiles and organisms more distantly related to us in the evolutionary tree. This all points to a common ancestor. Also, notice how strains of bacteria become resistant to antibiotics over time? That there is natural selection in practice. Bacteria with mutations which render them immune survive and pass on their genes, those that aren't immune are killed off.

I get the feeling that this evidence, which seems to be of enough magnitude to sway all the greatest scientific luminaries of the world (people far smarter than you), still won't be able to penetrate the nutty enigma that is your mind. Just what sort of proof would convince you? A monkey being turned into a human being? I've already explained that that is not at all how evolution works and by making such a stupid request you've shown yourself to be wholly ignorant of the process. You're impermeable mate.

The term theory, deployed in scientific circles, doesn't mean exactly the same thing as its equivalent used in every day parlance. When you and I conceive a 'theory', it's more of a hunch. When a scientist develops a 'theory' it is thoroughly well substantiated with studies and with hard evidence. You're confusing it with the term hypothesis, which is to the scientist what theory is to the layman. Gravity is just a theory too you know. Come to think, I hope that means gravity might not be true either, because then there's a slight chance that you'll float the hell away from your computer and this earth, and I won't have to continue to subject myself to the torture of dignifying your gibbering madness with a response.

Just answer the question, if you were locked up with another dude in a prison cell, would you indulge in homosexual sex with him?

Not with any ordinary bloke, no. However if I was locked up with YOU Quantavius, I'd seriously consider it and perhaps even follow through, just so I could annoy you.

[KhoonKaBadlaKhoon]

I understand the point you are trying to make here. But I am not speaking of prostitutes. I said the prisoner who willingly INITIATES the homosexual act is homosexual. The straight victim of this rape is obviously not since he did not willingly become the participant of the rape.

And yes rapist is a homosexual for the obvious reason that he willingly initiated a homosexual act. I mean if lets say a grown man rapes a child just to show his dominance or out of desperation(like the homo prisoner) then obviously he's a pedophile because he willingly performed an act of pedophilia. Similarly if one sibling rapes another sibling just to show dominance or out of desperation(like the homo prisoner) that makes him incestuous doesn't it?

If the pedophile and the incestuous person in this scenario rightfully labelled as such then why is a person who performs homosexual acts for the same reason exempt?

Bro those were really just examples to show why one may do it, however its not the reasons of "domination" or "desperation" that disqualifies the "prisoner" from being homosexual, its his lack of attraction to males. The act will ALWAYS be homosexual however. If a man rapes his sister, the act is always going to be incest, no changing that, incest requires no specific attraction to any gender or any person.

I think I need to leave this discussion, doesn't feel very right defending deviant behaviour. I know where you are coming from too, I myself would call such a prisoner a "f*ggot," but what I said above is still true to me.