Jump to content

Is being gay wrong in sikhi


Guest Singh
 Share

Recommended Posts

Guest AjeetSinghPunjabi
54 minutes ago, JUSTAJATT said:

Being gay is NOT about sikhi.

Being Gay has NOTHING to do with Sikhi,,>>so why does the op keep bringing it in and asking for sympathy??

 

you gotta stop tampering and diluting sikhi to fit your own twisted agenda.  

 

SIKHI IS ABOUT YOUR ORIENTATION TOWARDS GOD.

IT IS NOT ABOUT YOUR SEXUAL ORIENTATION,,, SO JUST PACK IT IN AND STOP BRINGING UP THE SAME FILTH AGAIN AND AGAIN.

 

BTW. Being Gay should NOT be allowed in society..>>full stop.

We have messed up the world and it's play by being leneient and accepting all these divides. the divides just divide further and can never merge towards ONE. so in the light of spirituality>> you are walking AWAY from what is sacred and divine the more you divide.

today we shall accept gay people as norm,,, then gay marriage, then gay anand karaj,. then it will go to paedophiles and other fetish fangs saying that they have a medical problem,, they're born that way,,, we being unfair and predjudice,,blah blah>>>blaaah.. then the paedos will want sympathy and wanna be accepted as norm just like all the pufters currently are.... you guys are just killing and destroying the play of God.

SHAME ON YOU ALL

What a rant ! 

I am no gay activist on this forum . If you see my activity here, its more about the panthic issues most of the times.

But you have a seriously low case of IQ considering the crrap you write .

You think you're a perfect sikh ? Who're you to decide what is within the line of sikhi and what is against it ?

You said If people accept gays, it will lead to acceptance of other "fetishes" . Its a common logical fallacy called the "Slippery slope argument".(If we accept something unconventional and taboo-ish, then it will lead us to slowly accept everything worse taboo-ish) . Nope , that doesn't work that way dude ! 

In every court case around the world decriminalizing homosexuality, the courts have observed that the key word is "consent". 

Remember , for the mughals , sikhs were a perversion . Idol worship is more heinous to a muslim than homosexuality is . Then maybe you should convert to islam too ? 

See how ridiculous I sound , right ? You sound the same way to me.

 

BTW, being gay is not a fetish or fantasy btw. Its reality for millions of people around the world, including a fair share of gay , lesbian, bisexual and transgender sikhs.

 

Gurbani says "Purkh main naar, naar main purkha. bujho brahmgiani" and also divine light is inside everyone. So please don't give me your lecture. 

50 minutes ago, JUSTAJATT said:

Ms AjeetSinghKaurPunjab

seriously????

keep your dirty fetish and dingaling out of the dharam

 

I don't have a problem if you taunt me as "kaur" . I never mentioned anything about any fetish here.

Being gay isn't a fetish , its a written-in-stone congenital reality for millions of people around the globe. 

 I respect kaurs and I think they're 1000 times better than "singhs" (jackals) like you. You're' not only homophobic, you're a misogynist and casteist too, Mr Jatt ! 

If god didn't want us to be gay, maybe he shouldn't have made us this way. 

God is quite queer too. Read Jaap sahib . 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest AjeetSinghPunjabi

All the folks here (and anywhere else on the planet) find male homosexuality especially disgusting because the idea of a man inserting his <banned word filter activated> inside another man's rear is quite a revolting image in the head for most people.

Little do they know, many many heterosexual couple nowadays have unconventional sex (including anal sex) . I don't see the fuss over there . Why ? its between a man and a woman ? 

LGBT are the new  choode-chamyaar of modern era sikh world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jacfsing2
40 minutes ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

No dude ! This is just a hetero-sexist attitude . i.e if a straight couple does it , then its ok .

 

 

No, it's not sexist at all, if an unmarried couple decided to have sex regardless of orientation, it's still wrong.

41 minutes ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

 

Contraceptives were not back then at guru's time. So how can you be sure of what their opinion is on this topic. 

No, but people didn't always talk openly about sex back then, in fact, only until the British came did Sikhs have western perspective of sex. In the past nobody debated it like you are doing now.

44 minutes ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Tell me again how mediums like condoms and pills that prevent conception, not defeat the "purist" "religious" purpose of sex ?

People could have always had sex without pregnancy results. Again you have been indirectly believed in the Christian view of sex.

46 minutes ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Heterosexual sex with contraceptives (since the intention is to not have a child) is certainly exactly the same as homosexuality.

No it's not, another factor that you've been brainwashed by from India was still ruled by Britain, even Hindus are thinking the same.

47 minutes ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Otherwise you think god has a disgust with 2 men or 2 women , and not a man or a woman ?

Yes, that's exactly what it is, any couple that's not married and has sexual relations is not promoted by Gurmat. In Gurmat Homosexual Anand Karaj is not supported.

49 minutes ago, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

Sikhs just like to pick and choose, like every other religion out there. We accept Akal Takht when it decries homosexuality, but when they pass a matta which we don't like, we say RSS/BJP or badals are controlling akal takht.

If you can find any post where I said Badal was good, I will agree with you, but find actual proof.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest AjeetSinghPunjabi

@Jacfsing2 , so the panth is discriminating against homosexuals by not allowing them to have sex without sinning , by not allowing gay anand karaj ?

So god wants only heteros to have sex, and not homos , without sinning ??

Sounds like an abrahamic concept of god most sikhs are used to thesedays.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jacfsing2
Just now, AjeetSinghPunjabi said:

@Jacfsing2 , so the panth is discriminating against homosexuals by not allowing them to have sex without sinning , by not allowing gay anand karaj ?

So god wants only heteros to have sex, and not homos , without sinning ??

Sounds like an abrahamic concept of god most sikhs are used to thesedays.

If you don't like the way Sikhi goes, then you can freely leave and live a proud gay life, and Vaheguru wouldn't care. But if you were to remotely be gay in an Abrahamic faith, then hell-fire for eternity is ready for you by Yallweh. However the other option is remaining celibate, which if you hate women that much is also an option for you. 

But before you make any remark, faggot:

NEVER EVER COMPARE THE GREATNESS OF GURU SAHIB TO SOME PAKHANDI BABA!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Instead of replying to Ajeet paji with anger, why don't people explain it what they are saying with nimrata? If there's something he's not understanding, then why punish him for being gay? And to Ajeet paji, I think it's better if you get your answers from a Gursikh with knowledge, or a high avasta Mahapursh, than asking questions on here. There's nothing wrong in asking questions if we are curious or we do not have the answers. I haven't ever heard any kathavachak comment anything on Gays, or Lesbians or whatever they maybe. But that doesn't mean that they aren't accepted as humans. It's just even I don't know what Sikhi views are on this area. It would be interesting to know. And if somebody explains why it's forbidden, then that would help understand it too. If somebody can put a parchar video on about it, maybe that would be helpful to those that ask questions. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest Jacfsing2
9 minutes ago, simran345 said:

Instead of replying to Ajeet paji with anger, why don't people explain it what they are saying with nimrata? 

+100 If this was the first-time he was asking his question in a respectful manner, I would agree; however, ever since he's gotten on this site; he's been trying to create arguments and spread hate towards one group or another. Sometimes it's straight people sometimes it's people who simply don't know about Guru Sahib, sometimes it's Sikhs. If he wants respect, he needs to get his act together and do the same. 

12 minutes ago, simran345 said:

If there's something he's not understanding, then why punish him for being gay?

Nobody is hating him because he's gay, it's because he's a troll. There are some good gay people, and they may be helpful in the long-term; but nobody is being punished for being gay.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 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