Homosexuality with Vaishnava theology is a direct offense to Srila Prabhupada

[stonehearted 0]

Pritha: Personally I don't mind that you posted it here if it helps to shed some honest light on the subject. It has been not talking which caused more trouble in the movement than talking has.

 

In fact, I only brought it up because "god" asked for this disgusting thread to end; however, he (she?) began the thread. Moreover, this has been discussed over and over again on this forum. There's no lack of discussion of this topic here. Unfortunately, it almost always degenerates into name-calling, self-righteousness, and even vaishnava aparada. This makes me question the value of such discussion.

[stonehearted 0]

Dear god, I pray that you explain why you posted this article in this particular thread.

 

You most unqualified servant,

Babhru das

[Guest guest]

Admin:

 

Please refrain from such discussions,

and keep the topics on subjects relating to:

 

Lord Krishna and His Devotees.

 

Thankyou.

[stonehearted 0]

Pritha: If GALVA originated just to help those with this type of "broken body" return to devotional service, as they claim they have brought some back to chanting and such, that would be fine. But if you read between the lines, and lately not even between the lines, this is NOT their goal. Their goal is to make a third gender acceptable, to make marriage of homosexuals normal, and so on, within DEVOTEE society. That is 100% bogus and we do not see even one example of Prabhupada making such allowances.

 

Be careful not to fall for the party line of GALVA. They are good politicians and make it sound like they just want to hear, chant and go to the temple like everyone else. But they want other things too, and they are things which are contrary to Prabhupada's teacihngs.

 

Or maybe they actually mean "like" everybody else - making it acceptable. But they are not like everybody else and need to accept that theselves. While I dont believe a homosexual can change, instead of trying to change us they need to be more honestly accepting of their birth in this life, deal with it, and own their sexual preference as a problem rather than ok. From there it will be easier to work on purification.

 

 

Babhru: Many of the same things were said (still are being said) about women and gurukulis' "activism." I didn't buy it then, as you know. In fact, when I engaged Ameyatma in disussion of polygamy, he accused me of having ulterior motives for questioning his line: he asked if I just wanted to enjoy everyone's daughters myself.

 

You exhort us to read between the lines. I'm not sure what you mean by that. As an English professor, I'm probably a pretty sophisticated readers, and I know that real reading between the lines is reading critically, which means reading with discernment. That means asking questions about the identity, background, and motive of the authors, as well as considering the context of the text in question. It doesn't mean making up stuff that's not there. I've spent a little time on the GALVA site recently, and I haven't yet found anything advocatinggay marriage in devotee society. I don't know that Amara has written about that yet at all.

 

You say GALVA folks are good politicians. Who is that? Which of these politicians do you know? I know Amara personally, and he's no big politician. He may be an intelligent propagandist, but if he (or any of the others) were a politician, you'd see a different porfile.

 

The bottom line is that you make claims that you don't support. If you're going to make broad claims (They wsant other things, too, and they are things which are contrary to Prabhupada's teachings, or they want homosexual behaviro to be acceptable as vaishnava behavior), you need to support them with spcific evidence, not vague assertions. Than we may have something to discuss. Otherwise, I don't see what fruit of any value could come of such discussion, unless it's eveidence for labeling Babhru a "homo activist," just as I've been labelled as a pawn of women and malcontent gurukulis. The fact is that I'm independent thinker who has been faithful to Srila Prabhupada for almost 34 years. Whatever other labels you want to attach to me are your business, not mine.

[Priitaa 0]

Babru, Oh, my comment was not about yours. I agreed with yours as well. If a person posts it, they need to not loose it when they get replies they dont like.

 

Is the administrator telling us NOT to talk about this topic? I am not sure if a previous post is from the administrator or not. If so, I don't see how we can even get onto the trail of clearing up problems, if we are told to only talk about Krishna and not about problems. Reminds me of the old days - ha - but not the positive things. Remember? Everyone would say "Just be Krishna conscious prabhu." And that was suppose to make problems go away. But of course it didnt. They just festered and got bigger. So no offeense to the administrator, if its from him, just pointing out something he may not have considered.

 

(Tho I had not realized it has been repeatedly discussed on this forum. )

[Priitaa 0]

I just saw your other post, Babru.

 

First I must clarify, I am rather tired of women and children's rights or rather, abuse, put in the same category as homosexuality. I do understand you are open minded so my comment here is not limited to you, but applies everywhere. For example, even now I see the Episcapalian (sp?) church wanting to make acceptable their first gay bishop. In one speech on the topic I heard a connection made to acceptance of women as bishops, and now gay bishops. Its not in the same category at all! Homosexuality is a broken body, and being a woman or child is not. You or others dont have to agree with me its about a broken body, but show me in shastra or else any comment by Prabhupada where it says to be gay is normal and healthy.

 

However, please dont misunderstand. I do not wish any harm come to them. Prabhupada built a house anyone can take shelter in. (Directly or indirectly.) But they are trying to make a third gender acceptable and that is where I draw the line. And its totally against Prabhupada's teachings.

 

 

The bottom line is that you make claims that you don't support. If you're going to make broad claims (They wsant other things, too, and they are things which are contrary to Prabhupada's teachings, or they want homosexual behaviro to be acceptable as vaishnava behavior),

 

 

I thought it was pretty clear. Anyone who is not biased would understand. /images/graemlins/smile.gif Ok, so you support them. That's fine, but I feel you are just well meaning for their soul. However, they are pushing for these other 'rights' which I pointed out in my previous posts and here, but if clarification is needed: marriage is one.

 

And yes, I do say they are politicians, but not meant as 'evil' politician. Simply they initially indicated they are out to do one thing, when in time they proved they were out to do something else. Allow me to explain. They use to claim they were merely trying to help those who are gay to start chanting again, or get back into devotional service, etc. Whereas now they are preaching about homosexual marriages and varoius other things to make this third gender normal and acceptable.

 

And its true that I make such statements without a lot of research. I dont need to. They prove it for me. Just take a visit to chakra.

 

There is a major difference between helping someone get their spiriutal life together, and their love life.

 

I dont feel they are horrible people at all, just that they need to get their priorities straight, as well as stop trying to modify Prabhupada's teachings to fit their problem and artificially make themselves all right. You know as well as I do that if Prabhupada were here, he would never authoritize such a group.

[theist 1]

I'm with Priitaa. Two or three years ago when they first started gal_a I said they were involved in a gradual mind conditioning program aimed at the devotee community with the goal of making homoseual relationship on par with heterosexual one and even up to gay marriages with full sacrifice before the Deities etc. Brahma das laughed at the thought. Last month they finally felt it was time to enter that phase of their conditioning program via Chakra their sister station. Still laughing Brahma das?

 

It's not hard to see. The homo movement has been doing the same thing in the US over the 20 or thirty years. They are just following the same pattern aimed at Iskcon. Similar to homo Christians assault on the Catholic church and now the Anglican Church.

 

Employing some basic skills in observation with 1 oz. of human intuition and it is so obvious.

 

Now if you oppose this the homos and their enablers will predictably come out with cries of "bigots!" and "homophobes!".

 

The other established pattern they are following is to attach themselves and their cause to some struggle like women's rights or child abuse. Riding on the coattails of legitamet issues.

 

That in itself is not wrong as long as the similarities truly match up. Take the animal rights attempt to equate the slaughter issue with the holocaust and slavery.

 

Here we have Prabhupada's clear words on the matter to guide us. They are petitioning the devotee body to go against Prabhupada's desires for his own instituion.

 

I wonder if the present leaders in Iskcon are even awake to this?

[stonehearted 0]

theist: They are petitioning the devotee body to go against Prabhupada's desires for his own instituion.

 

Here's an example of a broad claim unsupported by any specific evidence, as if your saying something makes it so. This is the opposite of critical or careful thinking.

[Guest guest]

I am sorry,

my mistake /images/graemlins/frown.gif

should be more careful next time

I am just trigger happy

when I see some good article

that makes Krishna conscious sense

I try too to elicit good commentary and realizations

from you devotees /images/graemlins/smirk.gif

 

however I should stick to the topic

of the present thread

yours in service,

god dasa /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif /images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[stonehearted 0]

Whoa! Take it easy on yourself. It was an honest mistake, but a confusing one.

 

So where's the new thread with that article?

[mahak 0]

I reply to my friend stony here, because something has to be said.

 

 

 

Haribol, it is a relief from the arguing going on about who is

following Guru-shastra-sadhu. This is no arguement because it is all

a very personal matter. In this light, Ill write about a controversy

that some may not understand.

 

I have seen some who do not recognize GALVA who write about the

organization using GAL-A. This is very unfortunate, arrogant, and

unvaisnava-like. How dare you separate a segment of society from the

Vaisnava life that is not ours to give, only ours if we care to

receive. A very important fact is, in the beginning of the sadhana bhakti process,

one is fully enveloped in the offensive stage. This means that

regulations are not carefully observed, but, the kanistha adhikari is

very much accepted as Vaisnava. If not, there is no possibility of

being rescued from the grips of maya, no potential for a

representative of God being able to do anything at all for the

sleeping souls, in other words, there is no samkirtana movement.

 

GALVA is not a threat to Krsna Consciousness, any more than the

thousands of those who possess conservative (or liberal) political

ideas, nationalism preferences, or those who join Bush's "sanctity of

marriage" ideology. By pretending that the gay and lesbian

lifestyles prohibit one from becoming a devotee is a direct affront

to Lord Chaitanya, who made no such discrimination. No lifestyles

(certainly my drug infused past) are considered by the Great Gift

Giver, Srila Prabhupada. When a devotee who was gay admitted such to

Srila Prabhupada, he would NOT fail to accept such a disciple as his

own. The reciprocal promise to follow the regs and chant the

prescribed rounds was equal between gays and non-gays alike. And the

failure to adhere to such things, if humbly admitted, would not

disturb Srila Prabhupada to cause rejection, because he is the

embodiment of the phrase "gurudeva patita pavana", the friend to the

unfortunate.

 

GALVA was established to try to end discrimination against a segmnent

of society. It may have gone beyond the charter, and I do not agree

with the proposals therein, but I fully support GALVA in that the

vaisnava cannot afford to sit in judgement against another kanistha

adhikari.

 

I do have a problem with a certain premise, though. The very fact

that a person advertizes himself in any way other than "devotee" kind

of binds him into remaining content with the offensive stage of

sadhana bhakti. But this is not GALVA's unique problem, it is the

problem of all of us. I have read where devotees are saying that

Prabhupada would support Bush in his war against Iraq. Too many try

to assign devotee characteristics to strictly mundane personalities.

And far too many actually believe that sex with the other gender is

better than sex with one's own. Some get very angry when gay

devotees have the floor, but the anger is only proof that the angry

person has no convictions of his own. Thus, they are feeling

threatened by the gays, just like the rednecks whose hate is only

latent desire.

 

Anyway, I write this to show solidarity with anyone and any group

that wants to have the Holy Names of the Lord supplant all other

priorities in life. So, from now on, when I speak of GALVA (which I

dont see the critical need for, ever), I will write their acronym

as "---V-". Ya see, the "V" is the only thing that matters, it is

the only thing our Guru and our Gauranga care about as well.

 

After all, we have not been taught that we are "empty cups", we are

all full. Our fullness, however, is polluted. We are not taught

false renunciation, we are not taught to empty our cups. Our process

is to infuse pure nectar into the cups we carry. This nectar

GRADUALLY purifies and replaces the dirty stuff we may not want to

give up. The Holy Names of Hare Krsna, Hare Krsna, Krsna Krsna, Hare

Hare. Hare Rama, Hare Rama, Rama Rama, Hare Hare are the vehicle of

purification, and even dogs, when they hear the mantra, take part in

this wonderful purification process. Exclusivity and rejection of

others based on false ideas of qualifications needed to begin are not

only pollution, but have a way of replacing nectar with more

garbage. Srila Prabhupada always recommends that we RESPECT all

vaisnavas, even the prakrti sahajiyas, even the impersonal smarta

brahmanas who use the Holy Names to apply to their false identity of

divinity. This does not mean we go out and become gay to respect

GALVA (nor does it mean we become republicans and vote for the

fascista murderer operating in the white house because some right

wing devotee wants us to). We respect the fact that they are doing

what Lord Chaitanya describes as the ONLY method for developing our

love of God in this age. Who we associate with is another story, and

no one in a long time has come up with very good recommendations, so

lets quit throwing rocks unless we have unbreakable homesteads.

 

ys in cooperation, mahaksadasa

 

 

[Guest guest]

I do agree with you and I am straight which I mention first not to create any confusion just because I am supporting. Irrespective of sexuality, attaining moksha or reaching God is same for all the souls. I know one person who was used up by good number of people of same sex and in couse of time that person developed interest into it and through prayers that person came out of it and now leading a happy married life with a child. While I dont agree with homosexuality, still such people are also souls and anyone who illtreats them talking on one side about spirituality actually does not have any spiritual development in themselves. How far all the straight people remain pure before marriage or even after marriage and does it mean it is accepted by God, because they are straight and hence they can have illicit sex? No. it is not the sexuality that is important, but how far one controls their urge and chanellize themselves into spiritual path in proper way is the important thing.

 

Govinda Pundareekaaksham Rakshamaam saranaagatham

[Guest guest]

Either you are gay or you are a Vaishnava, How can you be both?

 

I agree with Yugala Kishora Das on this one.

 

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

I hate to have to bring this point up again, but the problem with GALVA is not that they are homosexuals.

 

The problem is that they want to claim that homosexuality was considered natural in Vedic culture, that certain activities of homosex are not sinful (I won't go into details, but this is Amara Das's view), and that Prabhupada, in a secret unrecorded conversation, said that homosexual relationships are fine (despite the fact that every single recording of Srila Prabhupada on this subject states the opposite).

 

These people have gone so far as to say homosexuals were considered spiritually more advanced in Vedic culture, because they were free from mundane family attachments.

 

These people want to live in a victim mentality because it makes them feel special. No one is stoping them from coming to ISKCON temples and engaging in devotional service. Last time I checked, no one asks you if you are gay when you come through the temple door, just like no one asks if you have a girl friend.

 

Unfortunately these people want to proudly advertise their gayness as a badge of honor. This is certainly not the proper mood of devotees of Mahaprabhu.

 

[Guest guest]

Isn't the point of the "vedic culture" to reach God? if so, why prove homosexuality is "okay" or not.

 

There is no genetic reason for people to be homosexual. This is not like schizophrenia, it is not natural also. The fact is homosexuals are turned into homosexuals because of past abuse or a type of environment from which they come from.

 

Homosexuality is a "NO NO" if you ask me and I agree with you. Our reason to have a vedic culture is to reach krishna, not go into some delusion and not to create Utopia.

 

It is to get the hell out of this world forever and never come again. Why do they think homosexuality is ok? This I do not understand.

 

[Guest guest]

This is ridiculous. ON what basis and whre it is mentioned that Gayism is better than straight and in which portion of vedas. Are they tring to insert something new and claim it as said in vedas. then it should not be encouraged. None has anything to feel special based on their sexuality and the only special thing is how far one give up their sexual urges naturally by focussing their mind on Lord.

 

[Guest guest]

(I am the same person posting)

 

Also, I think this thread should not be here, it does not deserve to be here. Spiritual discussions should be kept clean by focusing them on Krishna (like the stuff posted here by anadi or God, Govindaram, nothing else. This is one of the reasons for people to say "forget this!, I am out".

 

Elevation is required, there should be another place for these things called "worldly discussions " or "Mundane stuff interfering with spirituality".

[Priitaa 0]

 

I hate to have to bring this point up again, but the problem with GALVA is not that they are homosexuals.

 

The problem is that they want to claim that homosexuality was considered natural in Vedic culture, that certain activities of homosex are not sinful (I won't go into details, but this is Amara Das's view), and that Prabhupada, in a secret unrecorded conversation, said that homosexual relationships are fine (despite the fact that every single recording of Srila Prabhupada on this subject states the opposite).

 

These people have gone so far as to say homosexuals were considered spiritually more advanced in Vedic culture, because they were free from mundane family attachments. Say what?!

 

These people want to live in a victim mentality because it makes them feel special. No one is stoping them from coming to ISKCON temples and engaging in devotional service. Last time I checked, no one asks you if you are gay when you come through the temple door, just like no one asks if you have a girl friend.

 

Unfortunately these people want to proudly advertise their gayness as a badge of honor. This is certainly not the proper mood of devotees of Mahaprabhu.

 

 

WOAH!! If all JNdas is saying is accurate, I have to agree with him.

 

Those who say this topic should not even posted to these forums, that the topic should be avoided or that everything here must be kept "pure," I humbly disagree. To stick our heads in the sand like an ostrich does not make problems go away, though it certainly will help them grow.

[stonehearted 0]

Pritha: WOAH!! If all JNdas is saying is accurate, I have to agree with him.

 

What if some things he says are not quite true? He's made some broad claims and stated plainly he won't give any evidence. What if, for example, gays are treated differently at temples? What if they're not all flaunting their identity as a badge of honor? What if some really do just want to be treated like anyone else? Many GALVA members are celibate. Most, as far as I have seen, aspire to the same ideals you and I do, and do try as hard as heterosexual devotees to attain those goals. I fear it's too easy to paint the "other" with too broad a brush.

[Priitaa 0]

Well, we can give him the opportunity to prove they are true. I didn't see where he said he would not give any evidence, only that he would not give detalis. Maybe he had personal correspondence with Amara and knows what he's talking about but doesn't want to put all that here for all eyes. Anyway, from the posts of JNdas that I have read, he doesn't have a pattern of making comments on subject matter he hasn't first looked into.

 

I agree no one should be treated differently at a temple, but reality is, they are. Heck, I've been treated differently at the temple. My black friend once confided in me her black friend was called the "N" word by a devotee. I've heard of, and seen, the "simple" type of brahmacari being pushed around and taken advantage of at the temple. My bet is, this list is long.

 

I still hold to my opinion that Srila Prabhupada would have never authorized any type of homosexual group. That's the most important point.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

 

He's made some broad claims and stated plainly he won't give any evidence.

 

 

Actually I didn't give any evidence because I find the topic so repugnant. Just so no one thinks I am a liar, let me offer a few quotes. There are many other such statements in the GALVA writings, but I would prefer to not quote them in this forum.

 

The following is from the GALVA site:

 

 

First of all adhorata, or anal sex, is not recommended for any of the three genders, including people of the third sex. Verses condemning its practice cannot be assumed to be condemning all homosexual behavior and love-making. Nowadays it is quite common for straight people to identitfy homosexual behavior as being primarily anal intercourse, but this is simply not true. According to the Kama Shastra, oral sex is the natural practice of the third gender and not adhorata [anal intercourse].

 

 

 

"What about the regulation of 'sex for procreation only'?"

 

This is a general rule that applies to heterosexuals or 95% of all people. Since gays and lesbians do not engage in the procreative act by nature and as a matter of definition, how could this statement possibly have any relevance for them? The essence of this rule, however, still applies, which is to refrain from material sex life as far as possible so that one's spiritual practices will not be impeded. Gay people are encouraged to practice celibacy just like everyone else, but if they cannot, they should try to commit themselves to a single partner. As with eating and sleeping, spiritual aspirants must try their best to balance the sexual demands of the body in order to avoid the pitfalls of both over-indulgence and artificial renunciation. Scriptural injunctions and the orders of the spiritual master must be executed with practical intelligence, not blind literalism.

 

 

 

"Is homosexuality a sin?"

 

No, homosexuality is a natural behavior of the third sex. Natural and loving homosexuality is no more sinful by nature than heterosexuality. According to strict brahminical and Vaishnava standards, all attachment to material sexuality must ultimately be abandoned in order to achieve liberation, and this applies equally to everyone regardless of whether they are heterosexual or homosexual. The vast majority of people require loving relationships and physical intimacy in their life as a matter of personal fulfillment and good mental health. This should not be denied to anyone whether they are gay or straight. Only the most stonehearted of men would prevent another human being from experiencing loving relationships. The practice of celibacy is a very serious undertaking that cannot be forced upon others or adopted artificially.

 

 

 

In Vedic literature, the strongest bond within this material world is said to be the attraction between man and woman. Combined, they create so many attachments such as home, property, children, grandchildren, etc., all of which serve as distractions from the cultivation of spiritual life. Transgender people were considered to be aloof from this attachment, particularly gay males. They typically did not engage in procreation or family life, and this was a special quality that made their status unique within civilized Vedic culture."

 

 

They want us to believe that homosexuals are "aloof from attachment". Is this sanity? There are modern studies on the promiscuity of homosexuals, and it has been pointed out that the average homosexual male has 2,000 sexual partners in their life time, as compared to 7 for a heterosexual male. Are we to believe that homosexuals are somehow superior, free from attachments, and free from the distractions to spiritual life?!

 

Oddly enough, this last quote seems to have been edited out of the GALVA site recently, but it can still be found on old GALVA mirror sites.

 

The other point to note about GALVA articles is that they lack any scholarship at all. They make up definitions for words that are not found in any sanskrit dictionary. For example they claim nartaka as used in the Bhagavatam means "homosexual" when the word actually means "dancer" and has no connection to homosexuality at all. Sanskrit scholars such as Hridayananda Das Goswami have pointed out their completely ridiculous translations, but they refuse to accept they are wrong despite the fact that none of these authors know sanskrit.

 

They have an agenda (to propogate homosexuality) and they will do anything, including distorting Vedic scriptures and finding fault with Srila Prabhupada, in order to establish their agenda.

[Jahnava Nitai Das 2]

Here is one of my posts from an old thread which sums up my view:

 

 

i think gay people in KC have to be respected and they need our compassion...

 

 

This discussion time and again always comes to this same strawman argument. No one has ever said that homosexual devotees shouldn't be respected, given compassion, allowed to enter our temples and perform devotion, etc.

 

These GALVA people are trying to establish the absurd claim that homosexuality was natural in Vedic culture, that it is perfectly in line with Chaitanya Vaishnavism, that Prabhupada in a secret unrecorded conversation sanctioned union of gay couples, that it is natural and not sinful for homosexuals to engage in homosex acts, and the best of all, homosexuals are actually more advanced because they are automatocally detached from family life. They repeatedly distort the statements of scripture to fool the scripturally uneducated and innocent, all while accusing Srila Prabhupada of being ignorant and uninformed.

 

This has already been discussed a hundred times on this forum, so I will just post a link to my previous article on this matter:

 

http://www.indiadivine.com/galva-reply.htm

 

 

 

there's a lot of gay devotee, don't you know that ?

 

 

And there are a lot of devotees that smoke, eat meat, etc. Like all other vices, they should perform their devotion humbly while trying to purify themselves. They should not try to claim that their vices are actually virtues that were glorified in Vedic culture.

 

 

 

[And from another post:]

 

Some of the things I object to are as follows:

 

1) Claiming a vice to be a virtue, and then trying to propagate it as harmonious and beneficial to Sri Chaitanya's path of pure devotion.

 

2) Claiming our spiritual master, Sri A.C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, in a secret unrecorded conversation, authorized some disciples to accept homosexual marriages. This is a great insult and offense to Srila Prabhupada. His position on this matter is not a secret. It is clearly established in his books, letters and conversations. I am sure some here would be willing to call him homophobic for his views as well.

 

3) Misrepresenting the Vedic teachings through various deceptive means to propagate that homosexuality was commonly accepted in ancient India. For example, they claim the word "napumsaka" means "homosexual" when in reality it does not mean anything even remotely similar. Even today this word is still in use in nearly all Indic languages, and it refers to one who is born with no sexual organs, it indicates one who has a physical deformaty.

 

4) That in the Srimad Bhagavatam, the word "nartaka" refers to homosexuals. The word is used throughout the Puranas to refer to "dancers". Anyone with the slightest knowledge of sanskrit understands this. Any claim that this word refers to homosexuals is an intentional distortion.

[Guest guest]

You may say :" Those who say this topic should not even posted to these forums, that the topic should be avoided or that everything here must be kept "pure," I humbly disagree. To stick our heads in the sand like an ostrich does not make problems go away, though it certainly will help them grow. "

 

You are right, the problem does get highlighted. Also, it gets discussed, but discussing this on a discussion forum does not solve the problem.

 

When discussing the issues then we should not "To stick our heads in the sand like an ostrich" . People here come to discuss about krishna, not about this stuff.

 

These issues of homosexuality constantly raid this forum and same points get discussed, just by different people and finally it turns ugly. The ugly posts were usually started by Guruvani, but now god das started it.

 

Anyway, I shouldn't even be here, may be I should just avoid this and go find posts that actually talk about God.

 

[Guest guest]

If the temples really consist of pure devotees of the lord, then the gays , lesbians, stupid people, geniuses, prodigies and who ever and how wierd they may be would be treated the same way.

 

Just stopping to eat meat does not please the lord, if we still carry bunch of junk in our brains.

[stonehearted 0]

To be fair, I should have acknowledged that you were unwilling to provide evidence (that's the same as supporting details) becuase you find it repugnant, not because you were a liar. I did not men to imply the latter and I apologoze if anyone mistook that.

 

However, I need to point out that the quotations you provide don't actually support the assertions you seem to think they do. The first one, for example doesn't say that one form of sex isn't sinful, as you claim it does, but that Kama Sutra (yeah, I know) says it's natural, whereas another form is not. The last one does not, as you claim, assert that homosexuals are "aloof from attachment" but that they're generally alof from particular attachments. And as far as modern studies that show gay men have an average of 7,000 sexual partners, I'd sure like to see some citatations. There are studies, and there are studies, which is to say that the quality and suefulnes of studies varies widely, so we should be careful what information we rely on to advance an argument. This is not much different than your cautioning us not to accept any studies Amara gives that call nartakas gays rather than dancers.