Homosexuality is found in nature...

[Jaymes]

If your argument is not a ploy to rationalize sexual gratification, then prove it by not having sex.

How about 'no'? I don't love my girlfriend because I have sex with her, I want to have sex with her because I love her. It makes us both happy, and I see nothing wrong in it, nor anything that needs rationalizing.

Spirituality is a transcendental nature. This nature that you wish to make part of your spirituality is what covers the purity of your spirituality. You want to be clean, covered in dirt. So you have that capacity. But real spirituality means seeking to know what is spiritual living. If spirituality were simply our own concoction then we could rationalize anything as being "spiritual", i.e.: murder, rape, torture, etc. And it really isn't a matter of transcending. It is a matter of realizing that we are transcendental. The problem is that we identify with this external nature and that provokes us to act contrary to our constitutional position as spiritual beings.

No, it's a matter of you being an *** and telling everyone how they should live. Not everyone wants to go through life chaste, starving, and naked. Because, hey! Why pay any attention to your body at all? After all, it's just physical.

Some of us actually want to live life.

How about this: I won't tell you how dirty and hideous your spirituality is, and you won't say the same about mine. Fair enough?

Actually, I already know the answer. 'No,' because everyone needs to be just like you and transcend every bloody thing.

Maybe some of us don't want to transcend. Maybe we want to roll around in the dirt and giggle like mad because it's fun, and we don't care about what people think of us. Maybe you need to keep your spirituality to yourself and not look down your nose at everyone.

 

[Ardhanariswar]

okay. we get it. spiritality has nothing to do with being gay or straight. your point? you are saying that being straigt is just as wrong as being gay rite? well let me tell you, God gave us LIFE and we live this LIVE accordingly. God came down to earth as rama and krishna, he married and had sex and LOVED. thats the word LOVED. gay people love. straight people love. this love is not JUST sex, but its beyond that. i hope you have experienced that. ive experienced that with my parents and friends. its beyond the body, its with the soul. and this relationship mimick Gods relationship with YOU as an individual worshipper. thus all loving relationships are holy. and no, a relationship with a prostitute is not an actual *mental* and *Spiritual* relationship.

God is love. we live life. we fulfil our dharma.

 

[Sunstone]

This discussion reminds me of a Zen saying, "After enlightenment, the laundry." The implication is that once enlightened, you still live in this world with it's day to day activities, such as doing the laundry.

Even if it can be said (and I am not at all certain that it can be truly said) that our spirituality should be divorced from material things, don't we still need to live in this world? Don't we still need to deal effectively and functionnally with such things as our love for others? How can a spirituality that seeks to divorce us from this world be entirely right?

 

[Ardhanariswar]

it cant be divorced, its already separate, but they both can mutally work together. one does not need to be an asetic to be in touch with his spirituality.

paraprakrti, would you catagorize yourself as a person in love with God? than according to you, you must be devoid of all material things, why do you own a computer and internet?????????

 

[Paraprakrti]

How about 'no'? I don't love my girlfriend because I have sex with her, I want to have sex with her because I love her. It makes us both happy, and I see nothing wrong in it, nor anything that needs rationalizing.

Love is independent of sex. And if it needs no rationalizing then how come you attempted to rationalize it right here?

No, it's a matter of you being an *** and telling everyone how they should live. Not everyone wants to go through life chaste, starving, and naked. Because, hey! Why pay any attention to your body at all? After all, it's just physical.

How should you live, Jensa?

Some of us actually want to live life.

To what value do you hold 'life'?

How about this: I won't tell you how dirty and hideous your spirituality is, and you won't say the same about mine. Fair enough?

Spirituality has a goal. The way you talk about it is as if it is completely subjective.

Actually, I already know the answer. 'No,' because everyone needs to be just like you and transcend every bloody thing.

Spirit is transcendental.

Maybe some of us don't want to transcend. Maybe we want to roll around in the dirt and giggle like mad because it's fun, and we don't care about what people think of us. Maybe you need to keep your spirituality to yourself and not look down your nose at everyone.

Hey, you were the one that mentioned spirituality.

 

[Paraprakrti]

okay. we get it. spiritality has nothing to do with being gay or straight. your point? you are saying that being straigt is just as wrong as being gay rite? well let me tell you, God gave us LIFE and we live this LIVE accordingly. God came down to earth as rama and krishna, he married and had sex and LOVED. thats the word LOVED. gay people love. straight people love. this love is not JUST sex, but its beyond that. i hope you have experienced that. ive experienced that with my parents and friends. its beyond the body, its with the soul. and this relationship mimick Gods relationship with YOU as an individual worshipper. thus all loving relationships are holy. and no, a relationship with a prostitute is not an actual *mental* and *Spiritual* relationship.

God is love. we live life. we fulfil our dharma.

There is no value in comparing ourselves to Krishna or Ramacandra. I have already addressed this in another thread. If you think you should mimick such personalities then take the example of Lord Siva who drank an ocean of poison. I am sure you will reject mimicking that, won't you?

People love, 'gay' or 'straight' has nothing to do with it. Sexuality has nothing to do with it. Love is transcendental. I simply hold love in higher value than most people, apparently.

 

[Sunstone]

I simply hold love in higher value than most people, apparently.

Often, Paraprakrti, I think you hold love to such a high standard that you divorce it from its roots in this world. Won't such love wither and die without its roots?

 

[Paraprakrti]

This discussion reminds me of a Zen saying, "After enlightenment, the laundry." The implication is that once enlightened, you still live in this world with it's day to day activities, such as doing the laundry.

Yes, but sex life is not a day to day necessity. So where is the comparison?

Even if it can be said (and I am not at all certain that it can be truly said) that our spirituality should be divorced from material things, don't we still need to live in this world? Don't we still need to deal effectively and functionnally with such things as our love for others? How can a spirituality that seeks to divorce us from this world be entirely right?

Yes, we continue to reside in this world and so we have necessities. Spirituality does not mean inaction. It means purified action.

 

[Paraprakrti]

Often, Paraprakrti, I think you hold love to such a high standard that you divorce it from its roots in this world. Won't such love wither and die without its roots?

No, I hold it to that high of a standard because I have found its roots to not be of this world.

 

[Sunstone]

No, I hold it to that high of a standard because I have found its roots to not be of this world.

I think this is where we must disagree, Paraprakrti. I think the roots of love are in this world. If they are also not of this world, then they are both in this world and not of this world. But love is a grounding experience for me. So I have to say that at least in some way, the roots of love are in this world.

 

[The Voice of Reason]

... and the Kentucky 'blue' people.

Hey, hey, hey - let's go easy on the Kentucky Blue people.

TVOR

 

[Paraprakrti]

paraprakrti, would you catagorize yourself as a person in love with God? than according to you, you must be devoid of all material things, why do you own a computer and internet?????????

No, I categorize myself as just another one trying to live to the best of my ability. Loving God is my goal, but I feel that there are many things that I let get in the way of that. Nevertheless, being in love with God does not mean that one must be devoid of all material things. It means that material things are used in the service of God. And anyway, this computer does not belong to me. I use it because it is in my workplace.

 

[Paraprakrti]

I think this is where we must disagree, Paraprakrti. I think the roots of love are in this world. If they are also not of this world, then they are both in this world and not of this world. But love is a grounding experience for me. So I have to say that at least in some way, the roots of love are in this world.

This world is a perverted reflection of that "root" world. We feel love in this world because that is our transcendental nature.

 

[Sunstone]

This world is a perverted reflection of that "root" world. We feel love in this world because that is our transcendental nature.

Naw. Love is a meld of the sublime and the mundane.

 

[Paraprakrti]

Naw. Love is a meld of the sublime and the mundane.

And this is why I hold the concept of love to be of higher value.

 

[Sunstone]

And this is why I hold the concept of love to be of higher value.

Are you saying there is a difference between "the concept of love" and love itself? IF so, what's the difference?

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Spirituality does not mean inaction. It means purified action.

Now I get it - whenever you need to, you simply reinvent a word or phrase (intentionally) to make whatever point supports your position.

From Webster's Online Dictionary:
Main Entry: spir·i·tu·al·i·ty
Pronunciation: "spir-i-ch&-'wa-l&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
1 : something that in ecclesiastical law belongs to the church or to a cleric as such
2 : [size=-1]CLERGY[/size]
3 : sensitivity or attachment to religious values
4 : the quality or state of being spiritual

Let me see, it must be in there somewhere. Nope, I can't seem to find it. I sure could use some help.

You continually do this. I guess I am at fault for not calling you on it before now. After trying desperately to follow your logic, I have come to the conclusion that you don't really have a solid position on very many things. Whatever position you are trying to defend, your argument always reverts to this:
"I have transcended (whatever you are attacking), and anyone else that disagrees with me is weak. If you cannot transcend (pick your poison), then you are weak."
Since you refuse to defend your positions on a logical basis, I have made the decision that I will do the same for you.
I'll start with this one - I have transcended bigotry, but since you haven't you are unclean.
Yea - that's it. A whole lot easier than actually making sense, using reason, or even trying to see someone else's point.

TVOR

 

[Paraprakrti]

Now I get it - whenever you need to, you simply reinvent a word or phrase (intentionally) to make whatever point supports your position.

From Webster's Online Dictionary:
Main Entry: spir·i·tu·al·i·ty
Pronunciation: "spir-i-ch&-'wa-l&-tE
Function: noun
Inflected Form(s): plural -ties
1 : something that in ecclesiastical law belongs to the church or to a cleric as such
2 : [size=-1]CLERGY[/size]
3 : sensitivity or attachment to religious values
4 : the quality or state of being spiritual

Let me see, it must be in there somewhere. Nope, I can't seem to find it. I sure could use some help.

You continually do this. I guess I am at fault for not calling you on it before now. After trying desperately to follow your logic, I have come to the conclusion that you don't really have a solid position on very many things. Whatever position you are trying to defend, your argument always reverts to this:
"I have transcended (whatever you are attacking), and anyone else that disagrees with me is weak. If you cannot transcend (pick your poison), then you are weak."
Since you refuse to defend your positions on a logical basis, I have made the decision that I will do the same for you.
I'll start with this one - I have transcended bigotry, but since you haven't you are unclean.
Yea - that's it. A whole lot easier than actually making sense, using reason, or even trying to see someone else's point.

TVOR

Honestly, do you think a dictionary is going to explain spirituality to you in a practical manner? Just like if I told you that being nice means helping others. Then you go and look 'nice' up in the dictionary..."nope, theres nothing about helping others in here". Is the dictionary now your scripture?

 

[The Voice of Reason]

Is the dictionary now your scripture?

I have no scripture. I am merely asking you to cease your practice of twisting words and their meaning to try to defend your positions. Perhaps you might choose to spend a little time searching for the proper word. Then again, perhaps not. An expanded vocabulary can eliminate misunderstandings and miscommunications.

TVOR

 

[Ardhanariswar]

"There is no value in comparing ourselves to Krishna or Ramacandra. I have already addressed this in another thread. If you think you should mimick such personalities then take the example of Lord Siva who drank an ocean of poison. I am sure you will reject mimicking that, won't you?

People love, 'gay' or 'straight' has nothing to do with it. Sexuality has nothing to do with it. Love is transcendental. I simply hold love in higher value than most people, apparently."


no, shiva never made an appearance in this world as to become the perfect man, a model for us. but rama is. rama is called the perfect man. he loved. and well, he also gave up his preganant wife, but he was still the perfect man...er...ya.

kishna danced with the gopis and made love to them. whats that? sure, i agree with you, love is tranedental and it symbolizes the worshippers love for the God.

gays cant have kids. but they can adopt. that is thier purpose even if they cant bear children, they can certainly raise them! and lesbians can have children!

homosexuality is found in nature, so what. hetersexuality is also found in nature. whats wrong with incest? as long as its concentual! frankly, i dont agree with it, cuz there are major health issues, but hey, its not immoral. animals care for thier young. its instinct, not love. humans are the only ones capable of LOVE. i love everyone as for human dignity. but if i had a partner, it would be a different type of love. what do you have against it?! God has nothing against it. it is the way nature works.

its funny how people can say that. they say God hates gays, God hates childmolesters. but really, are you sure? i dont take anyones word for it. id rather find out from God himself. all scripture condraticts themselves with others, who is the right God? who is not? thats why im not too much into scripture. i mean, it teaches important stuff, but hey, times change, and we need to change our interpretation of scripture differently.