• This forum contains old posts that have been closed. New threads and replies may not be made here. Please navigate to the relevant forum to create a new thread or post a reply.
  • Welcome to Tamil Brahmins forums.

    You are currently viewing our boards as a guest which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our Free Brahmin Community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), respond to polls, upload content and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

    If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact contact us.

A very Unusual Hindu wedding.

Status
Not open for further replies.

auh

New member
This perversion of same sex attraction worse still leading to the absurdity of same sex marriage needs to be opposed strongly by all right thinking people and nipped in the bud before it leads to undesirable consequences.

Some may argue that it is a natural instinct for some but not all natural instincts are desirable from the point of view of society.
What harm does same sex marriage do to the society? Would you please elaborate?
 

sravna

Well-known member
What harm does same sex marriage do to the society? Would you please elaborate?

Dear Auh,

The most telling is , it encourages perversion to be granted acceptance. We can imagine the consequences if that becomes the case.

Also, marriage is just not for procreation and you do not need marriage for procreation. It is to foster and enhance one 's understanding of a important relationship that can have positive effect on the mind. So is the case with any other important relationships. But the point we have failed to see the deeper connotation and have come to a stage where we think marriage is for procreation.

Same sex marriage is just based on physical attraction. There is no other purpose to it. We are seeing a deteriorating situation from marriages to live ins to now same sex marriage. What next? Same sex live ins or something more creative?
 

auh

New member
Dear Auh,

The most telling is , it encourages perversion to be granted acceptance. We can imagine the consequences if that becomes the case.

Also, marriage is just not for procreation and you do not need marriage for procreation. It is to foster and enhance one 's understanding of a important relationship that can have positive effect on the mind. So is the case with any other important relationships. But the point we have failed to see the deeper connotation and have come to a stage where we think marriage is for procreation.

Same sex marriage is just based on physical attraction. There is no other purpose to it. We are seeing a deteriorating situation from marriages to live ins to now same sex marriage. What next? Same sex live ins or something more creative?

Dear Sravna, the world has moved away from being only "black and white" where things that are not "normal" are perversions. If you reflect on the situation you would perhaps understand.

If we remove perversion from your reply, there is nothing that holds water in the argument. If the act is between consenting adults, why should it be treated perversion?
 

sravna

Well-known member
Dear Auh,

Why do you want to remove the word perversion.That is the central word to the argument. A perversion is something that is abnormal and undesirable. Same sex attraction is indeed not normal and same sex marriage is not desirable either.

Think of another situation. A 18 year old boy who is an adult has the abnormal desire of marrying a 50 plus year old woman and assume there is consent in the relationship. Would you accept it? Can't you see how the situation can quickly worsen if such thoughts are granted acceptance.

There is some solid reason why certain relationships are considered taboo. Moral fear is sometimes required to maintain peace and order.
 

auh

New member
Dear Auh,

Why do you want to remove the word perversion.That is the central word to the argument. A perversion is something that is abnormal and undesirable. Same sex attraction is indeed not normal and same sex marriage is not desirable either.

Think of another situation. A 18 year old boy who is an adult has the abnormal desire of marrying a 50 plus year old woman and assume there is consent in the relationship. Would you accept it? Can't you see how the situation can quickly worsen if such thoughts are granted acceptance.

There is some solid reason why certain relationships are considered taboo. Moral fear is sometimes required to maintain peace and order.

Perversion is based on how people perceive things as right or wrong. The world cannot be seen through binary eyes, and hence the reason to remove the notion of "perversion". Can you explain why two persons sharing love and physical relationship is deemed perversion?

Reg. the query of marriage of the younger boy with the older woman, it is not for me to judge. There is nothing we can grant to anybody. Nobody seeks our acceptance; we are deluded into thinking that some "society" should accept and endorse the private act of an individual.

Morality is a different subject. It is subject to time, place and interpersonal beliefs.
 

sravna

Well-known member
Perversion is based on how people perceive things as right or wrong. The world cannot be seen through binary eyes, and hence the reason to remove the notion of "perversion". Can you explain why two persons sharing love and physical relationship is deemed perversion?

Reg. the query of marriage of the younger boy with the older woman, it is not for me to judge. There is nothing we can grant to anybody. Nobody seeks our acceptance; we are deluded into thinking that some "society" should accept and endorse the private act of an individual.

Morality is a different subject. It is subject to time, place and interpersonal beliefs.

Dear Auh,

I think you would agree with the abnormal part of the act because the overwhelming majority do not have same sex attraction. Though there cannot be a restraint on what a private act of an individual can be yet it cannot be granted public sanction indiscriminately. A individual is also part of the society and his acts have a bearing on other members of the society . So his acts are subject to the overall good of the society. I am sure you are not naive enough to dismiss the consequences that can crop up if every act of an individual has public sanction without restraint.
 
Last edited:

auh

New member
Dear Auh,

I think you would agree with the abnormal part of the act because the overwhelming majority do not have same sex attraction. Though there cannot be a restraint on what a private act of an individual can be yet it cannot be granted public sanction indiscriminately. A individual is also part of the society and his acts have a bearing on other members of the society . So his acts are subject to the overall good of the society. I am sure you are not naive enough to dismiss the consequences that can crop up if every act of an individual has public sanction without restraint.

1) We cannot go with the argument that the acts approved by the majority are right and hence the minority acts are wrong.
2) Private acts of an individual that is between consenting adults and not inflicting abuse (physical or mental) to anybody need not await sanction from the society. The public need not pass judgement on an act of an individual. It only shows their lack of understanding.
3) Individuals acts that endanger the life or mental well being (as understood in the normal sense to exercise his free will) of others would definitely be scrutinized and tailored appropriately. But when the society sticks a "tag" on an act because it is deemed unnatural and immoral, there we do have a restriction of free will.

Calling same sex an act of perversion is similar to saying that "dark skinned people are in the minority and hence they are an aberration of society, and deserve to the curtailed".
 

sravna

Well-known member
1) We cannot go with the argument that the acts approved by the majority are right and hence the minority acts are wrong.
2) Private acts of an individual that is between consenting adults and not inflicting abuse (physical or mental) to anybody need not await sanction from the society. The public need not pass judgement on an act of an individual. It only shows their lack of understanding.
3) Individuals acts that endanger the life or mental well being (as understood in the normal sense to exercise his free will) of others would definitely be scrutinized and tailored appropriately. But when the society sticks a "tag" on an act because it is deemed unnatural and immoral, there we do have a restriction of free will.

Calling same sex an act of perversion is similar to saying that "dark skinned people are in the minority and hence they are an aberration of society, and deserve to the curtailed".

Dear Auh,

It is not just an act approved by the majority. It is what is natural to the majority.

There will be tag on everything and that is how one can make sense of anything. What else can unnatural and immoral act be called? What is unnatural will be called unnatural and what is immoral will be called immoral.

As I said there is no restriction on what someone does privately but if he desires public sanction, the good of the society will what dictate its acceptance and for the arguments I made I believe it is not in the interest of the society to sanction such acts.
 
Last edited:

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
This perversion of same sex attraction worse still leading to the absurdity of same sex marriage needs to be opposed strongly by all right thinking people and nipped in the bud before it leads to undesirable consequences.

Some may argue that it is a natural instinct for some but not all natural instincts are desirable from the point of view of society.


Dear Sravna,

I guess you have no contact with gay males and lesbian females...I know many in course of work.

Very normal..not perverts..its just that their orientation differs.
 

sravna

Well-known member
Are you trying to say heterosexual marriages are not based on physical attraction?

Dear Renuka,

Very sadly so these days. But it has the scope to go beyond physical attraction.

I believe nature approves pairing that complement each other because that is what can produce synergy in relationship and you learn something new.
 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
I wonder if anyone of you had seen the episode of Look who's talking with Niranjan.

Ok the host Niranjan Iyengar is gay..and the episode where he was interviewing Fawad Khan..LOL...you should have seen how excited Niranjan was..sitting on a sofa and talking with all smiles ..giggling with Fawad.

Well Fawad is not gay ..he is married..very good looking guy BTW and Niranjan clearly looked very excited on the show!

It was nice to see BROMANCE!
 
Last edited:

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
Dear Renuka,

Very sadly so these days. But it has the scope to go beyond physical attraction.

I believe nature approves pairing that complement each other because that is what can produce synergy in relationship and you learn something new.

Sravna...in another thread you had replied to a girl who asked what do TB males look for in a relationship and you answered 'fairly good looks" in your reply.

How is this possible if there is NO attraction?

You have contradicted yourself.

BTW there is nothing wrong with physical attraction..that forms the basis for a deeper union of mind and soul.
 

sravna

Well-known member
Sravna...in another thread you had replied to a girl who asked what do TB males look for in a relationship and you answered 'fairly good looks" in your reply.

How is this possible if there is NO attraction?

You have contradicted yourself.

BTW there is nothing wrong with physical attraction..that forms the basis for a deeper union of mind and soul.

Dear Renuka,

I have never ever dismissed physical aspects totally. But they should not be the sole criteria on which decisions should be made when there are non physical aspects also. If made, they are likely to be either shortsighted or immoral.
 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
Dear Renuka,

I have never ever dismissed physical aspects totally. But they should not be the sole criteria on which decisions should be made when there are non physical aspects also. If made, they are likely to be either shortsighted or immoral.


So I guess its ok to be partially immoral by not dismissing physical aspects totally?LOL

Sravna...half truth = untruth.
 

sravna

Well-known member
So I guess its ok to be partially immoral by not dismissing physical aspects totally?LOL

Sravna...half truth = untruth.
Renuka,

What I mean is take the totality. In fact ignoring physical aspects implies one is not practical.
 
Last edited:

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
Renuka,

What I mean is take the totality. In fact ignoring physical aspects implies one is not practical.


Therefore you agree that one should NOT ignore physical aspects.

Ok next is..so how are you so sure that a gay person is ONLY attracted to physical aspects?

What if he also looks for some non physical aspects like love,compassion and intelligence in another gay?

Just becos majority of the world are heterosexual that does not mean homosexuals lack finer thinking capacity or only have physical attraction in their minds..they too do not chase after every Tom,Dick and Harry..they too choose who they find some compatibility.

The world makes rules according to what is prevalent..for example the using Left Hand is made to be sound as rude..reason? becos majority are right handed.

I am right handed myself but now I have began to use both left and right hand to accept things and give things..I feel both are my hands..why do I need to differentiate left from right?

Left is not lesser than right..its not rude..its not less auspicious ..its just made up by the majority who are right handed.

Do we differentiate our eyes?

Do we say I will only use my right eye to see and not use my left eye?

We dont.

Like wise we need to drop prejudice that something different from us is immoral or wrong etc.
 

sravna

Well-known member
Dear Renuka,

If one is looking for just compassion, love and is attracted by finer aspects of another person, the relationship is friendship or something that would be in any way be considering bodily attraction. Only when the attraction is bodily attraction it becomes a homosexual relationship.

Agree?
 

renuka

Gold Member
Gold Member
Dear Renuka,

If one is looking for just compassion, love and is attracted by finer aspects of another person, the relationship is friendship or something that would be in any way be considering bodily attraction. Only when the attraction is bodily attraction it becomes a homosexual relationship.

Agree?

Dear Sravna,

Lets rephrase that:

If one is looking for just compassion, love and is attracted by finer aspects of another person, the relationship is friendship or something that would be in any way be considering bodily attraction. Only when the attraction is bodily attraction it becomes a heterosexual relationship.


This theory applies for both homosexual and heterosexual.

BTW Sravna...most of us are married..surely there is element of physical relationship in marriage...none of us are doing Pooja for spouse and keeping them in a prayer room! They are also being used left right centre!LOL
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top
Thank you for visiting TamilBrahmins.com

You seem to have an Ad Blocker on.

We depend on advertising to keep our content free for you. Please consider whitelisting us in your ad blocker so that we can continue to provide the content you have come here to enjoy.

Alternatively, consider upgrading your account to enjoy an ad-free experience along with numerous other benefits. To upgrade your account, please visit the account upgrades page

You can also donate financially if you can. Please Click Here on how you can do that.

I've Disabled AdBlock    No Thanks