Dear Shri a-TB,
I understand your outburst. I accept your view it is in nature that one is a gay. There are many other conditions that are due to nature. The point is, if any one of them may not be in the interest of the society at large, they have to be restrained or better corrected.
What is the basis for a man being attracted to women or vice versa? Does nature have a purpose for it other than making it a mere attraction? Definitely it does as it helps in sustaining human race and so is the case with any species. What about the attraction between a man and a man or a woman and a woman? Does nature have a higher purpose than the perverted one? I am not sure .If you think of one let me know. A man-man or a woman-woman relationship can happen as friendship which is a noble one and without perversions.
I believe that nature gives purpose to everything in its creation and there are ones that are creative and one that are destructive. This tension is necessary for learning deep truths which is the ultimate purpose of the physical-mental reality. So one cannot easily escape by saying that it is in one's nature for being in a certain way. If the act or thought is destructive it will be restrained and corrected by the other members of the society. Many devious plots are done in a bedroom and devious and abnormal behaviour arises out of actions in ones bedroom. If it does stop at bedroom, nobody cares. But there is an animal called the mind. It can be triggered anytime and at any place.
So kindly look at the larger picture and be not biased in your support for something that cannot be approved by the majority of the society for the good of the society.
Dear Mr Sravana:
It is hard to debate you if most if not every sentence is full of logical holes drenched with narrow minded ideas.
Let me show a few examples, do not have time to go over every sentence. But you will get the drift.
Sentence 1: You can call it outburst. I was calling your comments with reasons that they are narrow minded, immature and divisive. I have not seen any refutation to that but only label it as outburst.
Sentence 2. This is silly. It is like me saying ' we have days and nights' and you agree to my 'view'. That will be absurd. You dont have to agree to my view because nature is what it is. It is not my view and you are a nobody like me to agree to it.
Sentence 3: There are not conditions. There is only nature, we are part of the nature. We cannot want nature to be different. We can only correct our wrong ideas and conclusions about nature.
Sentence 4: It is an absurd statement or downright arrogance to say what in nature for 'good of the society'. You are a nobody like me and cannot determine what in nature is good for a society. That is the kind of thinking that let a Hitler of the world to get rid of Jews. Let us not go there
You should be able to read what people have written here by others, understand their points and then put down your rebuttals.
No one can say why gay, or bisexuality exist in nature. No one can say why every couple is not able to conceive a child.
You have stated a belief that if tested is immature because it is harmful to peace, lacks acceptance of fellow beings and divisive. It is bad for the society. I am not talking about nature but the expression of your beliefs/ego. So you should understand the effect of your beliefs.
Examine your beliefs and you will find they are flawed. No 'spiritual progress' is possible with divisive thinking and wanting to criminalize nature. Gay people cannot be converted anymore than straight people cannot be made to develop gay love.
Learn to see human beings as equal. That is the first step to any spiritual progress.