galva demons

[theist]

While lurking at another devotee forum a thred on galva came up in reference to all the articles on that subject lately.

 

Someone mentioned that they had complained to VNN for running them and that galva had links to hardcore homosex web sites on their site.

 

Its true they do. Imagine all this talk of krsna consciousness mixed in with hardcore homosex links.

 

Do you still think you want their version of a "gay friendly temple"?

[livingentity]

an enormorous amount of ignorance by identifying with the body - isn't that our first lesson of Krsna Consciousness? By identifying themselves as "third gender" etc - they are just perpetuating body consciousness.

 

Also, if my mind is not playing tricks on me - isn't one of the four regs concerning illicit sex? Illicit sex is illicit sex whether it be hetero sex or homo sex. Mixing porn with Krishna is demoniac! Offensive - sunk to a whole new lower than low. Any creditbility they may have somehow developed with anyone out there should be totally dissolved.

 

There was a good article on VNN just the other day concerning this Galva business. It is a must read. Very thought provoking.

 

The temple is no place for sex concerns. Just what is a "gay-friendly" temple? Body consciousness and sex should be left outside the temple.

 

I have said this so many times concerning so many debates etc. but obviously these people are not reading Prabhupada's books as they are!!!

 

 

[stonehearted]

I've heard this before, but Ihave been unable to find any links to hardcore gay sites. To confirm, I just checked again. The "Other Links" appear to be to for aspiring vaishnavas who are gay and lesbian. I can't find any evidence of links to hard- or soft-core porn, gay or straight. (I did, however, run across a link to porn on another devotee-run site, and I hope they delete it soon.)

[stonehearted]

We all display great ignorance by identifying withour bodies, gross and subtle. le, you certainly identify yourself as a woman (?) on some level, as well as a straight, or celibate person. I know that I do on some levels see myself as a middle-aged straight man who has been married for over 30 years and who has tow grown daughters and who teaches at a little college in the middle of the ocean. Ii often see devotees referred to as "black-bodied," which shows ahankara, and which I find a particularly awkward construction. To the extent that anyof us identify with matter, to that same extent we are forced to try to exploit the material energy, as well as other living beings. That's ignorance, no matter how you paint it.

 

I still haven't found the alleged porn links mentioned here. Nor have I read posts advocating illicit sex. What I have seen are posts requesting that we treat these fallen souls with the same respect and compassion we show folks who have illicit heterosexual connections, or who eat meat, or drink, or smoke tobacco or cannabis. That's all Amara was really suggesting in his article about "gay-friendly" temples. Nowhere did he suggest that temples accommodate gay couplings--just that we try not to reflexively treat them like s**t. I think we all should stop for a moment to listen to the clok on the wall ticking (tick . . . tick . . . tick . . .) and realize how little time we really have for dwelling on others' sexual proclivity.

 

There's a story Srila Prabhupada told of a brahmin and a prostitute. The brahmin lived next door to a prostitute. Every time a man visited her, he would add a rock to a plie of stones he used to gauge how sinful this woman was. In the meantime, she constantly lamented the sins that condemned her to such an awful life and prayed that she may some day become eligible for spiritual life. When he died, he took birth as a woman of ill repute; when she died, she went back to Godhead.

 

There's another story: Two brahmins came to a river bank. A woman was standing there, unable to cross on her own. One brahmin offered to carry her across the river. Later that day, the other brahmin confronted his "wayward" friend with his sin a touching the woman. The first brahmin replied, "I only carried her across the stream. You've been carrying her in your mind all day!"

[theist]

It was there last night. You click on their links link and there click on what is called "the best homosexual site on the web". What comes up is Xplicit pictures of fags doing the oral sex thing.

 

Thinking they may remove that link after seeing this thread exposing them I copied their link page for proof.

 

I was going to post it but thought I would get JNdasji"s permission first. It's only redeeming value is in showing the motives of these people against Lord Caitanya's mission.

 

To publicly display and try to mix hardcore gay sex with Prabhupada I find really way too much. I would hope Prabhupada's disciples would also be outraged. How can this be tolerated.

 

I would also be pissed off if it were a hardcore hetero sex site.

[theist]

Its still there Babhru.

 

I won't post the description of the site from gal_a's page, with Jndas's permission as it is very obscene. Although devotees should be made aware of what is trying to pollute their movement and association.

 

 

[Admin5: Dear theist, I hope you don't mind, i removed one thing in your post. I think it is best.]

[livingentity]

I hear of and see this sort of thing going on and I always have to wonder about the person out there with sincere questions happily typing in Krishna, Prabhupada etc on their search engine thinking that all will be well and ending up on such a site as Galva with their gay porn!!

 

What about a parent whose son or daughter has found Krishna Consciousness and Prabhupada - and they want to know more about what their child is into?

 

The person whose curiousity has been sparked from seeing some devotees downtown distributing books etc?

 

 

[stonehearted]

I was looking on Amara's original GALVA site. This link is on an associated site in the UK. It looks as though it may have been posted there by a user, not necessarily the Webmaster for the site. It certainly complicates their case for acceptance. I'll try to track this down and see if I can find out what the deal is.

 

I still urge caution in our condemnation. That link may not have been put there by the devotees associated with the site. There's something just as sick (if not worse) on the Hare Krishna World site. What if a sincere seeker stumbled there (and it wouldn't be hard!).

[Guest guest]

www.harekrishnaworld.com

 

I have never found anything wrong with the hare krishna world site, and would not hesitate to recomend it to others. You really seem to be grasping at straws to try to degrade such a wonderful site, just to save face for a site such as galva.

[stonehearted]

My point was NOT to quickly condemn a site because someone has put an objectionable link on the site. The devotees in charge of that site may or may not be aware that it's there.

 

Please notice that I didn't call you any names.

 

 

[Admin5: Dear stone hearted, i hope you do not mind, i removed one thing in your post, i think it is best.]

[livingentity]

I had not looked at the Hare Krishna World site for a long time. No way do they realize this has happened!

 

However, the Galva site has had that link up long enough to know about it and apparently a number of people have complained about it.

 

 

[stonehearted]

You betcher bead bag! Icky, huh? And it's right there at the top. It has been there for some time. It's just as easy to say that they must know,and that someone must have complained by now. I have known Sarvastya and Kunti for decades, and they're decent people and solid devotees as far as I know. My point is only that we should be careful about making rash judgments. Why is it easy for us to excuse HKW but not GALVA? Why does someone pop off and call me sick, as though I were making this . up?

 

Take a deeeeeeeep breath, and look in the mirror, dear souls.

[livingentity]

and let them know at HKW as soon as I saw the link just now.

[theist]

I had never seen that site before. HKW I mean. Can outside people really just put up a link on someone else's site like that?

 

Is $ exchanged when someone uses a link from one site to go to one of these xxx sites?

 

Well LE just clued them in, if they weren't before. Wev will see if they remove it or not.

[stonehearted]

I just found the "Contact us" link at the bottom of the home page. It's a little awkward to use, but I thought they'e appreciate it.

[stonehearted]

theist: Can outside people really just put up a link on someone else's site like that?

 

I dunno. It appears so, but this techie stuff is far beyond my ken. If we're willing to give HKW the benefit of the doubt, why not GALVA? (Suggested answer: We'd just rather condemn them as a bunch of goddamn fags and turn our backs on them, secure in the knowledge that we are superior to them in our devotion. [Please tell me I'm wrong, and suggest an alternative answer based on shastra].)

[theist]

>>I dunno. It appears so, but this techie stuff is far beyond my ken. If we're willing to give HKW the benefit of the doubt, why not GALVA? (Suggested answer: We'd just rather condemn them as a bunch of goddamn fags and turn our backs on them, secure in the knowledge that we are superior to them in our devotion. [Please tell me I'm wrong, and suggest an alternative answer based on shastra].) <<

 

Well this was my first trip the HKW so I don't how long this has been up. And as I said I don't know if an interloper can put such things up or not. I did say in an above post that I would also complain if it was a hetero xxx site on a HK site. I do know that i heard the galva link story over a week ago.

 

 

I think your characterization of people that complain about what gal_a is doing is rather harsh there Babhru. Directly or indirectly you are calling us intolerant bigots.

 

 

 

 

[stonehearted]

theist: I don't know if an interloper can put such things up or not. I did say in an above post that I would also complain if it was a hetero xxx site on a HK site. I do know that i heard the galva link story over a week ago.

 

Babhru: I'd guess it is possible. I don't think Sarva or any of his crew put that link on the HKW site. I checked out the site for the first time recently (several days ago--time is a littl arped at the end of the semester, but it was probably Saturday), so I know the site has been there for at least several days. Did you actually complain to HKW? Will you complain here? You said you would, so let's see it.

 

t: I think your characterization of people that complain about what gal_a is doing is rather harsh there Babhru. Directly or indirectly you are calling us intolerant bigots.

 

B: What's your shoe size? I think calling me sick is rather harsh, don't you? What I'm suggesting is that there may be prejudice (look it up in a good dictionary right now, class) based on attachment to a bodily designation (heterosexual). Prove me wrong. Do you know any gay devotees personally? (I have known many, some of whom I didn't care for and some I lkie very well. Some are celibate, and some act out, even while living in the brahmachari ashram, and they have often been pounded by the other brahmacharis.) Have you ever served with any? Have you ever asked these folks you condemn what they are really after? Or do you find it more convenient just to label them and dismiss them as demons?

 

In fact, I've written the Webmaster for the GALVA Resources site about this link. His reply: "I know; I have to keep removing them!!! Thanks."

 

Anyone willing yet to reserve judgement?

 

[stonehearted]

prej·u·dice

1. An adverse judgment or opinion formed beforehand or without knowledge or examination of the facts.

2. A preconceived preference or idea.

2. The act or state of holding unreasonable preconceived judgments or convictions. See Synonyms at predilection.

3. Irrational suspicion or hatred of a particular group, race, or religion.

4. Detriment or injury caused to a person by the preconceived, unfavorable conviction of another or others.

 

[stonehearted]

it appears that offensive link was immediately removed from the GALVA Resources site.

 

(goddamn demons--tryin' ta cover up their real agenda!)

[theist]

B:>> Did you actually complain to HKW? Will you complain here? You said you would, so let's see it.<<

 

Actually this is what I said:

I had never seen that site before. HKW I mean. Can outside people really just put up a link on someone else's site like that?

 

Is $ exchanged when someone uses a link from one site to go to one of these xxx sites?

 

Well LE just clued them in, if they weren't before. Wev will see if they remove it or not.

 

 

Yes I would complain about a hetero xxx site as well as a homo one. But then HKW is not promoting a link between deviant sexual relationships and KC all over the web like gal_a is doing. Also seeing that LE and then yourself had done it I felt no need to.

 

 

[stonehearted]

Well, if name calling is all you have, I don't know what there is to say.

 

Again, please note that I haven't called anyone here names. I asked if you thought it wasn't a little harsh to call me sick (especially anonymously), but you won't respond to that. What are we to infer from that?

 

theist: But then HKW is not promoting a link between deviant sexual relationships and KC all over the web like gal_a is doing.

 

Babhru: GALVA's agenda seems more aimed at undermining some prejudices than in promoting any kind of sexual relationships. Many of those folks are celibate and have been for a long time. They aspire to become Krishna conscious. Many of them, however, aren't treated well when they go to temples, or when they move into temples. Being gay is not necessarily a lifestyle choice. It's an apparently innate proclivity for romantic/sexual feelings for someone of the same sex. What these folks are trying to do is point out that even Vedic culture had ways of accommodating folks whose inclinations are different from yours or mine. If it were my agenda, I'd most likely approach it very differently. However, they haven't asked me.

 

You actually have not answered quite a few questions. They weren't strictly rhetorical. Here's another one: Would it bother you if people at the temple treated a guest or member ill just because they're a woman? How about because they're black? Or Jewish?

 

Do you demonize guests or devotees who you think are having illicit sex? What about those who eat eggs? Have a drink sometimes? Smoke cigarettes? Smoke weed?

[livingentity]

It is not my style to instantly "hate" someone or treat them badly due to sex, age, religion, race etc etc. I just do not work that way.

 

what I do not like or stronger "hate" is bending the "rules" to make oneself "ok" either in their own eyes or everybody else's.

 

By the way, I think someone else called you sick. Not Theist. Note that the poster of that message said he recommends HKW to his friends. Theist has never seen it before today.

 

[theist]

Babhru, you don't get it. I never called you sick.

 

 

I was going to answer your questions then i realized the futility of it. Do I know any gays etc. and now this latest round. It just that questioning attitude that caused me to refer to you as a bigot hunter.

 

Sorry i didn't get the purport of your shoe question.But I don't need to justify myself to you or anyone else. Nor do I want to rehash the arguement on homosexuals again. Go quiz someone else.

[stonehearted]

theist: Babhru, you don't get it. I never called you sick.

 

Don't get what? I didn't say you called me sick. You said I was harsh, and I asked if you didn't think it was harsh of our "guest" to call me sick. Take a deep breath.

 

I won't apologize for asking questions. You should ask them of yourself. That's called introspection.

 

You accused me of implying you are intolerant and bigoted. The shoe refernce was an allusion to "If the shoe fits." Sorry if it was too oblique. I didn't want to call you names, and I didn't bring those adjectives into the conversation; you did.

 

I don't need to justify myself to any of you, either.