stonehearted Posted May 15, 2003 Report Share Posted May 15, 2003 I don't think I said (or even asked if) you hate anyone. The point I was making is that Amara's recent article only asked that devotees who are gay be treated with the same respect anyone else gets. They're not trying to bend the rules; they're not trying to say homosexuality is Krishna conscious. Some may have other agendas, but the Galva folks I have had contact with ask nothing more than to not shun aspiring devotees because the way they're different from you has to do with something they didn't choose. You win, too. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted May 15, 2003 Author Report Share Posted May 15, 2003 Hey Babhru, do you still beat your wife? Get it now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingentity Posted May 15, 2003 Report Share Posted May 15, 2003 I did not mean to make it sound like you were accusing me of hatred or hating just to hate. I was just stating facts about myself. Go back and read your post to Theist about being called sick and you will see why I and apparently also Theist would think you were accusing him of doing that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingentity Posted May 15, 2003 Report Share Posted May 15, 2003 what next - drag queen friendly temples? Now that would be distracting!! Sorry, but I had to get it out of my system. /images/graemlins/wink.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonehearted Posted May 15, 2003 Report Share Posted May 15, 2003 I never called anyone anything. I was pointing out habits of mind, perhaps of the heart. I'm a teacher, and I have been for a long time. I won't apologize for acting like a teacher. I simply pointed out that we might be overreacting, that there may be a possibility that we may be misreading Amara and others. This thread began with outrage that GALVA is positn links to hardcore homosexual porn site. I suggested that it may be the case that GALVA is not responsible for those links' presence on their site. To support that, I showed that a perfectly respectable site has a similar link, and that it was likely not put there by the sites' owners, whom I know personally. In response, our correspondents have called not only GALVA's members names, but me (sick; bigot hunter; wifebeater). Also, some correspondents have accused me of calling them, either explicitly or impliticly, bigoted,and have taken exception to that. So it's okay to call me names, but not you. At least I know the rules now. I must point out that, as soon as I contacted the GALVA Resources Webmaster, he not only responded immediately to my email, but took the link off the site immediately. Not one of you acknowledged that or its possible implications. Not one of you appears ready to admit that you may have been even a little mistaken. I know exactly what I wrote to theist. When I asked what there was to infer from theist's not responding to my question about calling me sick, I meant to imply not that he was the culprit (or insightful one, in this case--you missed getting credit, buddy!) but that he felt it was okay. If anyone read more into it, I apologize for not writing more clearly. That's all. It doesn't bother me that devotees think that homosexual activity is sinful. I think so, too. And I'd guess that many devotees on GALVA would agree. I also know that many in the gay-rights movement have an agenda that goes beyond simply being accepted as people who are a little different. The flaunting of their queerness at gay day parades (and San Diego, where I lived for a long time, has one of the biggest) bothers me as much as it does anyone else. However, I've known too many gay men and women to think that their entire person is defined by their sexuality. They're not all bathhouse cruisers. And I've known far too many gay devotees to think their personhood is defined by their sexuality. That's all. When I ultimately found the link referred to, I admitted that it was disturbing. But I suggested that it may be a mistake to facilely ascribe it to GALVA's "real agenda." I actually asked about it, which is something no one else here was willing to do. When it turned out I may have been correct in my assumption, no one else would even approach admitting it. Instead, I was greeted with defensiveness and name calling. That's all. Now I know the rules, and I know who I'm dealing with. And I'm rather harsh? Gimme a break. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 15, 2003 Report Share Posted May 15, 2003 In the end what was the conclusion? Are you more Krsna conscious? Or Nrisimha conscious by the way? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonehearted Posted May 15, 2003 Report Share Posted May 15, 2003 It's a waste of time if there's no communication. Other than that, I'm not sure I know what you're driving at. Same for any conclusion. Nor does it really matter, apparently. I'm no more or less Krishna conscious for this discussion. It in no way affects my faith in the gift I recieved from my spiritual master, my determination to share it, or my relationship with him. We had a nice program honoring Lord Nrisinghadeva in Hilo tonight, with about 35 devotees in attendance. Nice kirtan, nice prasadam, and I led what became an enlightening discussion about the Lord. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonehearted Posted May 15, 2003 Report Share Posted May 15, 2003 At the risk of keeping this thread alive, I'm sharing this from Rama Keshava regarding the link that got the thread started: Hare Krsna. GALVA108 has the following websites: GALVA108 - http://www.geocities.com/galva108/ GALVA108 Resources - http://www.nine9.ukshells.co.uk/galva108 (my site) GALVA108 - http://www.galva108 The links you refer to were on the Links page on the at http://www.links. I have had a constant battle with spammers peddling this smut joining our group and silently posting these links, to the point where I have disabled this function. Let me reiterate: GALVA does not condone these sort of websites in any shape, way or form. I actually removed the links before Babhru prabhu asked me about them, however I thank him for his concern. I appreciate the fact that he wrote to me, directly, asking what was going on instead of gossiping about GALVA's intents. If you have concerns about GALVA's websites, its work, etc., please do feel free to write to me directly at rama.kesava.bvts@pamho.net. Please feel free to copy this response from me to any parties concerned. Your servant, Rama Kesava dasa Moderator & Member of the Board, Gay & Lesbian Vaisnava Association Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted May 18, 2003 Author Report Share Posted May 18, 2003 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.] ...take the essence...SP letter to Krsnadasa 1972 Edited by Admin5 (05/14/03 07:13 PM) Actually I do mind. I know JNdas didn't edit it. I don't recall posting anything that would warrant that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonehearted Posted May 18, 2003 Report Share Posted May 18, 2003 I got one of these, too. I don't remember posting anything that would have been objectionable, and since I composed online, I don't have any way of checking. Wouldn't it be more effective for Admin5 to have told us privately what was edited out and why? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jahnava Nitai Das Posted May 18, 2003 Report Share Posted May 18, 2003 I just inquired about what was removed. It was the instructions on how to find the objectionable links on the Galva site and the HKW site. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted May 18, 2003 Author Report Share Posted May 18, 2003 I just found out and agree that editing was in order. Good heads up admin 5 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted May 18, 2003 Report Share Posted May 18, 2003 Here is their other : * Gay Hare Krsna singles * A meeting place for Gay devotees to find friendship and companionship. gayharekrsnasingles/ /images/graemlins/frown.gif Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted May 18, 2003 Author Report Share Posted May 18, 2003 A perfect example of the in your face offensive nature of the homosex movement. JNdas just explains why my post and Babhrus was edited and this character now posts another direct link. Actually Babhru's post of rk's message to him should be edited on the same grounds. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonehearted Posted May 18, 2003 Report Share Posted May 18, 2003 jndas: I just inquired about what was removed. It was the instructions on how to find the objectionable links on the Galva site and the HKW site. That's what I hoped, but I was't able to confirm it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonehearted Posted May 18, 2003 Report Share Posted May 18, 2003 theist: I just inquired about what was removed. It was the instructions on how to find the objectionable links on the Galva site and the HKW site. Yes--thanks. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonehearted Posted May 18, 2003 Report Share Posted May 18, 2003 theist: A perfect example of the in your face offensive nature of the homosex movement. JNdas just explains why my post and Babhrus was edited and this character now posts another direct link. Babhru: I think it may be too hasty to connect this posting to the same people. We don't know who this is or what his or her motive is. Perhaps it was posted just to stir up more dust. What really frosts me is that it keeps this thread alive. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theist Posted May 19, 2003 Author Report Share Posted May 19, 2003 Maybe we can ask our good host to kindly lock this thread in the closet. No, I didn't say it was the same people. I have no idea who it is. The motive is clear though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stonehearted Posted May 19, 2003 Report Share Posted May 19, 2003 theist: Maybe we can ask our good host to kindly lock this thread in the closet. I was going to suggest that but desisted because I was afraid I might be considered presumptuous. I'm glad you brought it up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
livingentity Posted May 19, 2003 Report Share Posted May 19, 2003 Lock this thread in the closet and throw away the key!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.