"What about same sex couple? Spiritually, even if both of them are devotees is it the right choice for them? Is it common? Does it even exist in ISCKON?
Hridayananda das Goswami: Oh yeah, oh yeah, oh yeah! Yeah! There is a lot, yeah. ISKCON is just the real world – with asafetida (hing), and Hare Krishna! Heheheh! Yeah, because, basically, the way I look at it is that we all have the same goal. We’re all trying to get back to Krishna and we’re all trying to find our real self which is not a bio-machine. There is a real person inside.
In the meantime, back at the ranch, you know, we’re all born in material bodies and there is a human reality to our existence which we have to work with. In fact, Isopani?ad says that in order to be liberated, you have to really understand not only the spiritual but you also have to understand the material world. Krishna explains in the Bhagavad Gita, whatever kind of body you have, whatever kind of nature you have, just engage in service. You have to spiritualize the person that you are, and obviously monogamy is better than promiscuity.
Again, we all have the same goal. We’re all doing the same thing. Superficially someone has this orientation, that orientation, or someone likes to write poetry, or someone likes to – I don’t know – plant trees. Everyone is different. But actually the differences are just superficial. All of us are just trying to spiritualize our lives by engaging whatever our nature is. Whatever your nature is – that is just where you are starting from.
So we’re all starting from different points, but we’re all going towards the same point. And so the goal for all of us is obviously to develop real love. Love for Krishna. Love for other souls. So in relationship, whatever it is – you know, whatever the relationship is, we’re trying to see the other person as a spirit being. So, whether someone has this or that orientation is really the same.
People are not heterosexual or homosexual because of a philosophical decision, but because they are born that way and therefore they’re taking their material desires or desire to be with another person and saying, “let me put Krishna in the middle so that it becomes spiritualized.”
It’s like, you go to a gym. You know, a good workout is based on the condition you’re in. If you’re trying your best given the reality you’re born into, if you’re trying your best then you’re as good as anyone else trying their best.
The particular situation we’re in, whatever it may be, whatever the situation is the result of our past activities. So it’s not something we’re choosing now; it’s something that is the result of past activities. And so what counts in this life is not what you did in the past; that’s irrelevant in a sense. What counts is based on, as they say, “the hand you’ve been dealt.” Based on your situation, what do you do?
So, if you try to sincerely offer your life to Krishna, whatever that life is, then you’re doing the same thing as anyone else is doing. So in that sense the differences between us are just superficial. The real point is sincerity and the sincere attempt to become Krishna conscious."
http://swamitripurari.com/2010/07/homosexuality-and-scripture/
http://www.srimatham.com/uploads/5/5/4/9/5549439/gay_marriage.pdf
So the Sastra prescribes wedding ceremonies and commitment ceremonies.
Of course, unlawfully sex lives of heterosexual (having as a consequence abortion) does not justify unlawfully sex lives of homosexuals.
Both (hetero and homo) must gradually reduce the sexual life to zero.
Now one thing to consider is that demand from gay devotees celibacy for a lifetime or marry the opposite sex is unrealistic, counterproductive and violent (many commit suicide).
Let them maintain a marital life, put Krsna in the center of their lives and gradually reduce the sexual life to zero.
I think people should look at this situation honestly. Does this society claim to be "vedic?" NoPe. So who cares if homosexuals are now allowed to marry? It's a non issue in that respect.
It's also fact that homosexuals were always around since ancient times, yet we don't see them being killed by fire and brimstone in the sastras. That's a Biblical, Islamic phenomenon. Our sages and rishis chose to remain silent on the matter in general. IT would be best to follow their example.
Vishal Joglekar when you said that you were cured I thought you were completely free of sexual desire.
But what you got was being attracted to the holy name. This is very good.
Luckily I also managed to be attracted to Krsna consciousness myself and have chanted Hare Krsna.
But my sexual orientation has not changed and I still have sexual desires. As my sexual orientation is hetero when sexual desire slam the door I find myself attracted to the opposite sex.
The same with devotee with homosexual orientation.
The cure is to be completely free of sexual desire.
The cure is not that you had homosexual orientation and now you have heterosexual orientation.
So my question for you Vishal Joglekar is when sexual desire slam the door for you, you feel attracted to the opposite sex or the same sex?
If even a man of abominable character engages in My ananya-bhajana , he is still to be considered a sādhu, due to being rightly situated in bhakti. BG, 9.30
SĀRĀRTHA-VARṢIṆĪ by Visvanatha Cakravarti Thakura:
“My attachment for My bhakta is natural and, even if his behaviour is degraded, My attachment for him is not lost and I make him supremely righteous.” For this reason, Śrī Bhagavān speaks this śloka beginning with the words api cet. Sudurācāraḥ means that even if he is addicted to killing
others, having illicit relations with women, and being attached to others’ wealth, if he engages in My bhajana, he is surely saintly.
What type of bhajana must he perform? In answer to this Bhagavān says: ananya-bhāk. “He is a sādhu who does not worship any devatā but only worships Me, who does not engage in any karma and jñāna but only engages in bhakti to Me, and who does not desire any happiness such as the attainment of a kingdom but only desires to attain Me.”
But where is the question of his being a sādhu if some type of bad behaviour is visible in him? In response, Bhagavān says: mantavyaḥ. “He must be considered a sādhu. From the word mantavyaḥ, the following injunction is indicated: There is a flaw in that person who does not consider him to be a sādhu.
In this regard, My order alone is authoritative.” If a person who engages in Your bhajana is also poorly behaved, can he be considered a partial sādhu? In response, Śrī Bhagavān says: eva. “He is to be considered a complete
