Mr Singh posted a comment on my Why Start This Blog? entry. He disagreed with homosexuality within Sikhism and used Charles Darwin’s theory of Evolution to prove his point. He also insinuated that the existence of the gay gene would result in “instant death”. I’ve decided to reply in form of a blog as there’s quite a lot to cover.

Mr Singh, thank you for you comments. I really value your input and welcome your statements which I rather take as questions and assumptions. Each one of us is on a journey for learning, it’s evident that you have much more to learn.

Vaheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Ji Ki Fateh
You have stated on your Instagram account that being gay is something genetic. You also say that modern science proves this. Well unfortunately so called ‘modern science’ is delayed as it is only discovering new things which our gurus gave us the knowledge about centuries ago. Here is a solid argument to why being gay is not right and more of a disease:

Charles Darwin’s theory of Evolution by Natural Selection condemns being gay. Variation exists within a population and mutations occur. Mutations happen constantly however only mutations which help a species survive are kept. This has now become a gene. This is then passed on to the next generation by breeding.

By having a so called ‘gay gene’ will completely condemn concrete evidence of Evolution. The ‘gay gene’ cannot survive as it means instant death for a species as it means it will no longer be able to breed and therefore survive, because after all, it’s all about survival.

If there was a so called ‘gay gene’, how would it be passed on as gay people have no offspring so therefor is purely and environmental affect rather than a chemical affect.

I absolutely agree that modern science is only discovering things now which religious scholars have figured out hundreds of years ago. It’d be arrogant of scientists or atheist people who believe in science to dismiss religion as it has brought forth so much of knowledge and understanding. “There can never be a conflict between true science and true religion, because they both describe reality.“I am not a scientist so what I have to say is only based on the numerous studies I’ve been reading coupled with experience of myself and stories of others. I find that there are some logical flaws in your arguments which stem from ignorance of certain facts.

The gay gene does not mean instant death. Humans (gay or not) both live to the age of 70-80, sexuality is irrelevant. I do hope you’re not trying to imply that being gay is a choice as this is completely untrue. Do you think the whole meaning of life for straight humans is to pro-create? If so, you may wish to reconsider this, humans have much more to contribute to society.

Think of infertile people, last year an infertile gene was identified. Now if infertility existed many years ago and still does today, that would disprove your argument about genes needing to survive. There definitely isn’t an “instant death” of infertile humans as you suggest.

Regarding the gay gene, this actually isn’t agreed upon by all scientists, like evolution, it’s a theory. But so far, it’s the best we’ve got and seems more and more likely based on many research projects. However, what scientists and psychologists do agree on, is that being homosexual is natural and not changeable. Suppressing it (as you suggest) doesn’t work but leads to depression and a dysfunctional human being (and we all know that dysfunctional humans will not contribute optimal to society). Just wikipedia “Conversion therapy”.

Back to the gay gene. As far as I understand, this isn’t passed on. Otherwise we’d be seeing generations of gays one after another. My parents are straight and so are their parents. Gay people are born to anyone.

I know of a lesbian partaking in IVF with a gay man and they produced a straight son. The gay gene evidently isn’t passed on.

The left handed gene was only identified last month by the University of Oxford, I think you know where I’m going with this, left handed humans do not produce only left handed offspring!

In addition I would like to bring this back to Sikhi, our gurus lived the perfect life style and are our role models. None of the gurus were gay, so why should we be? By saying it is okay to be gay, is going beyond what guru Ji tells us, and therefore implies you are higher than Guru Ji.

The questions which I had originally addressed to you was if everyone was gay, how would the human race survive?

Forgive me if my opinions have offended you, but if I ask for forgiveness on guru jis teachings, then that is my sn. I hope maharaj does kirpa on you and helps you understand that you have misinterpreted guru jis message Bhul chuk di maaf,

Vaheguru Ji Ka Khalsa, Vaheguru Ji Ki Fateh

Dhan guru, Dhan hai Teri Sikhi

I think every human being can have several meanings in life. Several roles. To play one’s part in society. To do good to others. For that, I don’t need to produce. Unicef tells us that there are 132 million orphans in the world, many of whom were abandoned by their parents. In an ideal world, couples would adopt them but I know many straight people  who are unwilling to do so. In fact, this seems to be the vast majority of straight couples. Perhaps one life purpose of some homosexuals is to look after these children? In the UK, 4% of adopted children are taken in by same-sex parents (12.5% in York!) and the trend is growing. Surely, this is beneficial to society given that science is telling us, same-sex parents are just as good.

Perhaps you’re also missing another point about being gay. Nobody on earth thinks that all humans are gay (this is completely absurd and a comment in which you may wish to seriously consider retracting). If this were so, you’d be right, we’d experience a huge drop in population. As far as I’m aware, we are struggling with overpopulation in most places. The UN tells us that in the last 20 years, earth’s population grew by 20%.

Gay people have, are and always will be a minority, just like white peacocks or lions. This doesn’t mean they are entitled to be discredited by people like you, open your eyes and begin treating all as equal.

Back to the point, here is a link to around 20 studies on the percentage of the population that is not straight. It seems to suggest a margin between 1-10%. Although we know that nowadays lesbians and gays have arrangements or medical ways to produce offspring, even if 10% of humans stopped reproducing, would humanity be doomed to extinction?

The Gurus are our role models. And I strive for their model for a committed and monogamous relationship without lust but pure love, don’t you? Now, if you’re saying you can only have it with either one of the two genders, it doesn’t seem to go with the teaching that all humans are equal. Why do all Sikhs have unisex names? Gender isn’t as important as we take it.

It doesn’t make us that different. A woman and a man can be the perfect couple but also can two men or two woman. Because it’s the human that matters. Not the gender or the genitalia.

You have not offended me. I welcome our debate and wish for both of us to be open to ideas and learning so that we both can come to a better understanding of our Guru’s message.