Islam And Homosexaulity

[MrWhiteMan]

Concerning homosexuality - Most people say that Islam stands for sexual indiscretion, homosexuality and orgies. Well I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a Muslim homosexual, to be quite honest. I invite you - find one. On the other hand, how many Christians are there who proclaim their homosexuality in the United States? Furthermore, since you're keen at citing the Quran, why not look up all verses concerning homosexuality... How many verses call it a sin and an abomination, versus, those that say otherwise? Depending on which compendium of the Quran your looking at, I think the best ratio you'd come up with is 60:2, and even these are not explicitly endorsing homosexuality. Also, I should point out an ancient-world custom in Greece - indeed, the entire Mediterannean area - was for young men to have sexual relations with their boyhood friends. Yes, Machinist, this is stange, even revolting to us... But remember that Muhammad, in order to create cohesion among his followers, was not quick, at least initially, to throw away the custom and practices of those he converted. Later, as he completed the text of the Quran throughout his life, was critical of homosexuality ad nauseum. Why leave these countless examples out for the sake of a flawed argument?

Concerning the Quran and hadith - Remember, there are compilations of hadith and Quranic text that are made for various motives, and there are various websites which harbor motives that are less than scholarly! Instead of singling out dubious hadith based on what you read from dubious sources, why not read the whole darn apple and make your judgement after having read all the material? Why not read to acquire some background context upon which to base your understanding? Once you've accomplished this, you'll more easily differentiate between erroneous sources, and fair ones. Lastly, and most significantly, the Quran says that the Hadith are not to be trusted above the Quran, and when seeking truth on hadith, one should always filter it through a good Arabic Quran. I assure you, you've been more than misinformed on the proper textual criticism of Islamic scripture, and I think that's symptomatic of your reading 'material'.

Concerning Polygamy - Does the Quran not say monogamy is ideal and preffered? Did the prophet Muhammad not say that one must love his wives equally and treat them equally, and since it is difficult to do this, did he not say that men should normally have a single wife? The Quran is clear on this. Read up.

Concerning sexual promiscuity - if your tribe is young, unformed, and without a home, and your numbers are low from war and strife, how will one increase these numbers while maintaining fidelity to the belief of the community? Who, if no one from the outside, will bear children to increase these numbers? Think about it. There are plenty of examples in history of this phenomenon, including many on our own continent. Scores of Native American tribes made use of this practice. If you were the spiritual leader of this particular Islamic community from which this hadith originates, and you knew your people would listen to you based on the logic of the hadith traditions, is it so unbelieveable that these scriptures would surface for the purpose of child-bearing to avoid extinction? Remember, our modern, American/Christian notions of morality were not known to the pre-modern, nomadic bedouin; you wonder why I mentioned Bernard Lewis? Because he talks about this exact topic in some detail. During the invasions of the 10th-13th centuries, quick population regeneration was often needed to avoid extinction in the wake of the Turco-Mongol invasions, especially when the Turks joined Islam, and the bedouin were fearful that Islam would no longer be an Arab faith. This practice was doubly used to maintain ethnic distinction in the wake of an influx of Turkish blood.

Conclusion - Basically, I would encourage you not to judge those from pre-modern times, without your particular conception of Christian theology and modern morality, quite so harshly. It is justified to view them within their own context. Is it so impossible that these people were genuinely in search of God? If you're condfident you can answer that in the negetive, I'd like to see you try. For the present, I'll consider your apparent bigotry as simply ignorance due to bad information. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt. But to call the Islamic religion worse than Hitler and his ideology? That's just over the top. Don't judge the whole tree based on the relatively small percentage of bad apples.

PS - And what's wrong with Karen Armstrong? She's a lovely woman, and a brilliant scholar. I saw her talk twice at U of R. Also, radical Muslims call her an enemy of God - Doesn't this please you?

Note: I am not a Muslim; I am a Christian, and my comments are based on my knowledge from my minor in Islamic Studies under Dr. S. Malik, and the late J. Khalid, of SUNY Brockport, and Cornell, respectively

[afrikaNOW]

I know muslim homosexuals. I think the fact that you can't find any doesn't mean they don't exist, but because of the culture of Islam that they remain in the closet or undercover.

[ComradeOm]

Originally posted by [email protected] 10 2006, 01:00 AM
Concerning homosexuality - Most people say that Islam stands for sexual indiscretion, homosexuality and orgies.
I didn't get past this line. Who exactly says this? Its certainly not something you hear often. If anything Islam's "image" is the complete opposite.

[Forward Union]

The Qu'ran on Homosexuality:

Homosexual acts are condemned as unnatural. (Will ye commit abomination such as no creature ever did before you?) 7:80-81

Male homosexual activities are condemned as unnatural in 26:165-6

27:54-55 states that Male homosexuals commit abominations and act senselessly.

Male homosexuals acts are condemned as unnatural here; 29:28-29

"And Lot*! (Remember) when he said unto his folk: Lo! ye commit lewdness such as no creature did before you. For come ye not in unto males?"--29:28-29

*Lot was also male

Anyone notice the lack of condemnation of Lesbian acts? On top of being incredibly homophobic, it seems a bit Chauvanist to me, and then of course we have the reality to back up the ideals:

http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/media/iran_hangs_homosexuals.jpg

[Eleutherios]

Originally posted by Additives [email protected] 10 2006, 03:13 PM
Anyone notice the lack of condemnation of Lesbian acts?
Same goes for the Bible. It condemns male homosexuality in many places, but only once mentions lesbians. (http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com/rom/1.html#26) My hypothesis is that this is a result of two things: (1) society was a lot more sexist in biblical times, so men had pretty much all the power, and (2) most men think lesbian sex is hot.


Basically, I would encourage you not to judge those from pre-modern times, without your particular conception of Christian theology and modern morality, quite so harshly. It is justified to view them within their own context. Is it so impossible that these people were genuinely in search of God?
That could very well be. When people go searching for gods, they tend to find gods that agree with their pre-existing moralities and prejudices. However, our society has evolved its ethics, and the moralities of these ancient holy books are grossly out of tune with what we find acceptable today. For that reason we need to examine these books critically, realizing that they were written by ancient agricultural peoples with longstanding traditions of homophobia and sexism, among other primitive barbarisms. And we need to fight against those who wish to impose this kind of outdated ethics on modern society (such as the Islamic theocracies and the Christian fundamentalists).

If you're going to be a Christian or a Muslim, you need to take certain holy texts seriously. If you're just going to throw out those parts you don't like just because they don't jive with your modern ethics, you might as well throw out the whole thing as a guide to morality. If you have some sort of ethical standard by which you can pick and choose which passages you agree with and which ones you reject, why do you even need the book in the first place? Just apply your rational, well-thought-out ethics directly to your life, and read the Bible or the Qur'an with the same critical eye that you read the works of Homer and Plato with.

[Black Dagger]

MrWhiteMan, what is the point of this thread?

As far as i can tell, this thread is an attempt by you (for reasons unknown) to make it very clear to everyone on revleft that Islam rejects homosexuality as an 'abomination' - as if the idea that people thought that Islam accepted or endorsed homosexuality was a bad thing.

Are you saying that you agree with the Qur'an's 'real' stance on this issue? That homosexuality is an abomination?



Originally posted by MrWhiteMan
Well I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a Muslim homosexual, to be quite honest. I invite you - find one.

Seeing as homosexuality is natural and religion is not, i find it very strange that you would assert that in a subculture of humans there would be no queers, as if an invented religious dogma could prevent the manifestation of a natural aspect of human populations.

[LSD]

Concerning homosexuality - Most people say that Islam stands for sexual indiscretion, homosexuality and orgies.

:blink:

um...what???

That has got to be one of the wierdest opening lines I've ever read. I've yet to meet a single person who, when they think of Islam, think of "sexual indiscretion".

Sexual puritanism, sure; misogny, you bet 'ya; but "orgies"? ....not so much.


Well I think you'd be hard-pressed to find a Muslim homosexual, to be quite honest. I invite you - find one.

OK (http://www.alternet.org/story/12817/).

(in case you're curious, my brilliant detective technique was to visit Google and type in "gay muslim". It returned approximately 47,000 results)


Yes, Machinist, this is stange

So who's "Machinist", then?

If you're cutting and pasting some post you made on another board, you could at least show the common courtesy of linking to the original post so we can see it in context.

Even better, of course, you could keep threads on other forums on other forums and make your contributions here unique.

That way we don't have to wade through paragraphs of "rebuttals" to arguments that were not made and references to individuals that we do not know. Also, it ensures that your writing actually appeals to the demographics of this forum.


even revolting to us...

So homosexuality is "revolting" now? I take it you must have posted this on some Christian fascist / conservative board, because that kind of biggoted language would not be tolerated on any remotely progressive site.

You might want to clarify exactly what it is that you find so "revolting", because otherwise you're looking at a possible ban for homophoiba. :angry:

[afrikaNOW]

Originally posted by Additives [email protected] 10 2006, 03:13 PM


http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/media/iran_hangs_homosexuals.jpg
Why did you post that image up? They weren't hung because they was gay, it was because they raped a young boy.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by afrikaNOW+Jul 12 2006, 06:37 AM--> (afrikaNOW @ Jul 12 2006, 06:37 AM)
Additives [email protected] 10 2006, 03:13 PM


http://www.thepeoplesvoice.org/cgi-bin/blogs/media/iran_hangs_homosexuals.jpg
Why did you post that image up? They weren't hung because they was gay, it was because they raped a young boy. [/b]

Uh... no.

It has all but been confirmed that the sexual assault charge was trumped up the religious authorities to reduce sympathy for the young men involved, and that in fact the two men involved were a couple outed by a relative.


Afdhere Jama, editor of Huriyah, an e-zine for Queer Muslims, said his contacts in Iran affirm that the two youths hung in Mashad were lovers.

“The first day I found out, I called my Iranian contacts from Huriyah,” Jama said. “All agreed on the fact that these boys were murdered for being queer. One of my contacts who has been to gay parties in Mashad swears the boys were long-term lovers, and another source told me one of the boys’ family members outed the couple.”

This reporter has also had e-mail correspondence over the last 10 days with the editors in Teheran of an Iranian underground publication for Iranian gays—who asked that neither their names nor the name of their publication be cited, as they are fearful of the heightened repressive atmosphere for gay and lesbian people there. They, too, assert the rape charge was trumped up and that the two executed youths were lovers.

And other anonymous sources in Iran are suggesting the hangings may well have been a legally-disguised “honor killing,” which in Islamic cultures is frequently inflicted by families on their own kin who have engaged in same-sex relations.
http://www.gaycitynews.com/gcn_432/iranian...esquestion.html (http://www.gaycitynews.com/gcn_432/iraniansourcesquestion.html)

These two men - both of whom were minors at the time of their alledged crime - the younger being 14/15 - have been confirmed as being a couple, and they were executed, is it just a coincidence that same-sex relationships are illegal and punishable by death in Iran? That over 4000 gay people have been executed in Iran since the revolution? All for 'rape' no doubt?

Iran has a very clear stance when it comes to queers, do you support it?

[Raisa]

Damn, in all my life of study simple islamic shit.........
hahahahaha
Im not going to condemn a man from being gay cause only allah deals with peoples buisness based on their intentions more then even their actions..
but its kinda well known in the islamic faith that this isnt natural to do. Plus its considered filthy cause there is shit in there.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Raisa+--> (Raisa)but its kinda well known in the islamic faith that this isnt natural to do. [/b]

Okay, but do you think homosexuality is natural?


Raisa

Plus its considered filthy cause there is shit in there.

Do you consider it filthy?

As far as there being 'shit in there' - that's what washing yourself and toilet paper is for.

Although for some reason heterosexuals are not filthy, even though they have anal sex too? With heterosexuals 'regularly' engaging in anal sex put to estimates ranging from 20-50%.

And not all 'homosexuals' are men (which is implicit in the assumption that being gay is 'filthy' - i.e. anal sex - though religious texts are notorious for ignoring female sexuality, and same-sex relationships between women so whatever), and nor do all gay men have anal sex, but yeah i'm talking to myself here.

[ricardsju]

Both under Christianity and Islam some types (http://blogs.vestigatio.com/Pictures/410x313$homosexuality-0-2005621-mollah.png) of homosexual acts have been deemed ok at some times.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pederasty_in_the_Islamic_world

But I don't think thats the type of homosexuality that is being talked about here :rolleyes: .

[Black Dagger]

Both under Christianity and Islam some types of homosexual acts have been deemed ok at some times.


This is pretty tenuous, men kissing boys is not a 'homosexual act' (i'm not sure if you're saying that it is or that it isnt?) in and of itself, and especially it's just affection between heterosexuals, i mean, even my dad had kissed me before he's a homophobe so...


But I don't think thats the type of homosexuality that is being talked about here

Yeah, i really dont think that pederasty would be tolerated religiously in modern Islamic countries (like say Iran):

as per the wiki you cited,


Originally posted by Wiki
The traditional tolerance, literary and religious, for chaste pederastic love affairs which was prevalent since the 800's began to be eroded in the mid-1800's by the adoption of European Victorian attitudes by the new westernized elite

[Raisa]

Originally posted by Black Dagger+Jul 20 2006, 08:19 AM--> (Black Dagger @ Jul 20 2006, 08:19 AM)

Although for some reason heterosexuals are not filthy, even though they have anal sex too? With heterosexuals 'regularly' engaging in anal sex put to estimates ranging from 20-50%.

And not all 'homosexuals' are men (which is implicit in the assumption that being gay is 'filthy' - i.e. anal sex - though religious texts are notorious for ignoring female sexuality, and same-sex relationships between women so whatever), and nor do all gay men have anal sex, but yeah i'm talking to myself here. [/b]
"
Originally posted by [email protected]
but its kinda well known in the islamic faith that this isnt natural to do.

Okay, but do you think homosexuality is natural? "

I think if something makes you feel good, and its natural to feel good then it is natural for you. Cause we are higher thinking beings and we dont just have sex to reproduce.


"
Raisa

Plus its considered filthy cause there is shit in there.

Do you consider it filthy?

As far as there being 'shit in there' - that's what washing yourself and toilet paper is for."

I dont know man, you cant clean the inside.
Theres shit in there.
Thats why Im funny about letting anyone in my ass. Cause Im ashamed that there might be little shit crumbs I never knew about, I never seen the inside of an ass.
When a shit takes a slide down the tube, its not as if the shit has clorox bleach on the outside and is cleaning the ass tunnel on the way out, so yes I think anal sex is very filthy. :blink: EW.

But if you and yours like it dirty, have fun.

[Black Dagger]

Originally posted by Raisa
I dont know if its natural for two men to be attracted to each other or not.

Why are you singling out men?

Do you know if it's natural for to wom*n to be attracted to each other?

How can it not be natural? Homosexuality is a biological fact documented across a broad range of species, humans are one such species, there is absolutely zero evidence to the contrary - so why do you have any doubts?

[Sentinel]

Originally posted by raisa+--> (raisa)I dont know man, you cant clean the inside.
Theres shit in there.[/b]

Except it's a fact that you can, and then there isn't any.


BD
- so why do you have any doubts?

Because 'Allah' has?

[Dooga Aetrus Blackrazor]

The anus is self-cleaning dumbass, and it's not like exposure to 'shit' has a negative effect on the penis. Furthermore, homosexuality is a sexual orientation rather than a choice. It is well-documented within scientific circles.

Islam sucks.