Gay and Muslim?
-
Salam
What is the "natural" use of human butt?
Why we should not feel disgusted about this?
Do you feel disgusted about this?
You don't? wow
Peace
Salaam,
I have understood that you need to study English pragmatics. This is what lead us to our "communication issues". You misunderstand almost everything I write anywhere and I cannot believe it is because I formulate myself poorly.
The interpretation from your part is hilarious and does portray nothing of what I mean in my posts. You claim one thing while I meant the opposite.
God bless you
-
Power over women is not in discussion, it is basic, but when you do that to men, you are endangering their monopoly over power and risking the power security of all males, who should be de holders of that power over the women, but not deprive of power any other man. The boysclub conception of existence.
Nice. Boys clubs like the sort present in ancient greece and/or japan had concepts of manly love overriding that of a woman, who was considered subservient and a receptacle/tool but the real deal was with another man. Read an interesting book back in the day. The power balance was between young and old (the de rigueur coupling) and sometimes the newbie rather than someone already in the fold if age wasn't used. It was difficult to establish such with those on a more equal footing, the rank of age or status was most often used when it was incorporated as an established practice or somesuch. Things like these are all about power, achieving/retaining and the supposed benefits of such.Needless to say, there are different types of homosexuality. I know some who are born with it for whatever reason, call it hormonal imbalance or just another individual with their individual personality. Some may choose to go that route because of bad experiences with women of which I knew one. Some may just like kinky sex and doing a guy is kinky apparently if you're a guy and want a change. Or vice gender versa. Then there are the ones with no gender attraction, or the ones born with both and the confusion that arises...pretty sure there are other categories of 'all natural' puzzles that are placed in this world within humanity, not even beasts that certainly call into question wtf, for lack of a better word. It's not easy when people insist on lumping it all together and then by painting over all of the types with a holy brush. Nothing is really black or white yet we feel compelled to make it so because it's easier to digest and categorise and of course, the holier than thou complex of salacious tsk tsking. If someone was born with a vivacious personality, one'd be like it is what it is, if someone was born with a preference for the same gender we go omg haram y u no muslim. Regardless of whether the actual act of any penetration or even a hard on has taken place. I know some women who're like make sure the boys/girls don't spend too much time with each other, they might catch the gay somehow. Some people are a-okay with their boys being womanisers, it's even celebrated in some cultures as being the sign of a true blooded male but a gay son would be the end of times. It's beyond the pale for a woman to either be a maniser or a lesbian on the other hand, can't catch a break that gender.
Some opine that straight men take the concept of lesbians better because their fear of manly penetration is lessened visually or theoretically and what's better than one woman? Two women in sexy times eh. Anyways, socially, we're okay with women being touchy feely but God forbid it's two men. There's this thing in certain cultures where two men are totally comfy with holding hands in public just like girls but it evokes a strong reaction from those not used to it...anything beyond that is inconceivably awful. It's probably equal parts what we're used to, fear, social conditioning, expectations and so on which make us biased before we've even got to the actual stage of any sex or let alone emotions in a homosexual relationship. It's not what we're used to so we try to make things around us conform to an image of what is normal to us by using various justifications, most dreaded one is the 'it's...unnatural'. Pink was a manly colour back in the day, brawny got less in vogue and men that look like women have been preferred by certain cultures (wouldn't say i'm averse to it myself). Anyways, things change, different cultures whatever, ebbs and flows.
People don't really have a definitive answer to if someone is wired differently from God in terms of attraction. Some would say it's all in the head because it can't be 'natural', it's a disorder and we have to live with it or find a cure, it's a test so bear with it or the best one which is not an answer at all but a way to shut everyone up by throwing scripture around, bellowing haraaaam, not really caring about rhyme or reason or any explanation more than penis x arse = stuff of nightmares and hell. End of. I'm kinda okay I suppose with explanations of people being born into weird situations or drawbacks to living life normally...because many are born into weird situations and/or have drawbacks to living life normally. That certainly shouldn't stop us from questioning life around us, God's plan, and having an open mind and enough perception to listen to what God intends us to hear without shoving wrenches in the machinery ourselves by talking over the messages through the arrogance peculiar to humans in which we think we've wrapped it all up in a tidy parcel, lets move on to the next because there is never any new information that can be used to refine or even destroy our puzzle parcels once we've decided it's done and dusted.
-
Salam
Rules
And those who guard their private parts
Except from their wives <- is referring to marriage
(7029-31)Definition of "wives"
a man's partner in marriage
Further, the "wives" can never be referred to "men".
"Man" cannot be "wife", but "husband".
Facts
It is "natural" for homosexuals to have "private parts".
(cf. natural human organs vs. human/animal behaviours (issue of just or unjust) -> is natural?)Therefore, they are also affected by the above rules relating to "private parts" (7029-31), UNLESS they have none.
Question
Whether "homosexuals" must guard their "private parts" EXCEPT to "wives" (women/marriage)?
Answer, choose one
Homosexuals "must guard" their private parts except to "wives" (ie. marriage)
Homosexuals "can use" their private parts to "anyone" (ie. same-sex marriage, etc.)
Peace all peace
Unfortunately, translators, even excellent ones, God bless them, keep betraying themselves because of the ingrained and unnocited malecentrism which has pervaded all cultures known to me on earth, in spite of themselves. This is the case with the translation that is used in this message of muslims that I quote.
There are no wives in the Arabic text. In fact the aya is part of set of them that refer equally to men and women. Please read de preceeding ones and the follwing ones tot he ayas quoted by muslims
The text is spiaking the third person masculine, but referring to anybody, male or female, and does nto say "wives" but "zawj", that is, one of a pair, be it of identical things or be it of complementary things, like each part of a pair of shoes. So it could be properly translated as partner or consort or spouse, but no mention of wife, or of woman or of male or of man.
As to the mamalakat ayman... as we know they can be males or females and can be adscribed to males or females.
So in fact what is undoubted is that whatever is done or not done with the private parts is always in the intimacy with no more than one apart from onself. To note carefully is that if zawj is translated as wife, that would men that women would be authorized to have sexual partners, spouses of their same sex, or the they would be exempted of having to keep to their partners and could go freely with anybody else too.
Still good that it has been brought up. Thank you.
Salaam
-
Nice. Boys clubs like the sort present in ancient greece and/or japan had concepts of manly love overriding that of a woman, who was considered subservient and a receptacle/tool but the real deal was with another man. Read an interesting book back in the day. The power balance was between young and old (the de rigueur coupling) and sometimes the newbie rather than someone already in the fold if age wasn't used. It was difficult to establish such with those on a more equal footing, the rank of age or status was most often used when it was incorporated as an established practice or somesuch. Things like these are all about power, achieving/retaining and the supposed benefits of such.
Needless to say, there are different types of homosexuality. I know some who are born with it for whatever reason, call it hormonal imbalance or just another individual with their individual personality. Some may choose to go that route because of bad experiences with women of which I knew one. Some may just like kinky sex and doing a guy is kinky apparently if you're a guy and want a change. Or vice gender versa. Then there are the ones with no gender attraction, or the ones born with both and the confusion that arises...pretty sure there are other categories of 'all natural' puzzles that are placed in this world within humanity, not even beasts that certainly call into question wtf, for lack of a better word. It's not easy when people insist on lumping it all together and then by painting over all of the types with a holy brush. Nothing is really black or white yet we feel compelled to make it so because it's easier to digest and categorise and of course, the holier than thou complex of salacious tsk tsking. If someone was born with a vivacious personality, one'd be like it is what it is, if someone was born with a preference for the same gender we go omg haram y u no muslim. Regardless of whether the actual act of any penetration or even a hard on has taken place. I know some women who're like make sure the boys/girls don't spend too much time with each other, they might catch the gay somehow. Some people are a-okay with their boys being womanisers, it's even celebrated in some cultures as being the sign of a true blooded male but a gay son would be the end of times. It's beyond the pale for a woman to either be a maniser or a lesbian on the other hand, can't catch a break that gender.
Some opine that straight men take the concept of lesbians better because their fear of manly penetration is lessened visually or theoretically and what's better than one woman? Two women in sexy times eh. Anyways, socially, we're okay with women being touchy feely but God forbid it's two men. There's this thing in certain cultures where two men are totally comfy with holding hands in public just like girls but it evokes a strong reaction from those not used to it...anything beyond that is inconceivably awful. It's probably equal parts what we're used to, fear, social conditioning, expectations and so on which make us biased before we've even got to the actual stage of any sex or let alone emotions in a homosexual relationship. It's not what we're used to so we try to make things around us conform to an image of what is normal to us by using various justifications, most dreaded one is the 'it's...unnatural'. Pink was a manly colour back in the day, brawny got less in vogue and men that look like women have been preferred by certain cultures (wouldn't say i'm averse to it myself). Anyways, things change, different cultures whatever, ebbs and flows.
People don't really have a definitive answer to if someone is wired differently from God in terms of attraction. Some would say it's all in the head because it can't be 'natural', it's a disorder and we have to live with it or find a cure, it's a test so bear with it or the best one which is not an answer at all but a way to shut everyone up by throwing scripture around, bellowing haraaaam, not really caring about rhyme or reason or any explanation more than penis x arse = stuff of nightmares and hell. End of. I'm kinda okay I suppose with explanations of people being born into weird situations or drawbacks to living life normally...because many are born into weird situations and/or have drawbacks to living life normally. That certainly shouldn't stop us from questioning life around us, God's plan, and having an open mind and enough perception to listen to what God intends us to hear without shoving wrenches in the machinery ourselves by talking over the messages through the arrogance peculiar to humans in which we think we've wrapped it all up in a tidy parcel, lets move on to the next because there is never any new information that can be used to refine or even destroy our puzzle parcels once we've decided it's done and dusted.
I am glad to read something from someone that finally says it as it is, that there is no "homosexuality" as such, but many diferent phenomenons that can result in the outward attitude of indifference or dislike for the opposite sex as far as sexual relsationships are concerned, or even any realtions.
The roman and greek culture (and japanese I don't know) is true that at any rate women were politically and even socially meaningless so they could go further up scale. Matrons in Rome had their part cut out providing beastly males to maintain a ghastly empire by sheer force.
But if we look attentively at the background of homoproscription in the muslim sphere as we can grasp it today, I am afraid that that is very much so please do not confuse us with women, we belong on the top not with them. Do not spoil the bort for the whole of us. That claim coming from the mass of powerless "muslim" men lead by the overrligiousity that gurantees them, right from heaven, the absolute assuredness of their belonging to the top, and in order for anybody to beling to the top, there must necessarirly be a bottom part Women are the providentially there to be picked and entitled bottom part, no pun intended.
Who knows, we may get to that situation where males get also their bottom part, and the top is kept for the very, very, very top.
So indeed, sex is a very obvious field in whcih power battles are held. And Muslims are at the front of the battles for bottom power. So women, muslim in women societies will have it very difficult for a long time to come, while overreligious males hold on to the special relationship between male chauvinism and heavenly designs.
Salaam
-
You claim one thing while I meant the opposite.
Did you miss my post to you about pedophilia in humans?
We need to remember that homosexuality occurs in nature too and they do not have the same kind of consciousness as we do and still they are homosexual.
We proved that homosexuality is against God's (anatomical) design but it is not unnatural as the phenomenon simply exists and that not only in humans.
Salam
What is the "natural" use of human butt?
Should we feel disgusted, or it is "natural" and represent the truth? hmm
Yes, or No. Simple question.
Peace
The reason of "natural" in "human behaviours" (vs. human organs) may not be entirely correct in finding the right path.
Just cause it's natural or that it was made by the Creator doesn't mean it's good or nice.
-
Unfortunately, translators, even excellent ones, God bless them, keep betraying themselves because of the ingrained and unnocited malecentrism which has pervaded all cultures known to me on earth, in spite of themselves. This is the case with the translation that is used in this message of muslims that I quote.
There are no wives in the Arabic text. In fact the aya is part of set of them that refer equally to men and women. Please read de preceeding ones and the follwing ones tot he ayas quoted by muslims
The text is spiaking the third person masculine, but referring to anybody, male or female, and does nto say "wives" but "zawj", that is, one of a pair, be it of identical things or be it of complementary things, like each part of a pair of shoes. So it could be properly translated as partner or consort or spouse, but no mention of wife, or of woman or of male or of man.
As to the mamalakat ayman... as we know they can be males or females and can be adscribed to males or females.
So in fact what is undoubted is that whatever is done or not done with the private parts is always in the intimacy with no more than one apart from onself. To note carefully is that if zawj is translated as wife, that would men that women would be authorized to have sexual partners, spouses of their same sex, or the they would be exempted of having to keep to their partners and could go freely with anybody else too.
Still good that it has been brought up. Thank you.
Salaam
http//corpus.quran.com/wordimage?id=73472
Salam
I'm sure the issue you are raising is not relevant to the issue of this thread, and neither it distort the meaning or contextual meaning of the Qur'an.
Muhammad Asad
with any but their spouses - that is, those whom they rightfully possess - for then, behold, they are free of all blame,M. M. Pickthall
Save with their wives and those whom their right hands possess, for thus they are not blameworthy;Shakir
Except in the case of their wives or those whom their right hands possess-- for these surely are not to be blamed,Yusuf Ali (Saudi Rev. 1985)
Except with their wives and the (captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (then) they are not to be blamed,Yusuf Ali (Orig. 193
Except with their wives and the (captives) whom their right hands possess,- for (then) they are not to be blamed,Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar
but not from their spouses or what their right hands possessed. Truly, they are not ones who will be reproached.Wahiduddin Khan
except from their spouses and those whom they rightfully possess , for which they incur no blameT.B.Irving
except with their own spouses or those living under their control; with such they are blameless.Except with their wives and with those of the captives in their hands; an act being then holy and incurs no blame;
(2011 Edition)
Except around their spouses or those committed to by oath, there is no blame.Abdel Haleem
from all but their spouses or their slave-girls??there is no blame attached to these,Abdul Majid Daryabadi
Save in regard to their spouses or those whom their right hands own; so verily they are not blameworthy -Ahmed Ali
And those who guard their sex except from their wives and women slaves of old. Are free of blameAisha Bewley
except from their wives and any slaves they own, in which case they incur no blame,Ali ?nal
Save from their spouses or (as a permission for men) those (bondsmaids) whom their right hands possess, for with regard to them they are free from blame.Ali Quli Qara'i
(except from their spouses and their slave women, for then they are not blameworthy;Hamid S. Aziz
Except in the case of their wives or those whom their right hands possess - for on these surely is no blame,Muhammad Mahmoud Ghali
Except with their spouses or what their right hands possess; then surely they are not blameworthy (Literally other than being blameworthy).Muhammad Sarwar
except from their wives and slave girls, in which case they are not to be blamed,Muhammad Taqi Usmani
except from their wives and those (slave-girls) owned by their hands,__ because they are not to be blamed,Shabbir Ahmed
They have intimate relations only with their spouses - that is, those who are rightfully theirs through wedlock. For such relationship they are free of blame. ('Aw' = Or = That is = And. (235-7)).Syed Vickar Ahamed
Except from their wives and the (captive) whom their right hand possess? For (them), they are not to be blameworthy,Umm Muhammad (Sahih International)
Except from their wives or those their right hands possess, for indeed, they are not to be blamed -Farook Malik
except from their wives and those whom their right hands possess, for in their case they are not blameworthy.Dr. Munir Munshey
Except with their spouses _ those whom their right hands possess; because then, they are not blameworthy.Dr. Mohammad Tahir-ul-Qadri
Except from their wives or the female slaves they possess. So (in this) there is no blame on them.Dr. Kamal Omar
except unto their wives or ma-malakat-aimanuhum (the women who are given in guardianship of adult males as their wives under a document prepared by the Muslim state) ? then surely they are unblamed people.Talal A. Itani (new translation)
Except from their spouses or those living under their control, for then they are free of blame.Bilal Muhammad (2013 Edition)
Except with their spouses and those who their right hands possess, for they are not to be blamed,Maududi
except in regard to their spouses and those whom their right hands possess, for in regard to them they are not reproachable,(2013 Edition)
Except around their spouses or those maintained by their oaths, there is no blame.Bijan Moeinian
with their wives and the ones that God has approved for them.Faridul Haque
Except with their wives and the bondwomen in their possession, for there is no reproach on them.Hasan Al-Fatih Qaribullah
except from their wives and what their right hands own, for these they are not blameworthy.Maulana Muhammad Ali
Except in the presence of their mates or those whom their right hands possess -- for such surely are not to be blamed,Muhammad Ahmed - Samira
Except on (for) their spouses and what their rights owned/possessed (i.e. care-givers of the sick, elderly and disabled under contract), so then they are not blameworthy/blamed.Sher Ali
Except from their wives and from those whom their right hands possess; such indeed, are not to blame;Rashad Khalifa
(They have relations) only with their spouses, or what is legally theirs -Ahmed Raza Khan (Barelvi)
Except with their wives and the bondwomen in their possession, for there is no reproach on them.Amatul Rahman Omar
Except from their (free) wives or those (wives of theirs) whom their right hands own (- slave wives), for which they are not to blame.Muhsin Khan & Muhammad al-Hilali
Except with their wives and the (women slaves and captives) whom their right hands possess, for (then) they are not to be blamed,Non-Muslim and/or Orientalist works
Arthur John Arberry
save from their wives and what their right hands own, then not being blameworthyEdward Henry Palmer
except for their wives or the (slave girls) whom their right hands possess, for they are not to be blamed;George Sale
of women other than their wives, or the slaves which their right hands possess; -- for as to them they shall be blameless;John Medows Rodwell
(Save with their wives or the slaves whom their right hands have won, for there they shall be blameless;N J Dawood (draft)
save with their wives and slave?girls, for these are lawful for themPeace
-
Take a break muslims. I am disgusted by it and what made you believe otherwise? It is because it is an abnormality and not according to the design and we feel disgusted by the image of it.
Nevertheless I try to have empathy for those who were born this way or has it as a mental illness that they cannot help being homosexual.
I said that homosexuality is against the design and you know it, but the phenomenon undeniably occurs still and in which way it could be considered "natural". Of course the term "natural" can be slightly inaccurate and must be taken to the context, but it refers to a phenomenon which occurs biologically not in an unnatural way. It is difficult to say that an animal with a lesser mind can get a psychological disorder that they copulate with same sex partners, so the logical conclusion is that it is biological.
We can control certain abnormal behavior thanks to our developed brain, but we still suffer from the instincts, take the sex drive for example. Many people have trouble abstaining from certain behavior because of the instincts.
Peace
-
?Everything in the world is about sex except sex. Sex is about power.?
Oscar Wilde -
Take a break muslims. I am disgusted by it and what made you believe otherwise? It is because it is an abnormality and not according to the design and we feel disgusted by the image of it.
Nevertheless I try to have empathy for those who were born this way or has it as a mental illness that they cannot help being homosexual.
I said that homosexuality is against the design and you know it, but the phenomenon undeniably occurs still and in which way it could be considered "natural". Of course the term "natural" can be slightly inaccurate and must be taken to the context, but it refers to a phenomenon which occurs biologically not in an unnatural way. It is difficult to say that an animal with a lesser mind can get a psychological disorder that they copulate with same sex partners, so the logical conclusion is that it is biological.
We can control certain abnormal behavior thanks to our developed brain, but we still suffer from the instincts, take the sex drive for example. Many people have trouble abstaining from certain behavior because of the instincts.
Peace
Salam
That's my point, and I believe it is "unnatural for the Deen of Islam" to misplace what have God intended it to be.
It is okay to be empathy but it is not the truth in Islam.
The truth is what in the Qur'an.
We cannot distort the rules simply because we feel empathy, right? Is it?
What is the logical connection between "empathy" and "truth"?
Peace.
-
Peace
-
Peace
The rules relating to "empathy or hate" (feelings) vs. "be just"
O you who have believed
be persistently standing firm for Allah
witnesses in justice
and do not let the hatred of a people <- feelings, "empathy or hate"
prevent you from being just
Be just; that is nearer to righteousness
And fear Allah
indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what you do
(5Salam
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
?Everything in the world is about sex except sex. Sex is about power.?
Oscar WildeHeh, reminds me of an anagram!
Quote by Oscar Wilde
There is only one thing worse than being talked about and that is not being talked about. =
Wilde died broken, beaten 'n' total nut. Hate being sunk in that rotten gaol. Shh, gay is taboo.
(by Larry Brash)http//www.wordsmith.org/anagram/hof.html
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
Peace
The rules relating to "empathy or hate" (feelings) vs. "be just"
O you who have believed
be persistently standing firm for Allah
witnesses in justice
and do not let the hatred of a people <- feelings, "empathy or hate"
prevent you from being just
Be just; that is nearer to righteousness
And fear Allah
indeed, Allah is Acquainted with what you do
(5Salam
I'm not sure that hatred relates in any way to empathy!
Perhaps a better example of empathy would be the following
3159 It was a mercy from GOD that you were soft towards them; had you been harsh and mean hearted, they would have dispersed from you; so pardon them and ask forgiveness for them, and consult them in the matter; but when you are convinced, then put your trust in GOD; for GOD loves those who put their trust.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
I'm not sure that hatred relates in any way to empathy!
Perhaps a better example of empathy would be the following
3159 It was a mercy from GOD that you were soft towards them; had you been harsh and mean hearted, they would have dispersed from you; so pardon them and ask forgiveness for them, and consult them in the matter; but when you are convinced, then put your trust in GOD; for GOD loves those who put their trust.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
Salam
Is there any problem?
Both ayats about "being just", right?
Peace
p.s. RED Actually your ayat is more about the "mercy of Allah", which is out of context. )
-
Salaam,
Most of God's system has a lot of do with being humble, understanding and loving and not so much harshness and coldness except being able to stand up for your rights and defend yourself. I do not agree that emotions are forbidden and a sign of weakness. It is this kind of thinking Shaytaan wants to inflict in man. I am fascinated that people extract this kind of behavior from Qur'an.
If you can understand the situation of those who are homosexual even if you do not sympathize with them you can empathize and make their condition bearable, you have reached far into God's realm. You should be able to be kind or at least respectable even towards those who sin. And who does not sin anyway?
God bless you
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
Salam
Is there any problem?
Both ayats about "being just", right?
Peace
handshake
I agree that both verses are about being just (and kind)...just pointing out that hatred is not even distantly related to empathy.
Empathy is recognizing emotions that another person is feeling--"putting yourself in their shoes."
Empathy is related to the Golden Rule...the Golden Rule is in AQ both in the positive, and the negative (Silver Rule).
Positive form
2422 And let not those among you who have been blessed by abundance refuse to give to the relatives, and the needy, and those who have immigrated in the cause of GOD. Let them pardon and forgive. Would you not like GOD to forgive you? And GOD is Forgiving, Merciful.
Negative form
2267 O you who believe, spend from the good things that you have earned, and from what We have brought forth from the earth. And do not select the rotten out of it to give, while you would not take it yourselves unless you closed your eyes regarding it. And know that God is Rich, Praiseworthy.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
Salam
I believe both of you must be very confused.
Read from the start and there is not a single person who is talking or supporting the ideas of Muslim should oppress homosexual.
All are agreed that there should be no oppression, respect them as human beings, and are talking about "What is the rule in the Qur'an?".
Issue of this thread
I wanted to ask if a person can be gay and Muslim?
(the statements thereafter are the "supporting statements" suggesting the importance of this issue, and why the Sunni and Shia should treat them as a Muslim and human beings - which is not necessary since many here are not Sunni or Shia, and are not supporting any oppression)
ie. the issue of whether gay is a muslim or non-muslim?
if a muslim, why? which ayat? (refer here)
if a non-muslim, why? which ayat? (refer here)
and if relating to a statement that can be a muslim because of "feelings" (refer here) or "natural" (refer here).. then the issue whether these factors or elements can change God's rules? (refer here and here)
and what is the rule relating to homosexuality? (refer here, which no one is willing to answer, and rather wish to treat as if it is never existed in the Qur'an)
http//www.themarketingbit.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/04/head-in-sand.jpg
Same question.. from the start.
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605924.msg340673#msg340673
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605924.msg340574#msg340574
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605924.msg340409#msg340409
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605924.msg340242#msg340242
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605924.msg339941#msg339941
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605924.msg340013#msg340013
http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605924.msg339984#msg339984
Peace group
But as I pointed out, there is no reason for any society not to allow
I believe this will involve different issues, ie. "Whether gay is a public offence or private offence?". Why it is an offence when it is private between two individuals? Why prostitution is an offence?
(**Is it a private offence? It involves two parties and can be considered as a public offence, an offering to the public to join the offeror committing an offence, harming the other party and exposing them to various infections or diseases to the other, their family and relatives (+humiliation) and the society at large; cf. abettors, non-payment of taxes or zakat, and punishment for adultery, ie. it is a public sentence. Private is related to one single entity, you alone and without contacts with two or more persons, eg. leaving prayers.)
-
May peace and blessings of God be on you ,
I think that first we have to make it clear that is being a Gay something which is predetermined , which can not be controlled by an individual or is it a choice or nurture or mixture of both.
There are certain genes that increases the predisposition for a particular disease or behavior of a person.
for example certain genes makes a person prone for Lung cancer , however refraining from smoking ( which is due to his nurture, life style and free decisions) will not led to development of Lung cancer in his life.We know that some individual has an urge to get attracted towards the same sex which he can not control but at the same time we know that many a times Identical twins (monozygotic) having same DNA and genes are not both Homosexual. so i think that it is possible that some Genes may be responsible for predisposing a person towards a Homosexual attitude but at the same time nurture and proper raising of a child can change him.
Quran does not wants us to be a Homosexual but it does not prescribes any punishment for homosexuality from other Human beings , Punishment of Homosexuality ( and other associated crimes ) is from God , not Humans.
Allah Knows Best . these were my views.
-
Salaam Adil Husain,
I think it might be a test of tolerance and respect the whole homosexuality thing.
God bless you
-
May peace and blessings of God be on you ,
I think that first we have to make it clear that is being a Gay something which is predetermined , which can not be controlled by an individual or is it a choice or nurture or mixture of both.
There are certain genes that increases the predisposition for a particular disease or behavior of a person.
for example certain genes makes a person prone for Lung cancer , however refraining from smoking ( which is due to his nurture, life style and free decisions) will not led to development of Lung cancer in his life.We know that some individual has an urge to get attracted towards the same sex which he can not control but at the same time we know that many a times Identical twins (monozygotic) having same DNA and genes are not both Homosexual. so i think that it is possible that some Genes may be responsible for predisposing a person towards a Homosexual attitude but at the same time nurture and proper raising of a child can change him.
Quran does not wants us to be a Homosexual but it does not prescribes any punishment for homosexuality from other Human beings , Punishment of Homosexuality ( and other associated crimes ) is from God , not Humans.
Allah Knows Best . these were my views.
EXACTLY!
sunIf you can understand the situation of those who are homosexual even if you do not sympathize with them you can empathize and make their condition bearable, you have reached far into God's realm. You should be able to be kind or at least respectable even towards those who sin. And who does not sin anyway?
Well said.