Understanding the story of Lot and homosexuality

Mino-taur

http//www.telegraph.co.uk/science/science-news/10637532/Being-homosexual-is-only-partly-due-to-gay-gene-research-finds.html

http//www.theguardian.com/world/2008/dec/01/homosexuality-genetics-usa

http//io9.com/5967426/scientists-confirm-that-homosexuality-is-not-genetic--but-it-arises-in-the-womb

http//www.nytimes.com/1991/12/17/science/gay-men-in-twin-study.html

Peace Wakas, Everyone,

Being "born gay" is false, and has been shown by scientific studies.

Research the studies done on genetically identical twins, who later in life, one is homosexual, one heterosexual. This is very common.

Being ?Born Gay? does not necessarily mean that it is due to one single Gene which makes you gay. Sexuality is more complex than to be defined by one gene. Very few things about the body and how the brain is structured and works are defined by just one gene. If you study Genetics or molecular Biology, this is one of the first things you will learn. Moreover, in the link I have provided at the start of my post gives a quick summary of some of the studies into biological basis for Homosexuality. In the one by Canadian reasearchers, it shows that it may not be caused by Genes at all, it is in part due to the increasing strength in the mothers immune response.

The second link is there just to show more evidence that there may be some type of genetic factor involved in the causation of homosexuality.

The third link is another example how Homosexuality is not purely Gene based. Genetics is so much more complicated than ?You have this Gene, therefore you will have yellow hair? etc.

The fourth link is there to show you that the study you mentioned is most probably an anomaly. Also the ?epi-marks? explanation, explains why one twin with the same genes as his brother did not turn out to be gay also. The straight twin obviously lacked the epigenetic modification which would lead to homosexuality.

In summary, we can conclude that there is some Biological basis for homosexuality, probably not genetic, but biological nonetheless. Therefore, being gay is Definitely not a simple Choice. If it was, when did you choose to be straight?

And thank you for the link to the Thread, I will read it when I have more time. (I'm currently studying for exams!). But because there is some Biological basis, and no clear condemnation of homosexuality (being attracted to the same sex) in the Quran, I believe that being Gay is ok according to the Quran. Simply put, Allah would not create Gay people when they cannot help it, and then condemn them for it. It's like making black people, and condemning them for being Black!

Peace everyone, I sincerely hope I haven't offended anyone with my post as I understand this is a sensitive subject. )

Mino-taur

huruf

Again this like going on forever over free will and predestination. Gets nowhere.

Because what it revolves around is just that. On the other hand, I am still surprised that people keep on and on on whether it is by choice or by birth and look for statistics and science and all that which is very nice. but the point is that just knowing the people, the real people one knows that there are some who have sex with their own sex by choice and others that have a "natural" tendency to it. There is no one and only one way of behaving homosexual or bisexual or heterosexual. Many today considered even by themselves homosexual are so by choice. And many heterosexual are also so by choice, they could well have a great time with somebody of their own sex. They simply do not allow themselves to do it, which is an intelligent choice. And choice may involve simply the reason why one would involve in sex at all.

As to whether it is wrong or not, it is up to each person to examine her or himself as to the motives why they would do something or other. The blanket no it is not wrong or yes it is wrong does not work even for "hetero". Your motives must be sound. It is not some crowd or some ulemas who will bring you to account but your own deep self who wants to go back to Divinity to whom you should answer.

None here need to say a word or to be convinced of anything as to what any other person does with her or his sex life, it is each real person who should respond to her or himself as to whether they are being faithful or just giving themselves the answer that makes their life more pleasant or more fashionable or whatever in spite of deep down not wanting to know further.

And that problem we all peopla have, be it with sex or be it with other things. The point with sex is that a whole life is conditioned very much by that choice and we should consider the extent to which it will affect us.

Regarding the Qur'an, my conclusion is that it leaves things in the shade and is not obssessed with sex "sins". Just as it has been used wrongly to "endorse" poligamy, when in fact in 4.3 it doe snto talk about it, it is also used in some parts to set sexual dictates where in fact it doe snot go into it.

The thing into which the Qur'an really goes into is the intruding into people intimacy and privacy. The Qur'an forbids us to pry in people's private life, to wanting to know what is of no concern to us. Respect for private life, that is it. Sexual life is private life. It is each person who should look into his own private life, not the bunch of society.

Marriage, since it is the source of new generations, has to be protected. That is something which has nothing to do with protecting as such a sexual relationship, which again, is private. But what is protected is the birth and upbringing of generations.

People of any sex should be able to contract cohabitation, just as people are able to contract anything else, and what they do inside their homes is no public affair. They may or may not do this or that. It is their business and the faithful should not go into the private affairs of other people.

Do I need to know whether two women with blood relationship or without it, who live together, engage in sex or not? I do not need at all such knowledge, and personally, unless they are friends or some relation to me I do not want to be trown to me any such knowledge. It is no business of mine and it does not serve any purpose. Just as I do not need to know whether such or such person masturbates or not.

Homosexual love is not the equivalent of heterosexual love. Wrong or right or in the middle, whether it deserves approval or not, it is not the equivalent. But everybody should be able to live with the persons of his or her choice with a proper contract. And what they do or do not do in private is strictly their own private affair. The sex of the persons does not change a thing. Be they of the same or of different sex, sex is private. It is of no concern to anybody else, except as regards the reproduction, which obviously, as a result is public, very public.

Salaam

Mino-taur

Peace Huruf,

I do totally agree with you on the point that what people choose to do in their own privacy is not a matter concerned with the Public. With that said, it is important to see if Homosexuality is in line with the Quran as parents will start to Condemn their own children and make them feel bad for something they cannot help.
Most (I'm saying 95%) of people will tell you that they cannot help being gay, that it is not a choice. Now I do accept that there are these people who may Engage in "Homosexual" activities but these people are not Inherently homosexual, they are usually engaging in such acts as they may be confused or want to try something different. These people, i repeat, are NOT homosexual. So in effect, there are people who engage in homosexual acts because they have some personal reason for doing so, and Those who engage in sexual acts with the same gender because they are not attracted to the opposite Gender.
Please, speak with a Real life Homosexual, and you will understand what im speaking about.

I believe you are getting confused with that it is a Choice to engage in Homosexual activities, which is true. But it is NOT a choice of Who you are attracted to. If you are a Heterosexual man, tell me if you can choose to be attracted to Men tomorrow. Can you do that? Can you wake up tomorrow and decide to be only sexually aroused by men and not women?
You will find that it is not possible because sexual attraction is hardwired into your brain as it leads to reproduction. The body will not let this part of the brain be left to choice. What happens in Homosexuals is a biological mismatch happens, giving men, the same attraction mechanism as (Heterosexual) women.

And Homosexual Love IS equivalent to Heterosexual Love. The love between a Man and Woman, is Exactly the same between the between a Man and a Man, and a Woman and a Woman.

Also, I'm sorry, i did not understand some of your post

Peace

Mino-taur

muslims

I believe Allah acknowledge this and that's why lesser punishment for the crime of sexual intercourse between gays . .

If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both <- lash each one of them with a hundred lashes (242)
If they repent and amend ie. based on the "NATURE OF OFFENCE" - "Sexual Intercourse"
Leave them alone <- Allah is lenient on them
for Allah is Oft-returning, Most Merciful
4.16

JavaLatte

And Homosexual Love IS equivalent to Heterosexual Love. The love between a Man and Woman, is Exactly the same between the between a Man and a Man, and a Woman and a Woman.

How do you know that?

Do you able to ascertain accurately the love feelings of other people?

Just curious. peace

huruf

Peace Huruf,

I do totally agree with you on the point that what people choose to do in their own privacy is not a matter concerned with the Public. With that said, it is important to see if Homosexuality is in line with the Quran as parents will start to Condemn their own children and make them feel bad for something they cannot help.
Most (I'm saying 95%) of people will tell you that they cannot help being gay, that it is not a choice. Now I do accept that there are these people who may Engage in "Homosexual" activities but these people are not Inherently homosexual, they are usually engaging in such acts as they may be confused or want to try something different. These people, i repeat, are NOT homosexual. So in effect, there are people who engage in homosexual acts because they have some personal reason for doing so, and Those who engage in sexual acts with the same gender because they are not attracted to the opposite Gender.
Please, speak with a Real life Homosexual, and you will understand what im speaking about.

I believe you are getting confused with that it is a Choice to engage in Homosexual activities, which is true. But it is NOT a choice of Who you are attracted to. If you are a Heterosexual man, tell me if you can choose to be attracted to Men tomorrow. Can you do that? Can you wake up tomorrow and decide to be only sexually aroused by men and not women?
You will find that it is not possible because sexual attraction is hardwired into your brain as it leads to reproduction. The body will not let this part of the brain be left to choice. What happens in Homosexuals is a biological mismatch happens, giving men, the same attraction mechanism as (Heterosexual) women.

And Homosexual Love IS equivalent to Heterosexual Love. The love between a Man and Woman, is Exactly the same between the between a Man and a Man, and a Woman and a Woman.

Also, I'm sorry, i did not understand some of your post (

Peace )

Mino-taur

Man, you are funny, what makes you think that I have not talked to "homosexual men", wha makes you think even that I have talked to homosexual men less than you. I know what I am talking about. And you are wrong that people do not become homosexual or heterosexual by choice. They do. It may not work as a switch that you push it and everything chnages, it may be subtler or more gradual than that, but it is well known saying that proves true many times that for men, when they try with men they get to like it very much. Of course for that you need to give permission to yourself to fall into that, but many do give permission to themselves. Others do not, not even give permission to themselves to try. And that is wise. No need to add complications to one's life.

You are talking to me as if I didn't know anything, and was talking blindly, but I know what I know and I know what I am saying, and of course there are people, many people, I would say most people, that if they gave permission to themselves would feel attracted to either sex. They do not need to give permission to themselves, so they leave it at that, but do not try to pull on me the clich?e of the ingrained unsurmountable attraction to the same sex or to the opposite sex. I do not buy it. Some people may be like that, but where social permisivity allows people are very universal, and attraction exclusively to the same sex rarely stems from hormonal disfunctions but most of the time, overwhelmely it stems from emotional conditioning or trauma from early age. Emotional matters are far more important that the so ingrained genetic or whatever. Curiosity is another way where people come to be homosexual.

And if you divide homosexual as born with it or not real homosexuals you are kidding yourself. Where do you put the barrier separating both. Real homosexuals is what? There is not such thing, as there are no real heterosexual. The only division I can think of is motive. And the motive one justifies to oneself, not to others. One may cheat oneself or not, but there is no point in trying to make other people believe anything at all regarding one's sex life.

And there is no difference whether it is different sex or same sex. Moral people do not act on impulse and mere attraction, whether to the same or to different sex. Moral people refrain from engaging in situations where they may harm themselves or others, or demean themselves or others or get into relationships they know cannot bring anything but problems and difficulties.

Peole are not animals who just let themselves be led by their physical impulses, neither with people of the same sex nor with people of different sex.

Salaam

huruf

Peole are not animals who just let themselves be led by their physical impulses, neither with people of the same sex nor with people of different sex.

And that is one problem with applying Lut's history to determining how much does God condemn "homosexuality" because if we take it as that, we would come to the conclusion that what they did wrong was choosing the sex and not the raping and the violence and the use of other human beings for their beastly purposes, or had they done that to people of the other sex would have been better and moral? In fact some people from reading Lut's words interpret that in fact Lut did offer his daughters or feminine followers to the rapers, was he condoning raping and beastliness provided it was not done to men but to women? Like good rapers rape women, not men?

That is the big objection, or one big objection that I find when applying Lut's history to condemn homosexuality and it is that by the same token they approve of violence on women and the use of women as a legitimate usable object for lusts and bestiality of males. Disgusting, in fact I find that more disgusting than their preying on males.

So we should know what we are talking about. In the Qur'an God's gives males the task of taking care of women with their wealth and male partners of women to respect them and pay them and honour them, but aside of the history of Lut I do not see that the Qur'an goes into the question of "homosexuality". If anybody sees anything like that anywhere, please point it out.

May be it is as plain as that homosexuality or heteresexuality in fact do not exist, but are simply cultural figments.

There are, I know, and I am sure of it, very few people who do have physically border characteristics from the point of view of physiollogy and chemistry, they are neither fully females or fully male sor they are partly females and partly males. That is like people who have six fingers or siamese siblings or anything out of the norm. They are a very hard trial for the people who happen to have that conformation. All that can be done is take them as they are and be compassionate for their plight, because if it is already a trial for "normal" people to wade through the cultural conventions and idiocies of societies concerning sex, for a people like them it must be hell.

Other than that "homo" or "hetero" may be compulsive for some people, but it is nto because of their "natural" urges but because of other circumstances, most of the time emotional that set their survival instincts to atune to their emotional conditions. It is very easy to not do anything about the causes of things and simply decide that as you are you are right because it is "natural". Some things may be unavoidable, but not because they are "natural" but because whatever, but if they are unavoidable, they are unavoidable and the last thing one should do is punish oneself because of unavoidability on topp of suffering already that unavoidability. But another firs thing one should not do is kid oneself as to the reason or causes for whatever one does. It only confuses isues and comlicate things making them unsolvable, because one rejects investigating and finding out.

Feeling attraction to whatever may no be a sin but not wanting to know and wanting to cling to ignorance for lack of courage is an error, and errors always come back with a vengeance.

So I do not agree that people get comfort in this oversimplification of assuming that people are "naturally" attracted to one sex or the other and do not take any interest in their own beings and motives and identity because they already have their alibi for doing what comes EASIER for them. Good thigns are not necessarily easier in the short run, but on the long run are far more satisfactory.

This artificial division between "homos" and "heteros", as far as I am concerned, is crap. It is just social and intellectual laziness disguised largeness of spirit or tolerance.

It is not about condemning or approving anything, it is about knowing oneself and helping others, respectfully and without trespassing on their intimacy, to know themselves.

Salaam

Bigmo

IMPORTANT!

When Science is Context Three Questions Show
The Men of the Quranic Lot Story
Are Heterosexual men not Homosexual men

Introduction

Today, there are many studies showing sexual orientation is not environmentally influenced, but rather individuals are born with a sexual orientation.

See Parts I-IX Below

Applying these studies as an element of context within the Quranic Lot story, the story shows a condemnation of lustful homosexual acts of heterosexual men, and not a condemnation of homosexual acts of homosexual men. In other words, and the thesis of this short article, the men of the Quranic Lot story are heterosexual men not homosexual men. To support this thesis, I will share three commonsensical questions that must be asked about the Quranic Lot story when these studies become part of the story's context.

First Question

The first question that must be asked when these studies become part of the context is found in the Quran verse 781. The verse states,

". . . with lust you approach men instead of women . . ."

(Quran 781, M. Asad)

As seen, this verse uses ?instead of.? This usage shows the men of the Quranic Lot story are heterosexual men. How? Because the question that must be asked with science as context Can homosexual men approach women ?instead of? men?

Second Question

The second question that must be asked when these studies become part of the context is found in the Quran verse 1178. The verse states,

". . . Said "O my people! these daughters of mine they are purer for you ! . . ."

(Quran 1178, M. Asad)

As seen, this verse states that Lot offered his daughters to these men. This offering shows the men of the Quranic Lot story are heterosexual men. How? Because the question that must be asked with science as context Would Lot offer homosexual men his daughters?

Third Question

The third question that must be asked when these studies become part of the context is found in the Quran verse 26166. The verse states,

"keeping yourselves aloof from all the spouses whom your Sustainer has created for you? . . ."

(Quran 26166, M. Asad)

As seen, this verse states God created spouses for these men. This creating of spouses for these men shows the men of the Quranic Lot story are heterosexual men. How? Because the question that must be asked with science as context Would God create women for homosexual men?

Conclusion

When science is context, these three questions are enough to rightly question the long held belief that the Quranic Lot story is a condemnation of homosexual acts of homosexual men rather than a condemnation of lustful homosexual acts of heterosexual men.

Watch the videos and read.

The source
http//www.godists.com/articles/islam_when_science_is_context_three_questions_show_the_men_of_the_quranic_lot_story_are_heterosexual_men_not_homosexual_men

"2929] "You sexually approach men, you commit highway robbery, and you bring all vice to your society." But the only response from his people was to say, "Bring us God's retribution, if you are being truthful!"

"You are approaching the men out of lust instead of the women! No, you are an ignorant people!"

"Do you approach the males of the worlds?"
"You leave what your Lord has created for you of mates? You are an intrusive people!"
They said, "If you do not cease O Lot, you will be among those driven out."

He said, "I am in severe opposition to your acts!"

Does God approve of homosexuality? I think that's an obvious NO! Does that give us the right to go gay bashing on Friday night? No. It's between them and God. But no, it's not allowed.

How do you explain the verses I quoted above? If you're saying it's bad but not a sin... You may have a case (maybe). But if you're saying God is cool with Adam and Steve getting busy... I'd have to disagree. I don't think he's cool with it."

"2929] "You sexually approach men, you commit highway robbery, and you bring all vice to your society." But the only response from his people was to say, "Bring us God's retribution, if you are being truthful!"

"You are approaching the men out of lust instead of the women! No, you are an ignorant people!"

"Do you approach the males of the worlds?"
"You leave what your Lord has created for you of mates? You are an intrusive people!"
They said, "If you do not cease O Lot, you will be among those driven out."

He said, "I am in severe opposition to your acts!"

In the Quran we are told

And We caused the white cloud to overshadow you and sent down on you the manna and the quails, (saying) Eat of the good things wherewith We have provided you - they wronged Us not, but they did wrong themselves. 2.57

And remember ye said "O Moses! we cannot endure one kind of food (always); so beseech thy Lord for us to produce for us of what the earth groweth, -its pot-herbs, and cucumbers, Its garlic, lentils, and onions." He said "Will ye exchange the better for the worse? Go ye down to any town, and ye shall find what ye want!" They were covered with humiliation and misery; they drew on themselves the wrath of Allah. This because they went on rejecting the Signs of Allah and slaying His Messengers without just cause. This because they rebelled and went on transgressing. 2.61

Here we are told how the Israelites complained about the food and requested God to give them beans and vegetables when they already were given quail and manna. Moses commented on how the Israelites would prefare the veggies and beans over the meat and actually referred to it as inferior. This argument may make sense for most people but not for a vegetarian who would not see meat as a superior food to eat.

So a heterosexual may understand the verses you quoted. But a homosexual would not understand it that way since his attraction are not for females.

The issue with homosexuality is that its a behavior and not a character so it does not tell us anything about a person. Is this homosexual a believer or a non believer? Is he a righteous person or is he dishonest and selfish? Does he speaks truth when he speaks or is he a deceiver? Homosexuality does not tell us anything about a person except his sexual preference. Is he loyal to his male partner or does he commit adultery with other partners and exploits his partners and uses them? These questions shold be looked at when he look at any homosexual and not just look at his sexual preference only.

The Quran is concerned about a person's charachter and how it affects his behavior and not just his behavior regardless of his charachter. The same could be said about alcohol or smoking cigarettes or using recreational drugs. Too many times Muslims only look at behavior without considering the more important charachter of a person like arrogance, selfishness, misserliness, disloyalty and dishonesty and enviousness etc.

What i tried to point out is that homosexuals are not mainstream and represent a minority of males so sometimes we need to take that into account when we consider the Quran since the Quran sometimes talks to different audiences but generally it speaks to mankind as a whole. The Israelites were being stubborn while the people of Lot were being aggressive and violent and arrogant since they thought that they can rape whomever they want. Whether they were homosexuals or not we do not know. Its unlikely the Israelites were vegetarians but were probably just being stubborn so maybe the people of lot are just being assholes (excuse my language). But I believe both Moses and Lot were speaking as normal human beings would speak about food and sex. But like vegetarians, homosexuality is not mainstream. And how a homsexual would look at a women is very different than how most men would look at them. So we must take that into mind when we look at the verses of the Quran.

TheQuranAloneRevolution

Coming from a bi/gay Background, I choose not to act upon my desires and keep chaste. There is nothing un-Islamic about having sexual desires. The sin is however, in acting upon those desires. Sex outside of marriage is fornication (Zina). The fact is, most LGBT community do not have a form of spousal tie. Most change partners frequently, This is clearly ungodly. Yes of course God creates sin/sinners and righteous work, this is so he can test us, whether we choose to follow him, or follow desires/ego. I, as a reform muslim, who is attracted to both genders, choose to keep chaste until marriage, instead of acting upon carnal hedonistic desires. God did not ask for a change in the person, but rather a change in Character and conduct.

The Quran is very selective on whom we can marry and whom we cannot marry, We cannot marry women our father married, women from the same nursing mother, 2 sisters, Idol-worshiping women.... All of this help deduce that marriage is between men and women, because God set down standards to be ruled by, anyone who goes beyond the standard is wronging themselves, whether it is having intimate relationships with unlawful women, or men, or even animals, these are beyond the Standards, that is why God did not need to break down every single situation of marriage that can be allowed--He Simply set a standard, and what is beyond that standard is a sin.

Furthermore, I believe that nonsexual love and affection of the same gender is more of a coping mechanism for those who have attraction to the same gender. In many middle eastern countries/cultures for example, good friends desire a certain amount physical intimacy with each other. Friendships tend to be closer to the modern American concept of a "bromance" than the American concept of friendship. Men Kiss, hug, and hold hands while walking. This is considered a normal part of society. We all desire some level of love and affection, and seeking it in loving, affectionate, platonic (nonsexual), genuine, close relationships would be a coping method here, if one chooses to remain chaste.

419 "...If you hate your women, then perhaps you may hate something which God has endowed in it much goodness."

hawk99

Peace Family,

I seek refuge in GOD, from Satan the rejected
In the name of GOD, Most Gracious and Most Merciful

The people of Lot were vile, rape was but one of the offences, it was not a case of being born such and such
but entrenched criminal behavior of various sorts.

God bless

peace

huruf

I think that physical contact between people, touching, caressing without any sexual content is natural and necessary. However in today's society all physical contact has been restricted to the sexual. That is depriving people of an animal legitimate snese of well being like feeling physical closeness and intimacy other than sexual intimacy. It is a modern develoment. I remember when young, girls used to go hand in hand or arm in arm as the commonest thing and there was no hitn at all of any sexual content in it. equally people used to be effusive in physical expressions.

Today many many people have dogs and they say that one good thing about having a dog is that you have physical closeness, you touch the animal and it feels good.

I find that very funny. Not that I find anything wrong in being close to a dog and enjoying its touch, but to the fact that we shun physical closeness to people, but take refuge in closeness to animals. What are we playign at? There is nothign wrong with physical intimacy with those we love. I think that is rather the lack of that non sexual intimacy which helps today to fall into the trap of unbounded indiscriminate sex life, because sex life is the only way left for physical intimacy. So sex becomes the allpurposy physical relationship. We have been led like idiots into that trap.

Mammals rojoice in physical closeness, you just have to watch how the offspring of animals pile on top of each other just for the heck of it. Like being so close was the peak of wellbeing and comfort.

Salaam

hawk99

Peace Family,

Remember there were other societies that were destroyed because of their crimes, therefore the crimes
enunciated in the Quranic verses pertaining to those societies are unacceptable by God including homosexual
relations.

Coming from a bi/gay Background, I choose not to act upon my desires and keep chaste. There is nothing un-Islamic about having sexual desires. The sin is however, in acting upon those desires. Sex outside of marriage is fornication (Zina).
The Quran is very selective on whom we can marry and whom we cannot marry, We cannot marry women our father married, women from the same nursing mother, 2 sisters, Idol-worshiping women.... All of this help deduce that marriage is between men and women, because God set down standards to be ruled by, anyone who goes beyond the standard is wronging themselves, whether it is having intimate relationships with unlawful women, or men, or even animals, these are beyond the Standards, that is why God did not need to break down every single situation of marriage that can be allowed--He Simply set a standard, and what is beyond that standard is a sin.

Agreed

Lot said to his people, "You commit such an abomination; no one in the world has done it before!
"You practice sex with the men, instead of the women. Indeed, you are a transgressing people."

"Do you have sex with the males, of all the people? "You forsake the wives that your Lord
has created for you! Indeed, you are transgressing people."

And GOD made for you spouses from among yourselves, and produced for you from your spouses
children and grandchildren, and provided you with good provisions. Should they believe in falsehood,
and turn unappreciative of GOD's blessings?

God bless

peace

Abdul-Hadi

Greetings and Peace, all group

Peace Family,

Remember there were other societies that were destroyed because of their crimes, therefore the crimes
enunciated in the Quranic verses pertaining to those societies are unacceptable by God including homosexual
relations.
Agreed

Lot said to his people, "You commit such an abomination; no one in the world has done it before!
"You practice sex with the men, instead of the women. Indeed, you are a transgressing people."

"Do you have sex with the males, of all the people? "You forsake the wives that your Lord
has created for you! Indeed, you are transgressing people."

And GOD made for you spouses from among yourselves, and produced for you from your spouses
children and grandchildren, and provided you with good provisions. Should they believe in falsehood,
and turn unappreciative of GOD's blessings?

God bless

peace

C'mon...it has been demonstrated seriously that homosexuality far predates the people of Lot. Is the Qur'an in error? Nah! The abomination is clearly something other than homosexual acts.

Not just men were destroyed from the people of Lot. Were the women and children spared, or likewise destroyed? Isn't this a clue?

There is also the thorny "problem" of homosexuality being common in nature...even among mosquitos.

226 GOD does not shy away from putting forth the example of a mosquito, or anything above it. As for those who believe, they know that it is the truth from their Lord. As for the rejecters, they say "What does GOD intend with this example?" He strays many by it, and He guides many by it; but He only strays by it the wicked.

244 Do you exhort the people to do good, but forget yourselves, while you are reciting the Book? Do you not comprehend?

ALLAH knows best.

peace

~Abdul-Hadi

huruf

Yes, I insist that what the people of Lut did was not the mere fact of homosexual relations. Come to that, God should have destroyed the ancient greeks several times over.

What the people of Lut did would nto have been any better had they done to women what they did to males, would it? Part of the evilness seems to have been the fact of it being almost universal, except for the bunch of Lut's followers. Was Lut's wife also destroyed for aping males or females? It seems it was more for setting a standard of social mores that were beastly, violent, gangsters... A violent and mob behaviour so ingrained that nothing but doing away with them all would get them out of it. Greeks were commonly engaging in same sex relations all the time, but since they did not become universally violent on that coun, God let them go on.

All the confusion about the evilness of Lut's people seems to rest on Lut's words that seem to lead to the thought that had they done all those evil, beastly ganging and mobbing to women it would have been all right. But that cannot be the expplanation or we would be upholding a hell society. So it must be something else that Lut intended with his words. As far as I can weight the events as narrated by the Qur'an, he was buying time, and indeed, as the vents turned out, that is what he did indeed. Those silly comments of hinting at them trying something as "innocent" as raping women put off for a day the plans of his people, thus allowiing him and his followers to leave the city during the night and be spared. I very much doubt that he would have given away his daughters or female followers to be raped or that he had at any time any such intention. He put forward that offer in the trust that it would be rejected with contempt, as it indeed was.

So no, if we want hoosexual relations condemned int he Qur'an it must be supported by other ayas than those of the people of Lut, because the ayas on the people of Lut do not deal with that, but with a society that set sexual violence as a social standard.

Salaam

TheQuranAloneRevolution

Greetings and Peace, all group

C'mon...it has been demonstrated seriously that homosexuality far predates the people of Lot. Is the Qur'an in error? Nah! The abomination is clearly something other than homosexual acts.

Not just men were destroyed from the people of Lot. Were the women and children spared, or likewise destroyed? Isn't this a clue?

There is also the thorny "problem" of homosexuality being common in nature...even among mosquitos.

226 GOD does not shy away from putting forth the example of a mosquito, or anything above it. As for those who believe, they know that it is the truth from their Lord. As for the rejecters, they say "What does GOD intend with this example?" He strays many by it, and He guides many by it; but He only strays by it the wicked.

244 Do you exhort the people to do good, but forget yourselves, while you are reciting the Book? Do you not comprehend?

ALLAH knows best.

peace

~Abdul-Hadi

Peace,
Let me clarify

Lot was speaking to his people as a group & a community, not just isolated cases of homo-sexual-intimacy. This would be the reason why Lot states "No one has ever done before"..... We do not know of a community, before Lot's people, in the Quran that practiced widespread homosexual intimacy.
We cannot simply look at nature and derive what is sexually sound and moral and what isn't. Animals also have incest, homosexual behavior, multiple partners or orgies, you cannot look at that and justify that this is ok to also practice these, i.e just because it is found in "nature", does not guarantee a morally sound stamp on it.
God has specifically commanded us Laws about whom we can and whom we cannot marry, these laws cannot be understood without having a hetero-sex couple. If we superimpose 2 people from the same sex, these laws would be invalid, (e.g you cannot marry your mother or two sisters, but what about marrying your father or marrying two brothers ! ) Same Sex Marriage would thus not work if we superimpose the Quranic Marriage laws on top, because the standard was always between men and women, and, anything beyond that standard is a transgress.

Man_of_Faith

Peace,

In the story of Lot it seems as if the people of Lot tried to get to the angels (that seem to look beautiful) and likely rape them and Lot seems to have offered his daughters instead (possibly to honor his guests). The primary crime could have been rape and from other narratives it is revealed that the people of Lot committed highway robbery. It could be that they looted the male travelers and raped them. The narration does not reveal if they spared female victims from rape.

We do not know God's view of when Lot offered his daughters as that was an individual decision.

Despite this I am sure from the recitation that homosexuality is not exactly a norm, but the gravest problem is that it was forced upon those they robbed. Homosexuality is against the anatomical design of the creation, and two men or two women do not complement each other. And it appears that homosexuality is despised by God through the narration.

God bless you

hawk99

I think that physical contact between people, touching, caressing without any sexual content is natural and necessary.
Today many many people have dogs and they say that one good thing about having a dog is that you have physical closeness, you touch the animal and it feels good.

Peace huruf,

As you are aware, physical contact, such as hugging and touching is far different from sex.

C'mon...it has been demonstrated seriously that homosexuality far predates the people of Lot. Is the Qur'an in error? Nah! The abomination is clearly something other than homosexual acts.

Peace Abdul-Hadi,

The people of lot rejected the messenger, as did those societies that were destroyed before and after him!
Sodomy was but one of the entrenched crimes committed by the people Lot. Remember that there were
very few believers in the town.

Why do you choose to ignore this ayat? Is it a mistranslation? If so please let us know.

Lot said to his people, "You commit such an indecency; no one in the world has done it before!
"You practice sex with the men, instead of the women. Indeed, you are a transgressing people."

Not just men were destroyed from the people of Lot. Were the women and children spared, or likewise destroyed? Isn't this a clue?

Clue to what? no need being cryptic, please explain.

God bless

peace

Abdul-Hadi

Greetings and Peace, all group

My comments are in red.

Peace Abdul-Hadi,

The people of lot rejected the messenger, as did those societies that were destroyed before and after him!
Sodomy was but one of the entrenched crimes committed by the people Lot. Remember that there were
very few believers in the town.

Why do you choose to ignore this ayat? Is it a mistranslation? If so please let us know.

Lot said to his people, "You commit such an indecency; no one in the world has done it before!
"You practice sex with the men, instead of the women. Indeed, you are a transgressing people."

How can I ignore it and address it at the same time? It is a glaring contradiction as translated. If it isn't a mistranslation, it is at least a poor one.

"No one in the world has done it before!" No one = NOT ONE. Existing physical evidence shows that homosexual acts long predate the people of Lot. Cave paintings over 10,000 years old depict it. There is also evidence that it was common in Mesopotamia circa 3000 BCE--over a thousand years before the people of Lot were destroyed (1953 BCE). Mesopotamia was a society, or "people." Also, a more accurate translation is probably

'Will you commit lewdness such as no people in creation ever committed before you? For you come in lust to men in preference to women. No, you are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds'

To which I would comment that approaching anyone for lust is indecent. It is the approaching for lust that is a transgression, and the fact that it is men approaching men makes it incredulous.

Clue to what? no need being cryptic, please explain.

Did the women and children practice sex with the men instead of the women? Why were the women and children among the people of Lot destroyed along with the men? It is beyond reason to suppose that they were ALL transgressing in homosexual acts--something else was going on. Benefitting from highway robbery, perhaps?

2929 "You sexually approach men, and you commit highway robbery, and you bring all vice to your society." But the only response from his people was to say "Bring us the retribution of GOD, if you are being truthful!"

5338 None can carry the burdens of another.

God bless

peace

Let me put a few questions in sequence to the reader. For the sake of discussion, suppose that the people of Lot are being destroyed solely for homosexual acts

Was the transgression of the people of Lot individual or communal?
If communal, how does this in any way impact individual acts, especially in the here and now? )
If individual, how is this reconciled with existing physical evidences that the same acts had taken place long before? hmm

If the questions aren't valid, it is hard to get good answers. Look at the evidences and then make an informed decision.

3918 The ones who listen to what is being said, and then follow the best of it. These are the ones whom GOD has guided, and these are the ones who possess intelligence.

I find nothing in the Qur'an that tells me that either homosexuality or homosexual acts in themselves are despised--and certainly nothing that tells me to treat other people differently based on their sexual preferences/orientation.

6836 What is wrong with you, how do you judge?
6837 Or do you have a book which you study?
6838 In it, you can find what you wish?

ALLAH knows best.

peace

~Abdul-Hadi

TheQuranAloneRevolution

Greetings and Peace, all group

My comments are in red.

Let me put a few questions in sequence to the reader. For the sake of discussion, suppose that the people of Lot are being destroyed solely for homosexual acts

Was the transgression of the people of Lot individual or communal?
If communal, how does this in any way impact individual acts, especially in the here and now?
If individual, how is this reconciled with existing physical evidences that the same acts had taken place long before? hmm

If the questions aren't valid, it is hard to get good answers. Look at the evidences and then make an informed decision.

3918 The ones who listen to what is being said, and then follow the best of it. These are the ones whom GOD has guided, and these are the ones who possess intelligence.

I find nothing in the Qur'an that tells me that either homosexuality or homosexual acts in themselves are despised--and certainly nothing that tells me to treat other people differently based on their sexual preferences/orientation.

6836 What is wrong with you, how do you judge?
6837 Or do you have a book which you study?
6838 In it, you can find what you wish?

ALLAH knows best.

peace

~Abdul-Hadi

Lot was speaking to his people as a group & a community, not just isolated cases of homo-sexual-intimacy. This would be the reason why Lot states "No one has ever done before"..... We do not know of a community, before Lot's people, in the Quran that practiced widespread homosexual intimacy.

Your women are like a Fruit-bearing Crop. You may come to them (I.E Have sex with women), in anyway you want, so long as you maintain righteousness..." (2223)

God created the anatomical penis that would produce sperm, and the only rightful place that sperm belongs is in the anatomical vagina. You need to be married in order to have sex, and there is no mention of Same sex marriage in the Quran
I state again,
3) God has specifically commanded us Laws about whom we can and whom we cannot marry, these laws cannot be understood without having a hetero-sex couple. If we superimpose 2 people from the same sex, these laws would be invalid, (e.g you cannot marry your mother or two sisters, but what about marrying your father or marrying two brothers ! ) Same Sex Marriage would thus not work if we superimpose the Quranic Marriage laws on top, because the standard was always between men and women, and, anything beyond that standard is a transgress.

Show me one piece of evidence of Marriage Contract (Nikaah, Zawaaj) is between two men or two women from the Quran.... can two brothers marry each other, or a brother and a father? what about two men from the same nursing mother, explain the mariage laws & prohibitions in 423

Sincerely,
A concerned, chaste Individual.

Abdul-Hadi

Greetings and Peace, all group

My comments are in red for easy reading.

Lot was speaking to his people as a group & a community, not just isolated cases of homo-sexual-intimacy.

Great! This means this example is NOT a valid reason to bother individuals.

This would be the reason why Lot states "No one has ever done before"..... We do not know of a community, before Lot's people, in the Quran that practiced widespread homosexual intimacy.

Maybe not in the Qur'an, but such societies have existed. Mesopotamia comes to mind...

Your women are like a Fruit-bearing Crop. You may come to them (I.E Have sex with women), in anyway you want, so long as you maintain righteousness..." (2223)

This applies to women, no mention is made of men. If you want to split hairs, two men or two women can't even have sex together--call it what you will, but it isn't ~really~ sex in a biological sense.

God created the anatomical penis that would produce sperm, and the only rightful place that sperm belongs is in the anatomical vagina.

Actually, the penis does not produce sperm--you mean the testicles. The only "rightful place" is a matter of opinion. But are you arguing that men that don't produce sperm can have sexual relations with any willing participant, or that such people must cease all sexual relations? The argument that sexual acts revolve around sperm is ludicrous.

You need to be married in order to have sex, and there is no mention of Same sex marriage in the Quran

Maybe there ~is~ mention of same sex marriage in AQ. It would seem that many of the translations are skewed towards a traditional understanding rather than literally translated. For instance, the use of "spouse" instead of the more accurate "mates." I don't really see why the Qur'an would mention same-sex marriage anyway, because it has little to do with the Deen--that is what AQ is about, yes?

I state again,
3) God has specifically commanded us Laws about whom we can and whom we cannot marry, these laws cannot be understood without having a hetero-sex couple. If we superimpose 2 people from the same sex, these laws would be invalid, (e.g you cannot marry your mother or two sisters, but what about marrying your father or marrying two brothers ! ) Same Sex Marriage would thus not work if we superimpose the Quranic Marriage laws on top, because the standard was always between men and women, and, anything beyond that standard is a transgress.

There is no mention of many things in AQ. We are told that we would hate to eat the flesh of our dead brother, but cannibalism is not specifically forbidden. I care little for traditional standards, that is like saying that one will follow what a father followed. We are told to avoid sin, what is evident and what is subtle, and that covers many extremes. I'm not sure that same sex incestuous marriage is/was/is likely to ever even be an issue, ISA! I call strawman on the same sex incest marriage argument.

Show me one piece of evidence of Marriage Contract (Nikaah, Zawaaj) is between two men or two women from the Quran.... can two brothers marry each other, or a brother and a father? what about two men from the same nursing mother, explain the mariage laws & prohibitions in 423

No need. Take a look at the connected 424...

Sincerely,
A concerned, chaste Individual.

Concerned? confused Why be concerned about something very unlikely?

424 And the independent from the women, except those maintained by your oaths; the book of GOD over you; and permitted for you is what is beyond this, if you are seeking with your money to be independent, not for illicit sex. As for those whom you have already had joy with, then you shall give them their dowries as an obligation. There is no sin upon you for what you agree on after the obligation. GOD is Knowledgeable, Wise.

So, is a homosexual relationship beyond this, or not? Yes or no, please.

235 And they keep covered their private parts.
236 Except around their mates, or those who are maintained by their oaths, they are free from blame.

http//free-minds.org/forum/index.php?topic=9605924.msg341097#msg341097

May ALLAH see fit to Guide all seekers.

peace

~Abdul-Hadi