Homosexuality LGBTQI and the deen
-
Bender,
The reason I brought up that thread (which involved your method of understanding Quran) was because in this thread your method of understanding Quran came up again. It's simple.
In that old thread you were shown to be using an unproven method to govern how you interpret Quran - sounds dodgy to me. I felt in this thread you were doing the same thing, hence discussing testing your method - if possible.
Not my method fails but my understanding of that word fails.
Agreed BUT if your method is found lacking multiple times then we may be able to conclude your method may be weak/suspect.
Well the potential "benefits" are exactly the reason why I am against synonyms.
You're against benefits? Weird.
I assume you are referring to the "benefits" of being able to choose another meaning when our understanding doesn't fit - a suspect "benefit" hence your use of " ". If so, I wasn't even on about that hence why I referred to clarification. Forget Quran, forget Arabic, have you even considered how in a language, any language, synonyms can actually help clarify? THINK.I admit that my approach does not bring a lot of results, this means that I have for a loooooooooooooot of words/verses no clue, but I am confident that this is the way to go as I believe that this approach will lead to a better understanding.
Allowing homonyms and synonyms will for sure bring a lot of results, but it allows also a lot of different interpretations, and I am confident that this is the wrong approach.If one were to limit the scope of variation by utilising a robust checklist to check whenever one wants to choose a different meaning of the same word then that would certainly reduce variant interpretations, e.g. the same word could mean a different thing in another occurrence BUT only if
- the dominant meaning in the other occurrences has been tested extensively in this occurrence under question and found problematic (by intra-Quran analysis)
- AND there is an intra-Quran logical reason for choosing another meaning, e.g. an illogical outcome results
- AND this other meaning has some basis in Classical Arabic dictionaries or at least theory
- AND this other meaning fits a pattern, e.g. if its with a certain preposition, part of an idiom, all other occurrences fit like a glove
- AND obviously this meaning does not contradict anything anywhere else in Quran
And don't worry if you don't understand what I mean by the above, here is the method I try to stick to http//www.quran434.com/study-method.html
Generally, I prefer to use explicit methods of understanding Quran, e.g. those said in Quran itself (see link above), rather than making up interpretational rules then using these made up rules to understand Quran. If that's what others want to do, then good luck in that minefield.
Each to their own.
-
Bender,
The reason I brought up that thread (which involved your method of understanding Quran) was because in this thread your method of understanding Quran came up again. It's simple.
In that old thread you were shown to be using an unproven method to govern how you interpret Quran - sounds dodgy to me. I felt in this thread you were doing the same thing, hence discussing testing your method - if possible.
Does any one here has a proven method?
Agreed BUT if your method is found lacking multiple times then we may be able to conclude your method may be weak/suspect.
I see it differently, I think the method I use is the best there is, but it's me who is lacking skills.
You're against benefits? Weird.
I assume you are referring to the "benefits" of being able to choose another meaning when our understanding doesn't fit - a suspect "benefit" hence your use of " ". If so, I wasn't even on about that hence why I referred to clarification.
RED pedophiles, murderers, slaveholders, oppressors, thieves, etc also make use of those benefits.
I prefer correctness over benefits.Forget Quran, forget Arabic, have you even considered how in a language, any language, synonyms can actually help clarify? THINK.
Maybe there are some benefits from poetic point of view, but besides that I don't see any benefit.
I was watching a serie last week.
The bad guy Boyd Crowder held a man hostage, when he was done questioning him, he said to his sidekick Colt "Take care of him"
So Colt shot the hostage in the head.
Boyd actually meant for Colt to untie the hostage, and then reflects that he will have to be more careful with his choice of words next time.
I believe the language of the quran should be clean, it should not allow such misunderstandings.btw great serie, Boyd Crowder is O0
If one were to limit the scope of variation by utilising a robust checklist to check whenever one wants to choose a different meaning of the same word then that would certainly reduce variant interpretations, e.g. the same word could mean a different thing in another occurrence BUT only if
- the dominant meaning in the other occurrences has been tested extensively in this occurrence under question and found problematic (by intra-Quran analysis)
- AND there is an intra-Quran logical reason for choosing another meaning, e.g. an illogical outcome results
- AND this other meaning has some basis in Classical Arabic dictionaries or at least theory
- AND this other meaning fits a pattern, e.g. if its with a certain preposition, part of an idiom, all other occurrences fit like a glove
- AND obviously this meaning does not contradict anything anywhere else in Quran
And don't worry if you don't understand what I mean by the above, here is the method I try to stick to http//www.quran434.com/study-method.html
Generally, I prefer to use explicit methods of understanding Quran, e.g. those said in Quran itself (see link above), rather than making up interpretational rules then using these made up rules to understand Quran. If that's what others want to do, then good luck in that minefield.
Each to their own.
I respect your method and it will bring for sure only positive results for people who use the quran quotes you quoted in your link.
-
Peace Adem, the ayats you quoted are not commandments or
directives from Allah. There is no "o you who believe" or
"o mankind" in those ayats. Please continue.peace
bravo bravo bravo
sorry for giving reply to someone else post
i will continue actually just for this of your point .. becoz i feel due to the faulty reasonings what you guys are bringing here .. can confuse the believers...
look very carefully now...
1732 Do not go near adultery, for it is a sin and an evil path. ( missing "o mankind" oh "o you who believe"
1733 Do not kill, for God has made this forbidden, except in the course of justice(missing "o mankind" oh "o you who
believe"1736 Do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and mind, all these are held responsible for that. (missing "o mankind" oh "o you who believe"..
and lot more.... more ref will be provided on request...
i wonder what type of logics members are bringing here... really shocked... confused
-
brother hawk for you... again... look into bold parts.. and use your reason/aqal what God provided you..
26160 The people of Lot denied the messengers.
26161 For their brother Lot said to them "Will you not be righteous?"
26162 "I am to you a trustworthy messenger."( messenger by who) next verse will clear it..
26163 "So be aware of God and obey me." (messenger always bring a message from God..)
26164 "I do not ask you for a wage for my reward is upon the Lord of the worlds."
26165 "Are you attracted to the males of the worlds?" (warning of what they do)
26166 "You leave what your Lord has created for you of mates? You are an intrusive people!"
26167 They said, "If you do not cease O Lot, you will be among those driven out."
26168 He said, "I am in severe opposition to your acts!"
26169 "My Lord, save me and my family from what they do."
26170 So We saved him and his entire family.
26171 Except for an old woman who remained.
26172 Then We destroyed the others.
26173 We rained upon them a rain. Miserable was the rain to those who had been warned.
26174 In that is a sign, but most of them are not those who acknowledge.but if you think it was not by God. then you are free to believe.. that if a phrase is without oh who you beleive or oh mankind then we are exempt of obeying it .. you claim is very weak infact its not even weak its wrong... from my perception...
handshake peace -
26165 "Are you attracted to the males of the worlds?" (warning of what they do)
26166 "You leave what your Lord has created for you of mates? You are an intrusive people!"Salam, peace
It is not that simple and it is not that obvious. For some reason (I suppose biblical interpretation influence) when it comes to Lut's story everything is suddenly about homosexuality and orgies and the meaning of ?inmorality? is limited to sex. Why? Are those the really worst crimes for which a whole generation should be destroyed? Promiscuity is not welcome either it is hetero or homosexual. But I still dont understand why being homosexual is worst than being a people who destroys the earth and makes wars and does not respect basic and universal human rights.
The root for ?latatuna? is translated as ?approach? only TWICE in the Quran and it is precisely in the verses regardind Lut's people.
2929 You approach the males, and you sever the way, and you bring all vice into your place.
2755 You are approaching the men out of desire instead of the women!
Nowhere else it is translated like that, I mean, like ?approach? or ?commit?. A coincidence? hmm When it comes to Lut everything suddenly is made to fit into homosexuality while there are many other interpretations more suitable for God's sense of Justice. If it is a coincidence or a lapsus or just a very convenient interpretation, I don't really know.
The same happens to the root of ?shahwatan? in 2755, ?with lust?. There are much more appropiated roots for sexual desire, and shahwatan rather means - at least for me - ?give priority / give preference? and not sexual desire. It is exclusively ?sexual desire? and ?lust? TWICE in the Quran, precisely related to Lut's people. Like if ?passions? were only sex and precisely homosexual desire. I find it a very limited interpretation.
The root of shahwatan is the one used to say that dwellers of paradise will have in it ?whatever they desire?. So, wow, Heaven is going to be an orgy and Lut's people will be in there? Come on giveup
For example, do you see any hint of ?lust? in the use of the root of sahwatan here
1657 And they assign daughters to God; be He glorified; and to them is what they desire.
or here
3 14 It has been adorned for people the desire of women, and sons, and ornaments made from gold and silver, and trained horses, and livestock, and fields. These are the enjoyment of the world, and with God is the best abode.
I will insist once more We are more concerned about homosexuality than God is. Let's fight injustice and real evil.
At some point it really seems like shaytan is achieving to hide the real evil behind all those interpretation issues for us not to see real evil so it can go on spreading while we sit and get into meanless discussions about homosexuality.
This is my interpretation, you are welcome to desagree, of course, only God knows better. May the One and Only God give us understanding and knowledge hail
Have a greaaaaaaaaaaat day peace
-
bravo bravo bravo
sorry for giving reply to someone else post
i will continue actually just for this of your point .. becoz i feel due to the faulty reasonings what you guys are bringing here .. can confuse the believers...
look very carefully now...
1732 Do not go near adultery, for it is a sin and an evil path. ( missing "o mankind" oh "o you who believe"
1733 Do not kill, for God has made this forbidden, except in the course of justice(missing "o mankind" oh "o you who
believe"1736 Do not uphold what you have no knowledge of. For the hearing, eyesight, and mind, all these are held responsible for that. (missing "o mankind" oh "o you who believe"..
and lot more.... more ref will be provided on request...
i wonder what type of logics members are bringing here... really shocked... confused
) Peace imrankhawaja the ayats you quote are commandments and directives from
Allah, again, there are no such ayats regarding homosexuality! Please reread my
post again. handshakePeace Adem, the ayats you quoted are not commandments or
directives from Allah. There is no "o you who believe" or
"o mankind" in those ayats. Please continue.peace
-
I remember me and my friends used to think that there was something vaguely Satanic about San Francisco. We felt uncomfortable. Later on, I found out Anton LaVey's Satanic Church was based in San Francisco.So Satanism definitely has influenced the city.
rotfl
No, its not Anton LaVey's Satanic Church, but commercialism for the sake of tourism responsible for that uncomfortable feeling.And I would say more than 90% of the gay men I knew were extremely promiscuous. San Francisco was so gay as a straight male I was actually a minority and I felt kinda isolated (I knew there was gay people in San Francisco but I didn't know it was THAT gay!).
25% gay population in SF... because they are accepted. Absence of marriage leads to promiscuity. True for heterosexual people also.
I remember a man who looked like he was 50-something years old randomly came up to me and offered me money to perform oral sex on me. That kinda thing was actually kinda normal.
An Arab man of somewhere around 80 one night showed 500 dirhams to my mom for something similar back in UAE. We were shocked, but then we came to know it was "normal" there.
I would get approached constantly by gay men. I remember sitting on a bus and noticing the guy across from me was (very blatantly) checking me out.
But men do that to women. I am sure he did that too. I am also sure he never thought it was bad.
The history behind prophet Lot's people is spoken of in Quran Al-Kareem
in such concise terms that understanding the verses requires an expansive
view. The Quran states that basically the people of Lot were a criminal
society and culture and were doing things like rape of men which was
never practiced as a societal norm before them.29/29 (interesting verse and chapter no.)
What! you approach males and commit robbery on the highway,
and you commit evil deeds in your assemblies? But nothing was the
answer of his people except that they said Bring on us Allah's punishment,
if you are one of the truthful.That whole culture had to go, be destroyed the people of Lot were irredeemable.
peace
That's how I saw it too. Thank you very very much for the summary.
I understand the views of both sides.
We are not used to seeing same gender couples for which we feel uncomfortable and wrong about it. For us girls, gay men aren't big deal maybe because they behave like us. Its a familiar zone. But for straight males, it will probably remain a matter of discomfort. I won't hold it against them. I know neither my dad nor my fiance finds even a tiny clip of gay men acceptable. But, that's okay. I do feel a bit weird when I see such couples in public, but then I ask
Will I ever want my sister to marry a man who behaves like a woman and shows interest in males?
My answer is no and with that I lose the right to say homosexuality is wrong. -
Does any one here has a proven method?
"proven" is a strong word, but certainly methods can be tested. People test methods all the time, every day, including you, e.g. the method you used to make your breakfast. THINK.
Maybe there are some benefits from poetic point of view, but besides that I don't see any benefit.
How about this
Arabic is a living language, meaning it evolves with time and in different regions it is also different. People who speak a language are not robots, in the sense they only use a certain word only in one context and never in another context, or never as part of a metaphor or never as part of an idiom etc. Language has wide variation in usage.
So, let us say there are two words in Quran, let's call them X and Y. The author of Quran wishes to use word X with a specific meaning, but word X is used in many different ways/contexts in the real world so what is one way the author of Quran can utilise to ensure people understand it in a certain way?
Well, one way is to utilise synonyms and use another word, e.g. Y, in the same or similar context, instead of X, so if a reader was unsure of what shade of meaning/nuance the author meant for X they would note the use of Y in the same/similar context, which helps narrow down the meaning of X.
Of course, there are many ways for an author to narrow down a meaning, which are more common in my opinion, e.g. use of logic, practical application, contexts etc but synonyms can also be used.But even if you disagree, it does not matter, because my main point is you are using impossible to verify methods to govern how you interpret Quran. Any way you slice that, it can't be Justified.
-
"proven" is a strong word, but certainly methods can be tested. People test methods all the time, every day, including you, e.g. the method you used to make your breakfast. THINK.
On what test(s) does my method exactly fail?
How about this
Arabic is a living language, meaning it evolves with time and in different regions it is also different. People who speak a language are not robots, in the sense they only use a certain word only in one context and never in another context, or never as part of a metaphor or never as part of an idiom etc. Language has wide variation in usage.
So, let us say there are two words in Quran, let's call them X and Y. The author of Quran wishes to use word X with a specific meaning, but word X is used in many different ways/contexts in the real world so what is one way the author of Quran can utilise to ensure people understand it in a certain way?
Well, one way is to utilise synonyms and use another word, e.g. Y, in the same or similar context, instead of X, so if a reader was unsure of what shade of meaning/nuance the author meant for X they would note the use of Y in the same/similar context, which helps narrow down the meaning of X.- Why exactly would the author of the quran not just use word Y?
- I hope you can see that in your example word Y can never be a homonym as that would not make things clearer but bring only more confusion (while you are pro homonyms).
- According to you in that old thread you gave an example of a synonym, but you thought that my example was not a synonym. So how exactly do we determine that 2 words are synonyms?
Of course, there are many ways for an author to narrow down a meaning, which are more common in my opinion, e.g. use of logic, practical application, contexts etc but synonyms can also be used.
But even if you disagree, it does not matter, because my main point is you are using impossible to verify methods to govern how you interpret Quran. Any way you slice that, it can't be Justified.
I use what I think is best, if I knew a better method then I would for sure have used that, I am not stupid.
-
On what test(s) does my method exactly fail?
Oh dear. We just went over this. Let me simplify even further
Bender my method of interpreting Quran is XYZ
Wakas let's test that method. Here are 4 words in Quran, what meaning results using your method.
Bender provides no answerPreviously
Bender there are no synonyms in Quran, each word has a distinct meaning.
Wakas here are two words used in the same context, what is their difference?
Bender provides no answer- Why exactly would the author of the quran not just use word Y?
I already explained. Words in every single language in the world are used in many different contexts and therefore likely have nuance and/or regional variation. Thus, word Y will also have this issue.
- According to you in that old thread you gave an example of a synonym, but you thought that my example was not a synonym. So how exactly do we determine that 2 words are synonyms?
I dont think I explicitly said it was a synonym, but I did ask you for the difference and you had no answer.
To identify a synonym in any language would employ a similar method I'd imagine. It would be done by context, logic, cross-reference - if after a careful analysis we cannot find any difference in meaning then they could be considered potential synonyms.
I use what I think is best, if I knew a better method then I would for sure have used that, I am not stupid.
How about using what Quran says as your method?
Does Quran say there are no synonyms? No.
Does Quran say one word can only have one meaning regardless of use? No.I prefer
http//www.quran434.com/study-method.html -
Oh dear. We just went over this. Let me simplify even further
Bender my method of interpreting Quran is XYZ
Wakas let's test that method. Here are 4 words in Quran, what meaning results using your method.
Bender provides no answerYou can repeat or simplify as much as you like but I thought we already kind of agreed that this is testing defintions. This is thus NOT testing methods.
And Bender did provide an answer for the word "daraba", Bender said lets take "violence" for daraba, so please tell me what is wrong with my method, where exactly does my method fail?Previously
Bender there are no synonyms in Quran, each word has a distinct meaning.
Wakas here are two words used in the same context, what is their difference?
Bender provides no answerBecause I simply do not know the answer to that question, just like you.
I can give you with ease 1000 quran questions on which you have no answer, does that mean your method is bad?What I (and you) know for sure is that those 2 words are written differently.
But somehow you where hinting that they are synonyms, but when I gave you a similar example you had a different opinion.
If you can not provide me at least a method how to reconize synonyms then there is not much to discuss.I already explained. Words in every single language in the world are used in many different contexts and therefore likely have nuance and/or regional variation. Thus, word Y will also have this issue.
Did you actuallunderstood what I wrote in my previous post?
According to you the value of synonyms is that word Y can help to narrow the meaning of word X, with other words demanding that word X should have only 1 meaning and also requires word Y to have only 1 meaning.
So the question still remains the same, IF word Y is so powerful and clear, then why would the author of the quran use word X in first place and not simply word Y?I dont think I explicitly said it was a synonym, but I did ask you for the difference and you had no answer.
Maybe you forgot but you clearly said that it was an example/evidence (you have the link so you can check it yourself).
And what are we actually talking about if you do not think they are synonyms?
If you just want to show that I do not have an answer for a particular question of you then you have indeed succeeded.To identify a synonym in any language would employ a similar method I'd imagine. It would be done by context, logic, cross-reference - if after a careful analysis we cannot find any difference in meaning then they could be considered potential synonyms.
Thus with this method you have indentified potential synonyms, do you have a list for me with potential synonyms? In the example you gave 1 word was only used once in the quran.
How about using what Quran says as your method?
Does Quran say there are no synonyms? No.
Does Quran say one word can only have one meaning regardless of use? No.Ok lets check
Does Quran say there are synonyms? No.
Does Quran say one word can have more than one meaning? No.I prefer
http//www.quran434.com/study-method.htmlYes I know, I prefer (= believe in) a clean and clear quran.
-
Bender,
The quality of your posts have worsened (in my view) as this discussion has gone on, thus I will keep this short. Unfortunately you do not seem to be able to grasp simple points, e.g.A method can be tested.
The burden of proof is upon the claimant.
Words in a living language are used in a myriad of contexts, thus will inevitably have nuance and/or regional variation, and may overlap in meaning with other words.
So let's test your "answer" then...
When you said "daraba" is "violence" I asked for your actual understanding. You never clarified until your post above. Firstly "violence" is a noun. In any case, please provide your translation of the relevant parts of 434, 3156, 226, 1317, 1811, 2431, 435, 2077 where DaRaBa is used. -
Bender,
The quality of your posts have worsened (in my view) as this discussion has gone on, thus I will keep this short. Unfortunately you do not seem to be able to grasp simple points, e.g.This is always a nice way to avoid questions.
A method can be tested.
And what are the results of your tests about my method?
Did you find any contradiction or flaw? If so please then show me.The burden of proof is upon the claimant.
This is already the 3 time you are claiming that I have claimed something. Can you stop with this please.
And why exactly is the burden of proof on me?
Does the quran say there are homonyms and synonyms? NO
So if you want it this way then the burden of proof is also on you, except if you think that everyone who has a different opinion then yours has to provide evidence.Words in a living language are used in a myriad of contexts, thus will inevitably have nuance and/or regional variation, and may overlap in meaning with other words.
The quran is not a living language, it has always been the same.
And we are discussing here ONLY the quran and not another language.So let's test your "answer" then...
When you said "daraba" is "violence" I asked for your actual understanding. You never clarified until your post above. Firstly "violence" is a noun. In any case, please provide your translation of the relevant parts of 434, 3156, 226, 1317, 1811, 2431, 435, 2077 where DaRaBa is used.You were asking what is the theme/concept of the word, and I said "violence".
I take for every verse "beating/to beat/etc".
So now you know this, what is wrong with my method? -
You were asking what is the theme/concept of the word, and I said "violence".
I take for every verse "beating/to beat/etc".
So now you know this, what is wrong with my method?I already told you to provide your translation of the relevant parts of those verses so we can test your method. You have evaded.
What I am asking is really really simple, thus I think it is unlikely you do not understand my request and are therefore being deliberately evasive. Thus, this will be my last post to you on this (unless you actually answer what I asked).
-
Homosexuality not supported. Period.
It is vain sex, but any sex except for reproduction purposes is vanity and only to stimulate the sensuality of the human body's instinct.
It is not more wrong than you getting aroused in the middle of the street for a random woman, giving expression for your instinct.
The old Commandment speaks of vain sex, but later distorted into illicit sex. And Jesus said that even looking upon a woman with desire is committing adultery in your mind. The underlying brain activity in a human is the problem and is the spiritually detrimental factor and why the Commandments is more a remedy than a law.
Be well
Amenuel -
The quran is not a living language, it has always been the same.
And we are discussing here ONLY the quran and not another language.I agree with Bender here. What is written in Quran means the same now as well as it did when the book was written. If it means something else it is because people have twisted it into meaning something else.
Arabic consists of root words and they have one fundamental connotation and NEVER EVER change until the end of time.
Amen for example is secure, safe, confident and no other invention attributed to it.
Discovering what a word means in one location means you now what it means everywhere in Quran. It works like a code where you can research on easier segments of text to later return to harder because you better know the vocabulary. Lexicons with their corpus are a help, but one still has to contemplate a lot on an individual word to pinpoint its exact meaning in the middle of all bias. Often it is the least expected word that is the true defining word and not all too seldom it is the hidden one never used for interpretation of Quran that is the true definition.
And no, I say Quran is NOT preserved in interpretation, its traditionally conveyed message is not at all what it wishes to convey.
Be well
Amenuel -
We are given a clear example of homosexuality in the Quran - both private and consenting, as well as the craziness that is unfolding in the West during our times...
2754 And Lot, when he said to his people "Are you committing immorality (fahisha) while you can clearly see?"
2755 "You are approaching the men out of lust instead of the women! No, you are an ignorant people!"
2756 But the reply of his people was that they said, "Expel the people/followers/family of Lot from your town, for they are a people who are being pure!"
Do you not realize that is exactly what happens today?! When you call out fags/gays/sodomites/homosexuals on their behavior, you are called a bigot, homophobe, get publicly shamed, etc.
Also note this verse does not talk about merely aggressive/rapacious homos. It talks about homos in general. Homosexuality is of the same degree as pedophilia and transgenderism. Indeed, pedophilia is of the same kind of mental/sexual deviance as homosexuality. In the past, Western media actually called pedos "homosexuals." It's a mental illness and sexual deviance. I too was once brainwashed into being tolerant and twisting the Quran's words to justify faggotry/homosexuality to be allowed, when clearly it is against God's law ("kitab" in the Quran and in nature.
Homos need to get help. A lot of times it is because of past abuse or general mental illness that they are too weak to control. The problem is that the corrupted media owned by "you know who" is encouraging all of this along with the bought/controlled government.
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
A zombie thread--just in time for Halloween! My comments in red.
We are given a clear example of homosexuality in the Quran - both private and consenting, as well as the craziness that is unfolding in the West during our times...
The word "homosexual" is not used in the Qur'an.
2754 And Lot, when he said to his people "Are you committing immorality (fahisha) while you can clearly see?"
2755 "You are approaching the men out of lust instead of the women! No, you are an ignorant people!"
As commented before, approaching any person out of lust is not okay.
2756 But the reply of his people was that they said, "Expel the people/followers/family of Lot from your town, for they are a people who are being pure!"
Do you not realize that is exactly what happens today?! When you call out fags/gays/sodomites/homosexuals on their behavior, you are called a bigot, homophobe, get publicly shamed, etc.
Surely there are ways to effectively communicate without purposefully offending others/using offensive language? What behavior have you witnessed (seen with your own eyes) that required intervention/comment?
4911 O you who believe, let not any people ridicule other people, for they may be better than they. Nor shall any women ridicule other women, for they may be better than they. Nor shall you mock one another, or call each other names; miserable indeed is the name of wickedness after attaining faith. And anyone who does not repent, then these are the transgressors.
Also note this verse does not talk about merely aggressive/rapacious homos. It talks about homos in general. Homosexuality is of the same degree as pedophilia and transgenderism. Indeed, pedophilia is of the same kind of mental/sexual deviance as homosexuality. In the past, Western media actually called pedos "homosexuals." It's a mental illness and sexual deviance. I too was once brainwashed into being tolerant and twisting the Quran's words to justify faggotry/homosexuality to be allowed, when clearly it is against God's law ("kitab" in the Quran and in nature.
Modern science classifies homosexuality as neither mental illness nor abnormality. If homosexuality were against the intentions of the Almighty/"God's law", then why is it found in all known species that are capable of sexual reproduction?
Homos need to get help. A lot of times it is because of past abuse or general mental illness that they are too weak to control. The problem is that the corrupted media owned by "you know who" is encouraging all of this along with the bought/controlled government.
There is no known way to "help" a homosexual change their sexual orientation.
Be truthful, be logical, and be good to others. If the way of somebody else doesn't appeal to you, don't emulate them. All major differences will be sorted out on Judgment Day.
May ALLAH see fit to Guide all seekers.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
