gay people and islam

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Elena,

nooo, there is misunderstanding

I was referring to your previous post when you said

Quote
Respected sister, you have to understand it is your FEELINGS(emotions) about ths situation that are causing you not to make the two things fit.

Sorry. My response was based on the below statement

Elena
it is difficult to make the two things fit. I mean, every time that the word 'perversion' is used here or when equating homosexuality with children molestation I find those expressions denigrating for the homosexual people who don't commit children molestation, abuse, or any other crime. It is not direct violence but I find it intolerant, as much time it is repeated 'we are not against the person'

What else is it but "feelings" that would prevent you from seeing a person being able to speak up against something without following up with violence?

Zenje
Can one say they're against something, as Kyle pointed out numerous times, and speak up against it, without the follow-up of violence?

unknownuser

Peace idol-free. You know at one time an 'objective fact' was that the earth was flat. History is riddled with 'objective' facts that were later proved wrong.(earth being centre of universe etc etc.). And also 1 pound of sand is also an arbitrary and relative measure,which though useful for comparison,is not absolute. Why do we need absolute truths? Whats wrong with relative truths? And If we(humans) do not have access to all knowledge at once how can we make a universal,absolute conclusion?
example all frogs are green.( A so-called truth,absolute statement,verified and observed.) Then 20 years later a scientific discoverer finds white frogs,this is verified and observed. Therefore -End of objective statement(disproved) that 'all frogs are green'. (note,this is a hypothetical example,there may be white,green and pink frogs ) )
Peace.

sawtooth

Peace be upon you Sawtooth,

idolfree.... When in adoleselce, SOME people find themselves confused over what they are feeling in regards to others. Some may find that they are atracted to an individual and feel that they are either one way or another sexually and look into those feelings. Some find out they are homosexuals, some find out they were confusing their emotions. THAT is experimentation. Emtions are not always easy to figure out, but sexual atraction coes down to how a body reacts. it DOES or it DOESN'T

Thats not true. The "body" reacts based on programming. There are heterosexual couples who "loved" each other but have gone through so much EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS (arguments or what have you) that they cant get excited for sex with each other anymore. Likes and dislikes change, they are not "YOU". They are not the "I".

and YES that goes for both genders. Sometimes the IDEA of a taboo can be a turn on while the reality proves to be a complete turnoff, but you don't know until you put it to the test SOMETIMES

So since there is KNOWLEDGE hat crack kills, you are saying thatit is natural for someone to "try it out" just to be extra extra sure?

GENDER WISE!!!!!! Either a woman is gonna get you hot or a man. What does crack have to do with it?

Oh I am so done with this debate. When poeple are not using the same standard in a debate, there is no conclusion. I think homosexuality is a part of human existence. I acept that and see no reason not (except for reasons based on subjetive religious beliefe). therefore there is no middle ground to meet on.

So it's done

zenje

Peace enquirer,

I'm totally with you on facts that once were, and then totally changed. I've always been saying this. Here's a quote from MIB...

A person is smart. People are dumb. Everything they've ever "known" has been proven to be wrong. A thousand years ago everybody knew as a fact, that the earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, they knew it was flat. Fifteen minutes ago, you knew we humans were alone on it. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow. - Kay

We're on the same page there. However, I will disagree in regard to the scale examples - 1 pound is 1 pound. 32 degree F is 32 degree F... now whether one believes or feels that 1 pound is heavy or light, that is relative, still doesnt change the fact that it's one pound. Whether one finds it to be hot or cold at 32 degrees F is not the question... it's still 32 degrees F. I hope you get my meaning.

Peace.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you,

Peace idol-free. You know at one time an 'objective fact' was that the earth was flat.

That wasn't a fact, nor was it objective. Further, you make the distiction between "facts" and "truth", which deals with relationships. Our topic is the TRUTH of the relationship of "plugs" and "sockets".

History is riddled with 'objective' facts that were later proved wrong.(earth being centre of universe etc etc.).

You are incorrect. There is evidence BEFORE these people you are referencing who KNEW the earth was round and revolved around the sun. SO what you are refering to was the guesses of other people, this has nothing to do with OBJECTIVITY and the relationships of teh earth to the sun, etc.

And also 1 pound of sand is also an arbitrary and relative measure,which though useful for comparison,is not absolute. Why do we need absolute truths? Whats wrong with relative truths? And If we(humans) do not have access to all knowledge at once how can we make a universal,absolute conclusion?

I am not following what you said above, truth deals with relationships.

example all frogs are green.( A so-called truth,absolute statement,verified and observed.)

Wrong. You are discussing facts, not RELATIONSHIPS. Truth deals with RELATIONSHIPS.

Then 20 years later a scientific discoverer finds white frogs,this is verified and observed. Therefore -End of objective statement(disproved) that 'all frogs are green'. (note,this is a hypothetical example,there may be white,green and pink frogs )

Your example was not valid in regards to truth.

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Sawtooth,

GENDER WISE!!!!!! Either a woman is gonna get you hot or a man. What does crack have to do with it?

Crack was stated as a comparison to help you understand, but I dont think you reflected on it. Also, since you asked what Crack has to do with it, there are people who have sex with the same gender in order to get money for crack.

Oh I am so done with this debate.

Easy, dont let emotions get to you D

When poeple are not using the same standard in a debate, there is no conclusion. I think homosexuality is a part of human existence. I accept that and see no reason not (except for reasons based on subjetive religious beliefe). therefore there is no middle ground to meet on.

There's nothing subjective about OB-serving form and function, that is OB-jective. The only subjectiviy seems to be that you feel it is "religion" that is motivating my position. The midle ground is teh verifyable ground, and all you have is guesswork that homosexuality is biological, do you realize that is your only foundation?

unknownuser

Peace be upon you Sawtooth,

I went to another thread and saw that you do understand form and function, so I dont know why you have trouble applying it in this case.

Sawtooth
Cow's milk is not great for humans because our digestive system is designed to handle human milk specifically. there are protiens in cows milk that can reak havoc on a human digestive system. think about it.... Do we breast feed cow's? Or offer other species our own milk?

I agree with that by the way

TheNabi

Peace People

I think that people are debating what they feel is right instead of what God has decreed as right. I would like for someone to show me how homosexuality fits in with the marriage doctrine and with ayat 4/1.

Joe

topo

obviously, through out this thread most of us who defend the legal rights of gay people use common sense and compassion, only leyla who presented the opinion with quran verses back up, even still, many disagree with her interpetration. and that's okay, because that is why we are here, to discuss issues like this, hopefully to come to conclusion and agreement, but it doesn't matter either if there is nothing to agree with.
we are still in our journey of understanding life, our understanding now might be right or might be wrong, but we are to endlessly seek the wisdom of life.
i only believe that god is the most merciful and loves his every human being, and we are not to harm each other.

unknownuser

Peace zenje and all. Lets ask ourself how or why does the scale read 32 degrees when it does? Is it relative to the freezing point of water? If this freezing point varies or changes drastically (one day,or due to different conditions)) all the measurements will go wrong. D (note speed of sound is different at sea-level as compared to high altitide by about 100mph,-what happens to the scale/measurement then?) Maybe one day we will see(as in quantum physics) that though there are general laws they are not absolute and can be random at times. The stick may turn into a snake D . Peace and respect to all.

unknownuser

Hi idolfree1,

U obviously have posted quite a lot in the last 2 days. In a strange way, I am getting weary of this topic coz we seem to be running around circles here with the same things being said over and over again.

So, I am going to sum up some of ur favourite points based on ur posts so far.

Plug-socket -design-purpose

idolfree1 wrote
The sexual act is done until orgasm, the purpose of male semen coming out is to be connected with an egg, therefore the human with a penis and the human with a vagina are DESIGNED to go together.
Homo SEX uality is incorrect based on OBSERVABLE PROOF in relationship to its design.
Yes, and thats why birth control pills cause so much havoc as well as condoms. Your only foundation of response is based on using the "tools" for somethnig OTHER THAN thier purpose. When PURPOSE is brought into the conversation, the case is closed, there is no other PURPOSE for the semen that comes out of a penis except to be matched with an egg inside of a WOMAN.

Is every sexual act associated with the intention of conception? R u saying its wrong to have sex without the intention of conception? U r making no sense here. And how exactly do condoms cause havoc?
Its no good living in ideologies. U need to get more realistic about these things.

Everyone knows that to concieve, the plug needs to go into the socket and so on. but what if the intention is not conception? Will it make it wrong to have sex at all? Would u now call it as sexual perversion or sexual excess?
And will non penetrative sex also become perversion or excess? How r u in a position to define these norms for everyone?

Homosexuality, a perversion, sexual excess etc

Doing What is unnatural for u would be perversion for u. But to some homosexuality might actuallly be natural. For them, having sex with the opposite sex might feel like perversion.

Yin-Yang

With regards to yin yang and ur posts in this thread, I have one question for u. Is yin yang only about physical anatomy? Or has it got more to it?
Coz what u bring as explanations to ur yin yang concept, is penis and vagina. Is the positive and negative fields evidenced merely by physical shapes or also by energies?

Homosexuality a choice

Like I said earlier, I am opposed to the idea of anyone involving in homosexuality as a matter of choice(against their natural feelings of hetrosexuality). But this is not the case in the actual homosexuals. These people loathe the idea of being with member of the opposite sex. So, its not exactly a matter of choice for them.

Homosexuality and biological evidence

This area is very much a grey area till date and no definite answers have been attained. But yet, We have some evidence that there might be some biological factors in play.
This is from a textbook of neuroscience.

Although LeVay's findings support the idea that homosexuality is related to ?feminization? of the male brain (recall that INAH-3 in gay males is smaller than in straight males), Swaab and Hofman's data on the size of the suprachiasmatic nucleus undermine the interpretation that the male homosexual's brain is simply ?feminized? by a lack of androgens early in development. Whereas they found a difference in the volume of the suprachiasmatic nucleus between homosexual and heterosexual males, in contrast to LeVay they found no difference in the volume of the nucleus between females and heterosexual males. In addition, the development of the INAH-1 dimorphism occurs between 2 and 4 years of age?long after the first testosterone surge in human males. These discrepancies suggest that the development of sexually dimorphic nuclei in humans does not depend solely on early hormone levels. Even adult neural circuits have some plasticity (see next section and Chapter 25), leaving open the possibility that behavior, experience, and changes in circulating hormone levels generate dimorphisms at later stages. In accord with this suggestion, Breedlove and colleagues have reported that the posterodorsal nucleus of the medial amygdala has a greater volume in male rats than in female, but that castration of adult males and androgen treatment of adult females reverses this effect. Thus, the question of whether we are simply born ?that way? with respect to sexuality remains difficult to answer with any great confidence. Like most developmental events, a combination of intrinsic and extrinsic factors are probably involved.

Despite these uncertainties, work over the last decade has placed human sexuality on a much firmer biological footing. This is a welcome advance over the not-too-distant past when unusual sexual behavior was commonly explained in social, Freudian, or, worse yet, moralistic terms
http//www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/bv.fcgi?rid=neurosci.section.2127

Now here's one of ur absurd comparison.

idolfree1 wrote
If you can figure out what to do with your door key when you get home, the you should be able to figure this out.

If the intention is to open the door(which is the main pupose of a key), yes, the key would have to go into the lock and turned. But not necessarily so if the door doesnt need to be opened.

Whats another purpose for it?

I was kind of careful not to overdo my response here.
I dont have to use the key to unlock the door if i dont want to unlock the door, or if the door is open or whatever.
As to what other purpose for the key, I could scratch my back with it. So, now what? Does that make it wrong? wink

Peace!

unknownuser

Peace zenje,

U see homosexuality as a human choice.
I am opposed to the idea of homosexuality as a choice as well just as I am opposed to the idea of casual sex, swinging, violent sex, group sex etc
I understood about you being opposed to the idea of homosexuality being a choice (even though I'm not in agreement), but I didn't quite understand the comparisons that followed after. ? Are you saying those aren't choices (like homosexuality)?

Obviously, casual sex, swinging, violent sex, group sex etc are human choices and I oppose them as they are clearly wrong. Similary I would oppose a person choosing homosexuality inspite of naturally being a heterosexual(people who r fooling around with the idea of sex, 'trying out' stuff with people of same sex, opposite sex and both together etc).

I hope I was clear.

Peace!

unknownuser

Hi idolfree1,

I may have missed one other of ur fav point.

TV & homosexuality

I agree TV plays a major role in promoting culture(sometimes good and sometimes bad), but homosexuality? ?

Can anyone(heterosexual) get turned on by a member of the same sex just becoz some charachter in tv does? roll

Peace!

sawtooth

Hi idolfree1,

I may have missed one other of ur fav point.

TV & homosexuality

I agree TV plays a major role in promoting culture(sometimes good and sometimes bad), but homosexuality? ?

Can anyone(heterosexual) get turned on by a member of the same sex just becoz some charachter in tv does? roll

Peace!

THANK YOU!!

ichephren

Neither side is listening to each other in this debate. I will list my arguments so that at least I can be better understood

1.I don't know where anyone said that TV will turn a person straight person gay. What I do remember saying is that it in addition to societal acceptance of homosexuality may influence the emotions of young children who don't yet have a concept of their own sexuality. Please rebut that point.

2.I don't know who said that gays should be stoned. I certainly don't believe in stoning anyone,so this point is moot as far as the assertion that oppostion to homosexuality are intolerant and evil. I don't think I'm evil, I just don't agree with homosexual conduct.

3.Analogies to homosexuality and incest, bestiality, etc. have been made not to demonize gays, but to parallel it to other forms of sexually deviant behavior. Ex. if a man puts peanut butter on his penis and lets his dog lick the peanut butter off of it and enjoys oral sex with his dog, who also enjoys it b/c he gets to eat peanut butter, is this not sexually deviant? If this man only has this kind of sexual contact and does not have sex with anyone else, wouldn't we say that he probably has something wrong with him?

4.Rapists can be helped. The only sexual crime that cannot be rehabilitated is pedophilia b/c we just don't know enough about why they do what they do. Rape is a symptom of male aggression stemming from a lack of personal power. It is a form of control. A rapist can be rehabilitated to not need this form of control.

5.I think that sex is a matter of connecting the penis and the vagina for the purpose of reproduction. Every part of attraction is geared towards sex and the most efficient method of creating a baby. For example
a. men are more attracted to women when they are ovulating
b. ejaculation and orgasm are for the sole purpose of making the sperm reach the egg faster. When a woman has an orgasm, it causes her vaginal muscles to contract, helping to propel the sperm into the required space to fertilize the egg
c. after ejaculation the sperm stays in the "womb area" for a few days before it dies, making it more likely that at least one sperm will fertilize an egg
d. it is documented that when a woman is pregnant, men change their interaction with the woman subconsciously to protect her and the baby
e. every culture has a different conception of beauty, but this concept of beauty is always related to the ability to reproduce or how fertile the person looks

So as you can see, the enjoyment of sex is actually a biological mechanism that encourages greater chances for reproduction. The aspect of sex that makes it enjoyable also makes it a very efficient baby makign system, so sex is not solely for the sake of enjoying oneself. The point of sex is to make babies, it is simply our technology that allows us to protect aginst such a finely tuned system...and even so, condoms and pills only work 90-something% of the time. Without modern medicine which has only been in use for less than a century, sex would still = babies for the most part. The idea that sex is solely for pleasure is a big mistake.

I really don't see what homosexual love has to do with anything. Human beings can love anything and it can still be perverted. Saying that perversion is ok since they are in love is rife with conflict. Also, understanding something doesn't mean that one must endorse it. I can very much understand why someone would be attracted to a man, as I am attracted to men. I understand it, but I don't have to agree with it.

Ok, now I get off my soapbox )

TheNabi

Peace Ichephren

I agree with what you say. Concerning point #6 people can love what is not good for them. Even the reading mentions this.

Joe

TheNabi

Peace

Can anyone(heterosexual) get turned on by a member of the same sex just becoz some charachter in tv does?

It may be possible with the thought implanted in one's head, "I can do this, and look, it's okay". I do not think anyone is stating that tv makes people do things, however it influences one's considerations. Keep in mind how God speaks of the power of suggestion.

Joe

unknownuser

1.I don't know where anyone said that TV will turn a person straight person gay. What I do remember saying is that it in addition to societal acceptance of homosexuality may influence the emotions of young children who don't yet have a concept of their own sexuality. Please rebut that point.

What are you saing here? Sexuality is a learned behaviour?

As for as I know Sexuality is wired in the Brain from Birth. This is what research points to.

Here is a interesting case. An American boy due to a terrible circumcision accident lost his penis completely. The parents decided to raise him as a girl. The doctors gave the boy hormone treatments to make him more feminine. The boy grew up looking like a girl and behaving like a girl. But in his teenage years his masculinity re-asserted itself and he stopped taking hormone treatments and lived the life of man.

So Sexuality is NOT a conditioned response as far as I can see.

2.I don't know who said that gays should be stoned. I certainly don't believe in stoning anyone,so this point is moot as far as the assertion that oppostion to homosexuality are intolerant and evil. I don't think I'm evil, I just don't agree with homosexual conduct.

Well some people here have argued to remove homosexuals from the positions of power like teachers from schools and universities etc and others want to Exile them to a desert Island.

3.Analogies to homosexuality and incest, bestiality, etc. have been made not to demonize gays, but to parallel it to other forms of sexually deviant behavior.

Homosexaulity have been observed in the Animal world. There seems to be a certain percentage of the population that show homosexual behaviour in all societies in past and now. Why? This question has not been resolved yet. And the comparison between homosexuality and incest is not correct because incest is NOT usually between two consenting adults. And this goes for bestiality too.

If a man puts peanut butter on his penis and lets his dog lick the peanut butter off of it and enjoys oral sex with his dog, who also enjoys it b/c he gets to eat peanut butter, is this not sexually deviant? If this man only has this kind of sexual contact and does not have sex with anyone else, wouldn't we say that he probably has something wrong with him?

This has not been observed in the animal world where one animal puts peanut butter on it's penis and gets another animal of different species to lick it off. So yes this person is not well and needs urgent medical attention wink but licking cholocate from your spouse...erm I will not go there wink -)

4.Rapists can be helped. The only sexual crime that cannot be rehabilitated is pedophilia b/c we just don't know enough about why they do what they do. Rape is a symptom of male aggression stemming from a lack of personal power. It is a form of control. A rapist can be rehabilitated to not need this form of control.

Yes that is the case. The Power and Control. That is why rapist are not born and neither are paedophiles. They are borne out of either of hatred and abuse. And "Good" tortured can turn Evil. Good torturted by itself can turn Evil.

5.I think that sex is a matter of connecting the penis and the vagina for the purpose of reproduction. Every part of attraction is geared towards sex and the most efficient method of creating a baby. For example

Yes, that is what it is in the Animal World. But we are human beings. We are much more than an animal. Humanity exeptionally is a different Species than the Animal Species. Sex is more pleasureable for us. Procreation follows if we want to. Sexual Pleasure first, procreation second. We have left behind our REPRODUCTION instinct long time ago. So reproduction argument is no longer tenable.

a. men are more attracted to women when they are ovulating

And women are more attracted to men when men are sweating? wink
You have reduced men and women to their reproduction. But we have become more than our biology.

b. ejaculation and orgasm are for the sole purpose of making the sperm reach the egg faster. When a woman has an orgasm, it causes her vaginal muscles to contract, helping to propel the sperm into the required space to fertilize the egg

Yes that is just mechanics of reproduction. But you can have orgasm without ejaculating and you can also have a whole body orgasm instead of orgasm focused at the genital area. You can have orgasm in your dreams wink

c. after ejaculation the sperm stays in the "womb area" for a few days before it dies, making it more likely that at least one sperm will fertilize an egg d. it is documented that when a woman is pregnant, men change their interaction with the woman subconsciously to protect her and the baby

Yes this is all reproduction. But we human beings have become more than just a reproduction machine.

e. every culture has a different conception of beauty, but this concept of beauty is always related to the ability to reproduce or how fertile the person looks

I disagree. Beauty has it's own standard and is nothing to do with reproduction.

So as you can see, the enjoyment of sex is actually a biological mechanism that encourages greater chances for reproduction.

But we have gone beyond that. Sex is not for reproduction anymore.
Though nature may operate on Darwinian principles but we are living in an Anti-Darwinian world.

The aspect of sex that makes it enjoyable also makes it a very efficient baby makign system, so sex is not solely for the sake of enjoying oneself.

Yes it is now. Sex is for pleasure. We have gone beyond "sex for reproduction" stage in our development as a species.

The point of sex is to make babies,

Not anymore. Baby making is secondary and is just a choice now.

The idea that sex is solely for pleasure is a big mistake.

If it is mistake then hey WHAT A GREAT MISTAKE IT IS. Sex is for pleasure now. That's why there are 10,000 different never endings at the tip of the female clitoris!!! and what a thing it is too wink Baby making is now is a matter of choice.

I really don't see what homosexual love has to do with anything.

Love itself has nothing to do with SEX. There is no Sex in Love.
Sex can be part of LOVE but not always.

Human beings can love anything and it can still be perverted.

Don't mix SEX and LOVE. SEX is the need of the body. LOVE is the need of the spirit. You may "love" your bag of chips or Chocolate Dunk'em but it is nothing to do with LOVE! LOVE is the need of the soul.

I can very much understand why someone would be attracted to a man, as I am attracted to men. I understand it, but I don't have to agree with it.

Regardless wether you agree or not. Homosexuality exists and has always existed in all societies in the past and will always exist in the future. We don't understand yet why certain percentage of population in a given society show homosexual tendencies. But homosexuality is observed in the Animal World. Why? We have no answer yet.

Homosexuality is quite easily accepted in other cultures. It is only societies borne out of Abrahamic Religions that see homosexuality in such a negative light. Why this inherent phobia against it?

Regards,

unknownuser

Peace lote-tree and all. You made a very interesting comment about societies derived from the three abrahamic religions having a problem with homosexuality. I think mis-use/over-reliance on religious texts and a mis-understanding of theology are what have tarnished the tolerant and respectful message that these texts are supposed to have. Karen armstrong in her book 'history of god' says that when a concept of god does not work or seems to be illogical then we will look to new concepts.(my own paraphrasing) I would be interested to know what hinduism,buddhism or other philosophies(pre or post muhammed) think of homosexuality?
I believe certain elements of 'faith' need to be reviewed,we need less dogma and illogical/unrealistic views and more 'open' mindedness and humanity. We all have our own minds and there is an unending amount of knowledge and ethics out there... The quran is not the source of all knowledge or the centre of the universe,it can be a kick-start to rational thinking....if you want it to be....
Peace all.

TheNabi

Peace Lote

So Sexuality is NOT a conditioned response as far as I can see.

I'm aware of the following case of John who committed suicide in 2004 because of the scars he was left with. He was given hormones, etc, but he always stood out because he was a big man, a manly-looking figure. I'm not sure if you've heard of androgenic insensitivity syndrome, but it is a case where androgen receptors are defective. Read up on the case of Anne S. who was a genetic male. He was brought up as a female because he was feminine.

Joe