gay people and islam
-
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.
-
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.2127Now 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? winkPeace!
-
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!
-
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!
-
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!!
-
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 looksSo 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 )
-
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
-
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,
-
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. -
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
-
Peace be upon you,
But homosexuality is observed in the Animal World. Why? We have no answer yet.
Sure we do. Lust, as with all emotions, are the ANIMAL NATURE within you. Emotion and ANIMATION are the same thing (energy in motion).
This is why humans are compared to animals in "Koran" when they are called "dumb as cattle" or like "apes and swine", or like "parrots" etc.
Animals lick each other butts and other kinds of behavior, we cannot take the animals as our guide to correct behavior.
-
Peace be upon you,
The only problem here comes emotions leading your understanding. The process is to look objectively at an issue, look at form and function, then your emotion should follow that, not before that.
Anyway, lets take the most extreme example of this and see how it plays out
100% of people accept heterosexuality
100% of people accept homosexuality
Tell me the outcome of both.
I am not discussing how kind a person is, how much in "love" a person is, I am talking about he sex act.
-
Well if you were saying %100 of people TAKE PART in either I would say %100 of people being homosexual would not fair well (unless you facto in petri dish babies) But as for everyone accepting everyone? Well that would be fanfuckingtastic no? If people could live and let live (in this situation) without judgement, fear or hatred, think how nice the village in NYC could be.
Acceptance of eachother's differences is not going to be a BAD thing
-
Peace be upon you Sawtooth,
Well if you were saying %100 of people TAKE PART in either I would say %100 of people being homosexual would not fair well
Why not?
But as for everyone accepting everyone? Well that would be fan****tastic no?
I know the language on this thread has been very graphic, but please do not exceed the boundaries, respectfully.
My question was not about everyone accpeting everyone, it was comparing 100% hetero to 100% homo
If people could live and let live (in this situation) without judgement, fear or hatred, think how nice the village in NYC could be.
Why just that situation?
Acceptance of eachother's differences is not going to be a BAD thing
There is no compulsion, but the right way is clear from the wrong way.
-
Peace be upon you all,
In my opinion homosexuality is an immoral ACT, this however, does not mean the person is immoral. The reason I believe it is immoral is because of the fact that its only purpose is for pleasure, or to satisfy lust. With this line of reasoning though, people will say, that we shouldn't then go on roller coaster rides (they serve no purpose except excitement), we shouldn't watch a show like seinfeld, and on and on. Therefore, this argument won't stand ground, unless we decide that anything which only fulfills the purpose of pleasure or entertainment is something we shouldn't do. Unfortunately, I cannot foresee any arguments then that will work to discredit homosexuality, unless we simply say that its a test that some people have to overcome, just like we say eating pig meat is prohibited. This however, is one of the shittiest arguments, and doesn't sit well with logic. It's like saying "cause God said so". Since, I cannot come up with a good argument for why homosexuality is immoral, I will stop believing that it is so. I'll try to remain neutral on the subject.Lotetree made the argument that these days sex is for pleasure first, and procreation second. I agree with this view; today sex is foremost for pleasure, unfortunately this doesnt mean it is right. Simply because this view is in the majority, doesn't make it the right view. I think society has to turn this around, and make sex first for procreation and second for pleasure. People having sex just for pleasure, has led to a lot of unwanted pregnancies, and single parent families that pervade society today.
Another argument that has been made is that if nature does it (we are nature too I guess, but I mean the animal kingdom), then it's alright. This doesn't stand up to reason because animals do a lot of things that we've agreed aren't right. Should we run around killing our enemies children because animals in the wild do it? I doubt you'll say yes. We cannot therefore, rely on what animals do, to guide our actions as humans.
I think we have to analyze where we get our morals from, before we'll make any headway on this discussion. If it's from the book that people have titled the Quran, then we have to decide whether or not the Quran actually prohibits homosexuality. If it's from the conscience we all say we're born with, then we have to decide where we got this conscience, and can it be wrong (seems to create a lot of problems, and arguments that lead no where). Before we can decide why homosexuality is wrong, we must decide what wrong is, if we are going to be able to use reason and logic to solve this problem.
I hope I've made some sense,
Peace -
Peace
In my opinion homosexuality is an immoral ACT, this however, does not mean the person is immoral.
To me this statement is contradictory. How do you explain it? The person who sins is a sinner right? The one who abstains is an abstainer correct?
Joe
-
Peace Icephren,
I think Lote tree has adressed ur post quite well. I would have written similar.
These days sex is not only about conception. If every person in the world has unprotected sex every time like people of the past, we would have a population explosion.
Now a days, we pretty much pre decide the maximum number of children we want to have and then accordingly allow unprotected sex for the purpose. But otherwise, one has protected sex, is it not?
How many times do u think an adult has sexual intercourse with the intent of conception as compared to the number of times he has it for pleasure?
Peace!
-
Peace idolfree1,
Lets for a moment imagine a scenario here.
U r heterosexual, right? So u r naturally attracted to the opposite sex. Now lets say, homosexuality was what's considered right & moral and so, u r forced(by ur community) to feel attracted to a man instead of a woman. What would u do? How would u feel?
Peace!