Verses on Homosexuality
-
Peace Samia,
This intself is not unaccepted by the religion in my opinion, until they start acting upon it (having homosexual sex). They are not different from heterosexuals having sex outside the marriage.
Which is why I humbly believe that the god allows homosexuals to marry.
I do not understand why homosexuality should take all this credit as if homosexuals are the only people who are not supposed/ cannot have access to heterosexual sex there are those with congenital deformity, with organic or psychlogical conditions that prohibit them from having sex, the impotent whether primary or secondary..etc. Do they search for homosexual sex or are they advised to do so?
Homosexuals don?t seek people of the opposite sex for the same reason heterosexuals don?t seek people of the same sex. People with deformities don?t have sex because often times no one wants to have sex with them, but homosexuals find each other attractive. Why should they endure the unhappiness people who can?t have sex have to endure? And people don?t start having homosexual sex because they can?t have heterosexual sex.
No. God asks them to be patient (425), or marry those who accept their case. I believe that verse 424 has a shift of address to those homo and others who are unable to have sex with the opposite sex they are prohibited from marrying the "mu7sins those who can have sex with the opposite sex" except when those mu7sin agree to be their milku yameen. This kind of "marriage, in my opinion, is what is called (milkul yameen) each one of the pair is "milku yameen" the other. Vers 425 is even more explicit Whoever is unable to marry the mu7sins (wrongly understood as by poverty. God has already advised to marry the poor If they are poor, God will make them rich), then marry milku yameen. This is the only case where the family should be involved because of such sex-less marriage.
But where?s the sense in that? What is the logic in depriving homosexual people the right to have sex ? which the god acknowledges is an activity humans enjoy ? with the kind of people they like? And wouldn?t the kind of marriages you explained above be miserable ones?
-
Sexuality is important for your parenting skills because it keeps the two parents in the same house feeling positively towards each other. The children benefit from that.
And gay men and lesbian women also feel attracted and therefore positive towards each other.
-
Well, not exactly, sexual intercourse is a biologically unique function - there's certain kinds of hormone transfer between semen and vaginal fluid that occurs during coitus that does not happen in same gender activities. Sure it may bond people to an extent, but this does not serve the purpose of bonding together the parents of a child because children have one father and one mother.
-
Peace Roshan,
I don't think it's insidious.
Peace
Firstly, sorry for the delay in reply. I hope you are still here.
Secondly, yes it is so insidious and your answer has shown this to be true.
Plenty. No one really eats with their rear, but it's a fact that some people enjoy anal and oral sex. The fact that anal and oral sex don't serve the purpose of procreation doesn't make them wrong. To say they're wrong because their "unnatural" (which is nonsense anyway) is an appeal to nature logical fallacy.
EXACTLY! 'No one eats with their rear'. This is the statement that shows you understand the principles of what I am talking about on 'homosexuality', but because you have let other people think for you, on some issues, you have allowed their views to become your own insiduously. First of all, plently of people put food (and many other things) up their bottoms, but no-one calls it eating because eating is the process of consuming foods to be absorbed by the body. Ditto for sodomy.
What is your evidence that the quran (great reading) calls homosexuality and anal sex fahisha?
There is no such thing as homosexuality. However, God mentions same sex perversion in some verses of the Quran (they have already been mentioned). See 415-16
415 And those of your women who commit lewdness, you shall bring four witnesses over them from amongst you; if they bear witness, then you shall restrict them in the homes until death terminates their lives, or God makes for them a way out.
416 And the two men who commit it from amongst you, you shall trouble them. If they repent and amend, then leave them alone. God is Redeemer, Merciful.The story of Lut is also worth a perusal.
As for the other things you wrote, let me tell you the way society (at least in the UK) works. Since the 1960s left wing atheists, secularists (in reality self-deists) have sought to decrease the influence of religion in society through promoting the nanny state and encouraging people to be selfish and ignore the consequences to society. And of course, the government picks up the tabs and it is a viscious circle. So, free sex is allowed. Children are brainwashed at school to believe it is O.K. so long as you know about contraception. The obvious result is that hoards of unwanted children are either born or aborted and a new underclass is created who are entirely dependent on government hand-outs. These children are mentally unstable and this has huge consequences for society. Part of this breakdown in the family also involves the promoting of homosexuality as a valid sexual choice (by equating it with heterosexuality’. If you really want to know about sodomites look up cruising, cottaging, rimming and other terms that go along with the perversion. Apparently near a park where I used to live, after these perverts had engaged in their perversion it was left littered with needles, syringes etc. But of course people are so stupid that they equate gays with Jack from Will and Grace, or the other open perverts paraded as fashionable eccentrics on T.V.
Think about it.
Roshan
-
I'm not bloody blaming the heterosexuals zulu1, you're taking my arguments to simply suit your strange ideas. It's NOT a heterosexal versus homosexuality debate and who is inherently better though you obviously seem to slant it that way.
There are extremes in all factions of human behaviour, attributing it to only homosexuals is ridiculous, that was my point. There's no reasoning with bigots right? So I take my leave, there, be happy in your bigoted little world I won't torment you with 'anti-religious' ideas anymore.
-
Salaam Supernaut
Which is why I humbly believe that the god allows homosexuals to marry.
Yes you can only arrive at this conclusion when you isolate what I said from my whole post. God clearly frowned upon same gender sex. What I am saying is that being simply gay without having homosexual sex is not a sin intself. The sin starts with the act.
People with deformities dont have sex because often times no one wants to have sex with them, but homosexuals find each other attractive. Why should they endure the unhappiness people who cant have sex have to endure? And people dont start having homosexual sex because they cant have heterosexual sex.
Those with deformities and others do have desire but can't have sex. Why shoul they endure the unhappiness people who can have sex (and do have it) do not endure? What I am saying is, homosexuals are not a special case to make societies feel guilty for not allowing them to marry. No one is stopping them from enjoying their homosexual sex as long as they keep it private, just like heterosexuals having illegal sex..It's between them and God. Why don't homosexuals behave like those who have desires and can't have sex? It might be difficult but not impossible if the homosexual cares for their belief. If they don't, then what's the problem? Why do they want a "fatwa"?
But wheres the sense in that? What is the logic in depriving homosexual people the right to have sex which the god acknowledges is an activity humans enjoy with the kind of people they like? And wouldnt the kind of marriages you explained above be miserable ones?
Who is depriving them from having sex? What they want is not just sex, but a "fatwa" to legalize it. Please show me the verse where the god acknowledges sex as an activity humans enjoy "with the kind of people they like". I am not saying sex is not an enjoyable activity, but when you mention the god as acknowleging this act to prove "therefore homosexual act is OK" then you have to prove this.
Any marriage can be miserable. Marriage is not all about sex, and having wonderful sex is not a guarantee to a happy marriage. Even after a marriage has started, one of the couple may become impotent. Does this break the marriage? This is the difference/ and the problem with homosexual idea about marriage it's all about sex; and this is why people with deformity are not whining all over the world, because they know a happy life can have many faces when sex is not one of them.
-
Well, not exactly, sexual intercourse is a biologically unique function - there's certain kinds of hormone transfer between semen and vaginal fluid that occurs during coitus that does not happen in same gender activities.
All I've read is that having vaginal intercourse the night before can help reduce the stress that men experience while speaking in public. The lack of such a benefit in homosexual intercourse doesn't make it wrong. Popcorn has zero nutritional value so does that mean we should assume the god doesn't want us to eat any? Furthermore, there's evidence that gays and lesbians are aroused by the pheromones of unrelated people of the same sex and humans can smell and taste each others pheromones just by making out.
Sure it may bond people to an extent, but this does not serve the purpose of bonding together the parents of a child because children have one father and one mother.
Some children have no parents and are adopted by homosexual couples who love each other a lot.
-
Strotu
My dear friend.
No need to get nasty!!!! You did state that hetrosexuals caused more strife to mankind than homosexuals in order to counter my statement and you also listed people without children as great humanitarians etc etc.
I personally couldn't care less what your views or lifestyle was. But please do not try to attach Homosexuality as a normal form of behaviour and compatable with Islam or try to fight their corner.
If I am a bigot in your eyes, not a problem. As so is the majority of the world because they also hold similar views towards the un-natural practice of Homosexuality, to which I give no apologies. I feel comfort in the fact that at least 1 billion people also share my views. Democracy rules!!!!!
Peace
-
Peace Roshan,
EXACTLY! 'No one eats with their rear'. This is the statement that shows you understand the principles of what I am talking about on 'homosexuality', but because you have let other people think for you, on some issues, you have allowed their views to become your own insiduously. First of all, plently of people put food (and many other things) up their bottoms, but no-one calls it eating because eating is the process of consuming foods to be absorbed by the body. Ditto for sodomy.
Umm, no, because people do enjoy anal and oral intercourse with members of the same sex. Deny this all you want, but it will always be true.
There is no such thing as homosexuality. However, God mentions same sex perversion in some verses of the Quran (they have already been mentioned). See 415-16
415 And those of your women who commit lewdness, you shall bring four witnesses over them from amongst you; if they bear witness, then you shall restrict them in the homes until death terminates their lives, or God makes for them a way out.
416 And the two men who commit it from amongst you, you shall trouble them. If they repent and amend, then leave them alone. God is Redeemer, Merciful.The story of Lut is also worth a perusal.
The story of Lot isn?t about homosexuals (you should really go through the older thread on homosexuality that I linked Diem to in the first page of this thread) and it?s my humble opinion that 415-16 are about prostitutes, not homosexuals.
As for the other things you wrote, let me tell you the way society (at least in the UK) works. Since the 1960?s left wing atheists, secularists (in reality self-deists) have sought to decrease the influence of religion in society through promoting the ?nanny state? and encouraging people to be selfish and ignore the consequences to society. And of course, the government picks up the tabs and it is a viscious circle. So, free sex is allowed. Children are brainwashed at school to believe it is O.K. so long as you know about contraception. The obvious result is that hoards of unwanted children are either born or aborted and a new underclass is created who are entirely dependent on government hand-outs. These children are mentally unstable and this has huge consequences for society. Part of this breakdown in the family also involves the promoting of ?homosexuality? as a valid sexual choice (by equating it with ?heterosexuality?). If you really want to know about sodomites look up ?cruising?, ?cottaging, ?rimming? and other terms that go along with the perversion. Apparently near a park where I used to live, after these perverts had engaged in their perversion it was left littered with needles, syringes etc. But of course people are so stupid that they equate ?gays? with Jack from Will and Grace, or the other open perverts paraded as fashionable eccentrics on T.V.
Forgive me, but that is just an uninformative and indefensible rant.
-
Salaam Samia,
Yes you can only arrive at this conclusion when you isolate what I said from my whole post. God clearly frowned upon same gender sex. What I am saying is that being simply gay without having homosexual sex is not a sin intself. The sin starts with the act.
I have reason to believe that the god doesn?t have a problem with the act. Why would It? What harm does it cause? I think Arnold?s understanding of the story of Lot?s people is a more logical one because homosexuality isn?t a threat to anyone or anything.
Those with deformities and others do have desire but can't have sex. Why shoul they endure the unhappiness people who can have sex (and do have it) do not endure? What I am saying is, homosexuals are not a special case to make societies feel guilty for not allowing them to marry.
I think people with deformities should also be allowed to marry and have deformed kids because people have the right to do what they want with their bodies, including having deformed children. If that?s not what you?re disputing then my response to the above is that the suffering of one group of people doesn?t justify causing another group of people to suffer. Your argument is similar to saying that just because a poor person?s kids can?t get good healthcare, absolutely no one should get good healthcare. That kind of thinking gave birth to one of the most miserable and atrocious ideologies ever socialism.
No one is stopping them from enjoying their homosexual sex as long as they keep it private, just like heterosexuals having illegal sex..It's between them and God. Why don't homosexuals behave like those who have desires and can't have sex? It might be difficult but not impossible if the homosexual cares for their belief. If they don't, then what's the problem? Why do they want a "fatwa"?
Some homosexuals don?t want a fatwa. All the want to know is why homosexuality is wrong. There?s no logical reason to claim it?s wrong. Why would the god make some people homosexual and then tell them not to exhibit homosexual behaviour for no good reason at all? Does such a being seem merciful, let alone reasonable?
Who is depriving them from having sex? What they want is not just sex, but a "fatwa" to legalize it.
I don?t think the god criminalizes adultery or fornication. I humbly believe that the god prescribes a punishment for exhibitionistic sex only and that the punishment applies only to people who willing come under the great reading?s jurisdiction. Furthermore, what?s wrong with homosexuals demanding the same right as heterosexuals? Why should they be deprived the right to marry and have sex with the people they want? Many Americans would have thought it extraordinary if Blacks and women had demanded the same rights as White men in early America and we see people having the same kind of attitude today, but towards a different group of people (homosexuals). Same injustice (discrimination), different victims.
Please show me the verse where the god acknowledges sex as an activity humans enjoy "with the kind of people they like".
I don?t think I said that. What I meant was that the god acknowledges that sex is an activity that humans enjoy.
I am not saying sex is not an enjoyable activity, but when you mention the god as acknowleging this act to prove "therefore homosexual act is OK" then you have to prove this.
That?s not what I was arguing. I apologize if what I said was a bit vague.
Any marriage can be miserable. Marriage is not all about sex, and having wonderful sex is not a guarantee to a happy marriage.
Indeed, but you must admit that there often, or maybe even always needs to be sex for a marriage to be a good one.
Even after a marriage has started, one of the couple may become impotent. Does this break the marriage?
Impotent but not incapable of having sex. You must admit that sex is very crucial to most marriages and couples that can?t have sex endure misery. And why shouldn?t people enjoy when they can enjoy?
This is the difference/ and the problem with homosexual idea about marriage it's all about sex;
That?s untrue. Fine, if you think sex isn?t too important to marriage, why don?t you ask heterosexual people to marry people of the same sex but not have sex with them? They?ll tell you that they don?t want to because the thought of being in a romantic relationship with someone of the same sex is repugnant. Similarly, gays and lesbians don?t want to be in a romantic relationship with people of the opposite sex. Oh and research has shown that the brain distinguishes between sex and romance. Go to http//www.livescience.com/health/050531_love_sex.html to read all about it.
and this is why people with deformity are not whining all over the world, because they know a happy life can have many faces when sex is not one of them.
But romance is (I feel so stupid and like such a sissy saying this ) and no one wants a romantic relationship with someone they?re not attracted to.
-
Umm, no, because people do enjoy anal and oral intercourse with members of the same sex. Deny this all you want, but it will always be true.
Firstly, an unsubstantiated claim by yourself ('deny this all you want..'. Sodomy is wrong and a perversion whether between two men or a man and a woman (oral 'sex', as mentioned before is a form of masturbation). I note you are unable to make any rebutal to the principles of my analogy and are resorting to unsubstantiated claims.
The story of Lot isn?t about homosexuals (you should really go through the older thread on homosexuality that I linked Diem to in the first page of this thread)
It is, to some extent. Same sex perversion was one of their multitude of perversions.
and it?s my humble opinion that 415-16 are about prostitutes, not homosexuals.
Prositutes are not mentioned, only perversion between members of the same sex. You believe the verse refers to prostitution probably because you do not believe same sex perversion is wrong (based on irrationality as mentioned before).
Forgive me, but that is just an uninformative and indefensible rant.
I forgive you because you are unable to understand the gravity of the situation faced. My comments clearly indicate why this question on 'homosexuality' is important and was in response to your 'what people do in their own bedrooms is no-one's business' ignorant comments. The effect of sex outside of marriage is clearly visible to those who want to open their eyes.
However, some do not wish to open their eyes.
Roshan
-
Firstly, an unsubstantiated claim by yourself ('deny this all you want..'.
Erogenous zones are parts of the body that, when stimulated, elicit sexual arousal. Precisely which body parts are sources of sexual arousal is a very individual experience.
The genitals are the most obvious erogenous zones, but many parts of the body not involved in reproduction are sensitive to sexual touch. The largest sensory organ for both men and women is the skin itself, especially the inner thigh area, the neck, the breasts and nipples, and the perineum.Other erogenous zones include the eyelids, the ears, and the shoulders. Many people also find that having their feet stroked is arousing. Stroking, caressing and massaging of erogenous zones can be titillating forms of sensual pleasure in and of themselves, or they can be invitations to further sexual activity.
The mouth, including the lips and tongue, for most people, is an area of high erotic potential. Kissing is one act that uses the sensitivity of this region in a sexually stimulating way.
The anus, rectum and buttocks are also potentially erogenous zones. The anus is highly sensitive to touch and the insertion of a finger, object or penis in the anus and rectum is part of some people's sexual activity.
The buttocks are sometimes a target for spanking and stroking, which can feel very arousing to some people.
Source http//health.discovery.com/centers/sex/sexpedia/erogenous.html
Sodomy is wrong and a perversion whether between two men or a man and a woman (oral 'sex', as mentioned before is a form of masturbation). I note you are unable to make any rebutal to the principles of my analogy and are resorting to unsubstantiated claims.
Well I?ve substantiated my claims now (I didn?t think I?d have to before because what you?re arguing is obviously ridiculous) and in doing so have shown your analogy to be a faulty one. The strongest argument you have against homosexuality is based on nothing more than an appeal to nature logical fallacy.
It is, to some extent. Same sex perversion was one of their multitude of perversions.
I take it that you still haven?t gone through the older thread on homosexuality.
Prositutes are not mentioned, only perversion between members of the same sex. You believe the verse refers to prostitution probably because you do not believe same sex perversion is wrong (based on irrationality as mentioned before).
415-16 The women who commit lewdness, you shall bring four witnesses over them from amongst you; if they bear witness, then you shall restrict them in the homes until death takes them, or God makes for them a way out. The two who commit it from amongst you, then you shall reprimand them. If they repent and amend, then leave them alone. God is Redeemer, Compassionate.
415 mentions a group of women (lesbians don?t always engage in group sex) and the word alazani can also refer to a man and woman instead of just two men. It is my humble understanding that the above verses command muslims to put prostitutes (male or female) who willingly come under islamic jurisdiction under protective custody till the god makes it safe for them to come out of their homes. Prostitutes are vulnerable people (pimps and slave traders are sometimes very violent towards their prostitutes, and some punters are very abusive too) and they?re also a health risk to society.
My comments clearly indicate why this question on 'homosexuality' is important and was in response to your 'what people do in their own bedrooms is no-one's business' ignorant comments. The effect of sex outside of marriage is clearly visible to those who want to open their eyes.
What you said isn?t true for all homosexuals. Your argument is similar to saying that since a few Mexicans are drug dealers, Mexicans in general are bad people who deal in drugs an ugly and bigoted fallacious argument.
-
What you said isn?t true for all homosexuals. Your argument is similar to saying that since a few Mexicans are drug dealers, Mexicans in general are bad people who deal in drugs an ugly and bigoted fallacious argument.
When the proper analysis is that since drug abuse harms a lot of people, society benefits from government policy working to minimize drug abuse.
Likewise, misuse of human sexuality harms a lot of people, breaks up a lot of families, and is a bit cause of poverty. The focus of sex education is all wrong, particularly where I am in the UK, it's all about 'feeling comfortable' about what you are doing, entirely ignoring the context of marriage.
This link is typical of sex education in the UK. It encourages teenagers to be a little bit critical of peer pressure to have sex, and has a kind of feel good quality to it. But there is no serious attempt to convey what responsibility actually is, an no mention of the value and importance of marriage.
http//www.bebooksonline.co.uk/girls_and_boys/default.htm
I think there is a strong relationship between this obtuse failure of sex education and the activities of gay lobby groups arguing that anything that feels good is sex and on a par with marriage. It's garbage. Just because some patches of skin are sensitive doesn't mean that sticking dildos into every orifice is going to make a happy family and a stable environment for raising children. Such fallacious arguments need to be rooted out so society can progress.
-
FAR
My friend. From where I come from, this is the definition of homosexual
Main Entry 1ho?mo?sex?u?al
Pronunciation \h-m-sek-sh(-)wl, -sek-shl
Function adjective1 of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex
2 of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sexHow have homosexuals been procreating over the centuries without the use of the opposite sex and how would one avoid same sexism?
Please elaborate.
Peace
FAR seems to be a pretty fine man
he is gay but isn't in a gay relationship
would you kill him?
-
Yosemite
How would you define being 'gay' but not in a gay relationship?
Are you saying that FAR hasn't found a compatible same sex partner as yet or he's gay meaning he is happy, as the term gay was originally used, until well into the mid-20th century, primarily to refer to feelings of being "carefree," "happy," or "bright and showy"?
As far as killing him is concerned, I suggest you lay off the pipe and take heed of the following ayat
6151 (Asad) Say "Come, let me convey unto you what God has forbidden to you "Do not ascribe divinity, in any way, to aught beside Him; and do good unto your parents; and do not kill your children for fear of poverty - it is We who shall provide sustenance for you as well as for them; and do not commit any shameful deeds, be they open or secret; and do not take any human being's life- which God has declared to be sacred -otherwise than in justice this has He enjoined upon you so that you might use your reason;
Peace
-
salaam
they way you word your post against homosexuality made me believe that you had a "traditionalist" view on them sorry about that
i said that FAR refuses to go into homosexual activities, he said it sereval times already, he also said he was homosexual, so to me he is fine, right, refusing to fall to his deep desires
I actually knew someone who was strictly against homosexuals and would be killing anyone who is homosexual, he was a "traditionalist" muslim.
Once on a walk, one of the class mate said that "this man is gay"
The "traditionalist" immediatly stared him with a mean look and was really angry at him, for no apparent reason because that homosexual didn't look homo at all. (nothing like you would see in gayprides or in a society that openly accepts homosexual activities as normal)
-
i said that FAR refuses to go into homosexual activities, he said it sereval times already, he also said he was homosexual, so to me he is fine, right, refusing to fall to his deep desires.
The way FAR says he thinks gay men are meant to marry gay women makes me somehow doubt that he has the same understanding of what homosexuality means than the rest of us!
-
FAR
My friend. From where I come from, this is the definition of homosexual
Main Entry 1ho?mo?sex?u?al
Pronunciation \h-m-sek-sh(-)wl, -sek-shl
Function adjective1 of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex
2 of, relating to, or involving sexual intercourse between persons of the same sexYou and I, we can change that dictionary definition as easy as selling pie!
How have homosexuals been procreating over the centuries without the use of the opposite sex and how would one avoid same sexism?
You've got a mistaken view that a homosexual must mean "same sex".
http//www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/06/080617151845.htm
You avoid same sexual behaviour by taking the example of Andrea Dworkin, which is more closer to the quran than what some people who call themselves muslim who pratice same sex fornication.
http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andrea_Dworkin#Relationship_with_John_Stoltenberg
The way FAR says he thinks gay men are meant to marry gay women makes me somehow doubt that he has the same understanding of what homosexuality means than the rest of us!
And that's the challenge facing humanity. That all these inversely gendered (refer to the science daily link above) people use their minds to consider the shell rather than what is. This is so true for even the so called secularist heterosexual couple where it's look first, flirt afterwards, and ask questions... maybe never as it's too late.
Let's consider the marriage rate of same sex couples...
http//www.narth.com/docs/sweden.html
The survey revealed a high rate of legal divorce among homosexual couples in Sweden. Gay male couples were 50% more likely to divorce within an eight-year period than were heterosexuals; and lesbian couples were 167% more likely to divorce than heterosexual couples.
According to IMAPP "Even among childless households, same-sex male partnerships experienced almost a 50% higher likelihood (1.49 times as likely) of divorce during the study period, while childless lesbian couples were three times as likely (200% higher likelihood) to break up as a married couple without children."
http//www.familyresearchinst.org/FRI_EduPamphlet7.html
And that's gay men with lesbian women, not gay men with gay (heterosexual) women. That's the best solution for the homosexual, not the definition of what I consider to be a homosexual. A homosexual shall be medically described as having an opposite gendered brain to the heterosexual (refer to the science daily link).
(What's with all the FAR in the third person???)