The Lack of Science in Gay Debates

neb87

@Abdul-Hadi Thank you for the link, I thought I'd found most of the debates on the topic here, but I guess I overlooked the title of that one. ;D

Also, I think the counter-argument in your post is a much cleaner and concise summary of the issues present. I have a tendency to ramble and go all over the place even when simplicity would be the much better option.

God willing, I hope I learn to get straight to the point with fewer words, too.

Zulf

From 780... "such as none of the worlds had done before."

I wonder what this actually means. Does it mean that nobody in human history has done it before, or could it mean that "nobody has done it until you, humans, did it"? Just a thought. Never mind.

Also, homosexuality is not equal to same gender sex. Homosexuality is same gender attraction... with sex as one of the expressions of this attraction. As far as I have understood, this attraction to the same gender, is something you are born with. It seems to be something that might be distributed across the population as per that bell curve (standard deviation) and therefore something "built in" into nature.
I personally find it hard to judge someone as sinful or wrong who is just being him/herself. And how can a heterosexual ever understand how, what and why a homosexual person feels the way he or she does? It's not possible! This is why it is very tricky to pass judgement. Allah knows what we don't know. Who are we to judge other people when we clearly don't have to capacity? We can evaluate actions that affect other people, but that's something totally different.

I also wonder why there is so much focus on sex when it comes to homosexuality. Is homosexuality all about sex?? No! But is sure seems like that in much of main stream media. I also wonder why homosexual people define themselves so strongly with this inclination. But I guess this goes for all kinds of minorities... it has much to do with identity. I think this is unnecessary since it creates useless divisions and groupings. We are all human being after all. Why is unity so hard for us?

Peace

Reee

Thank you for bringing up the topic again. I recently read the mentioned verse again and thought that the negation at the beginning of the second sentence might indeed be a negation, that is, negating the first part that says they are (just) approaching men with lust in preference to women. So the issue is not this, but that they are crossing all bounds. Or to put it otherwise the problem with you is not that you are approaching men instead of women, but that you are going beyond any limit.

I hope you understand what I mean.

neb87

From 780... "such as none of the worlds had done before."

I wonder what this actually means. Does it mean that nobody in human history has done it before, or could it mean that "nobody has done it until you, humans, did it"? Just a thought. Never mind.

Also, homosexuality is not equal to same gender sex. Homosexuality is same gender attraction... with sex as one of the expressions of this attraction. As far as I have understood, this attraction to the same gender, is something you are born with. It seems to be something that might be distributed across the population as per that bell curve (standard deviation) and therefore something "built in" into nature.
I personally find it hard to judge someone as sinful or wrong who is just being him/herself. And how can a heterosexual ever understand how, what and why a homosexual person feels the way he or she does? It's not possible! This is why it is very tricky to pass judgement. Allah knows what we don't know. Who are we to judge other people when we clearly don't have to capacity? We can evaluate actions that affect other people, but that's something totally different.

I also wonder why there is so much focus on sex when it comes to homosexuality. Is homosexuality all about sex?? No! But is sure seems like that in much of main stream media. I also wonder why homosexual people define themselves so strongly with this inclination. But I guess this goes for all kinds of minorities... it has much to do with identity. I think this is unnecessary since it creates useless divisions and groupings. We are all human being after all. Why is unity so hard for us?

Peace

(bold added by me)

From a social science standpoint, arbitrary divisions ARE the primary, underlying cause of negative behavior exhibited in minority groups. When the discrimination diminishes so does the negative anti-social behavior. When minority individuals are given the opportunity to identify with the majority social group, the negative aspects of the minority identity fall away and are replaced with the norms of the majority. I feel that this is one of God's Signs that unity, is the only true option, as the standard holds regardless of the characteristics of the group being oppressed.

As for the focus on sex when speaking about gays, I also don't understand it. We don't use that kind of language when discussing hetero couples, so why throw it only on gays? The only explanation I see, is that it's extremely common in human interaction to de-humanize any oppressed group before giving yourself a license to harm them, either psychologically or physically.

You can see this behavior in literature pertaining to the Inquisition. Inquisitors were instructed to never look a "witch" in the eye during torture because she would "cast a spell" on you, preventing you from torturing her further. In modern times, we can look at that and see that no spells were being cast. It's just not possible for most humans (barring severe mental health issues) to cause such extreme pain to other humans while looking them in the eye. Today, we would call that "compassion", not "witchcraft".

You can see the same aspect of human behavior being applied in modern times to gays when homophobes instruct others not to listen to anything being said about gays that doesn't conform to their negative view of them. It's easier to cling to cruelty towards gays, and dismiss valid science about them, when they remain a mere image in your head, instead of actual human beings.

Thank you for bringing up the topic again. I recently read the mentioned verse again and thought that the negation at the beginning of the second sentence might indeed be a negation, that is, negating the first part that says they are (just) approaching men with lust in preference to women. So the issue is not this, but that they are crossing all bounds. Or to put it otherwise the problem with you is not that you are approaching men instead of women, but that you are going beyond any limit.

I hope you understand what I mean.

That's also how I read the verse. The issue was with their use of force (and to a lesser degree, their adultery) not the gender of their victims. To me, to say that the issue was with the gender of the rape victims implies that it would be fine with God if a society decides to condone and engage in the widespread rape of women.

Abdul-Hadi

Greetings and Peace, all group

@Abdul-Hadi Thank you for the link, I thought I'd found most of the debates on the topic here, but I guess I overlooked the title of that one. ;D

Also, I think the counter-argument in your post is a much cleaner and concise summary of the issues present. I have a tendency to ramble and go all over the place even when simplicity would be the much better option.

God willing, I hope I learn to get straight to the point with fewer words, too.

Aw shucks...<blush> thanks! sun

The discussion seems to be a good one. I study biology--but sociology is also interesting.

Verbose? Eschew obfuscation! ;D

May ALLAH see fit to Guide all seekers.

peace

~Abdul-Hadi

Bigmo

This behavior is not observed in mammals with social structures, a group which humans are part of. So no, it doesn't make sense to look at the behavior of animals that we have very little in common with and try to come up with rules for how we should live. You primarily only see infanticide and cannibalism in non-social, lower life forms that are driven more by instinct and have fewer higher functions. The lower you go on the totem pole of life, the more you see this kind of behavior.

One could then infer that this is something that life forms abandon as they develop higher functioning. There are clear and obvious disadvantages to eating your offspring when the primary focus of lower life is reproduction. The same cannot be said of homosexuality. It's present in many higher species, and has clear benefits in social animal societies. In many social animal species, homosexual animals are used by the group as surrogate parents when heterosexual parents die. Pretty much the same approach that is used by human societies that don't oppress their gay members.

As far as I know, the only people who consider pedophilia and bestiality as acceptable are pedophiles and people who have sex with animals. Using logic, you can easily dismiss their claim that their behavior is acceptable by the glaringly obvious fact that there is a victim in these scenarios. Children cannot consent to sex, so any sexual contact between an adult and a child is automatically rape. There is a mountain of evidence that children prematurely exposed to sex have many, many mental health issues. As for bestiality, it's wrong for partially the same reasons; animals are lower life forms than humans, so they can't consent to anything. Bestiality is just as wrong as other forms of animal cruelty and I don't know anyone who needs a book to tell them that.

Again, the same cannot be said of homosexuality when using logic instead of emotions. You have two sane, consenting adults who say that they love each other and wish to live together in monogomay. All of the credible experts on the subject say that they would both be mentally healthier and happier in life if left alone. There is no victim in this scenario, no one is taking advantage of anyone's lack of mental faculties, and there's proof that their pairing is beneficial to both of them.

I don't understand the tendency some people have to try and lump homosexuality, pedophilia, and bestiality all into the same cart, when common sense dictates that they have very little in common and science has proven that one of those 3 is a perfectly normal variation of human sexuality.

You and I clearly have different definitions of the words "impartial" and "myth". Instead of dissecting the misinformation in that article point by point, I'll ask you this What is the difference between an oil baron attacking the established fact of climate change with pseudoscience and a religious zealot attacking the established fact that orientation is unchangeable with psuedoscience?

Another question Are YOU, specifically, able to change your orientation, at will? If so, you should clap yourself on the back because you're an exceptional specimen of human. Are you sure even from the planet Earth? Most earthlings can't change their orientation no matter how much they may want to for whatever reason.

Sex with anaimals is done without the consent of animals and constitute rape and abuse and criminality. Homosexuality must be dealt with two issues in mind.

Are we asking whether homosexuality is haram or not? And if its haram what is the level of sin ?

Legally speaking should homosexuality be legalized or should it be made illegal? If to be made illegal that what is the legal punishment that can be adminstered?

If homsexuality is not haram or should ne made illegal can homsexuals be recognized by law as a legally married couple?

Evidence must be brought forth from the Quran using a Quranic legal and ethical understanding.

My take.

Homsexuality may or may not be haram but is not a major sin in any case. It may or may not be made legal but homsexuality can not be persucted by law since this kind of authority is simply not there from a Quranic constitutional understanding.

I found the last part the hardest for many to comprehend. Many simply link what they consider haram to legal pesecution. They make the assumption as Sunni Islam does that an Islamic Quranist state should persecute anything it considers haram or immoral.

neb87

Sex with anaimals is done without the consent of animals and constitute rape and abuse and criminality. Homosexuality must be dealt with two issues in mind.

Are we asking whether homosexuality is haram or not? And if its haram what is the level of sin ?

Legally speaking should homosexuality be legalized or should it be made illegal? If to be made illegal that what is the legal punishment that can be adminstered?

If homsexuality is not haram or should ne made illegal can homsexuals be recognized by law as a legally married couple?

Evidence must be brought forth from the Quran using a Quranic legal and ethical understanding.

My take.

Homsexuality may or may not be haram but is not a major sin in any case. It may or may not be made legal but homsexuality can not be persucted by law since this kind of authority is simply not there from a Quranic constitutional understanding.

I found the last part the hardest for many to comprehend. Many simply link what they consider haram to legal pesecution. They make the assumption as Sunni Islam does that an Islamic Quranist state should persecute anything it considers haram or immoral.

I think the fact that it's even debatable whether or not homosexuality is forbidden in the Quran is proof enough that humans were never given the right to persecute gays regardless of their personal opinions on the matter.

As for marriage, it's both a civil and a religious institution. The way I see it, if gays wish to get married either through a civil contract or a religious ceremony, believers have not been given the right to block this. Secular authorities describe homosexuality as normal and non-harmful. The belief that it's wrong is a religious one that can't be backed up with outside sources, so believers can't force this on people who don't believe as they do. Also, there are many gays who wish to marry BECAUSE of their faith. The Quran does not give believers a license to decide which faiths are "valid" and which ones aren't, so freedom of religion trumps all other arguments in that case.

Emil

@Abdul-Hadi Thank you for the link, I thought I'd found most of the debates on the topic here, but I guess I overlooked the title of that one. ;D

Also, I think the counter-argument in your post is a much cleaner and concise summary of the issues present. I have a tendency to ramble and go all over the place even when simplicity would be the much better option. P

God willing, I hope I learn to get straight to the point with fewer words, too.

Salam

I applaud your straightforward and very sombersome approach to this. Finally!

I am not a particular fan of homosexuality, I shudder by only the thought of a man being with a man. I was quite happy that islam forbade it.

Until my sister came out of the closet...........I was very angry with her and started to study the Quran as to see what it exactly said, I needed to find guidance. I love my sister, how am I supposed to act now?

To my surprise I could not find any evidence that homosexuality was against God. I found a story about a wicked people that refused to accept one of Allahs prophets. They were warned but they continued with their lewdness.
So they were terminated. An interesting point is that eventhough there was a prophet of Allah present he was not allowed to administer the punishment, instead angels were sent. A very telling evidence that mankind is not allowed to punish. It is only Allah who decides when lewdness becomes so bad the human has given up the right to live.

Since Lot prophets have walked the earth amongst homosexuals and pagans and not once has Allah sent down angels to kill humans because they are lewd. Could one reason be that whatever lewdness the people of Lot were engaged in was eradicated? This kind of lewdness does not exist anymore?

So I came to the conclusion that the people of Lot were punished because
Their lewdness was stopping them from accepting Lot as a prophet of Allah
A gay muslim today does not fall into the same category. He believes in God and the prophets.

And eventhough we do not think homosexuality is part of Islam
Only Allah is allowed to adminster punishment
Not even a prophet is allowed to take the matter into own hands

So nowadays I have come to an understanding between my sister and Islam. I am allowed to dislike her behaviour, but it has nothing to do with the fact that I am a muslim and. I am merely old fashioned.......or maybe it is difficult for me to accept because I am very very very heterosexual.

Someone

Peace All,

Just some points

1- Verse 780... "such as none of the worlds had done before."

I think this verse is mistranslated. "al-?lameene" in this verse is translated as "the worlds", it should be translated as "the knowledgeables" to conform to the language of the quran.

So in the verse 780 it means that none of the knowledgeable people had done before. Meaning only the ignorant ones do such acts of lewdness.

2- The homosexual act has NO benefit to the community, it doesn't give any outcome. Compared to heterosexual acts which can give offspring to enlarge the community and make it stronger. (I am not considering the recent possibilities to have children without sexual interaction)

3- The Bonobo's example

From WIKIPEDIA

The bonobo ( /bnobo/ or /bnbo/), Pan paniscus, previously called the pygmy chimpanzee and less often, the dwarf or gracile chimpanzee, is a great ape and one of the two species making up the genus Pan; the other is Pan troglodytes, or the common chimpanzee. Although the name "chimpanzee" is sometimes used to refer to both species together, it is usually understood as referring to the common chimpanzee, while Pan paniscus is usually referred to as the bonobo. It is distinguished by relatively long legs, pink lips, dark face and tail-tuft through adulthood, and parted long hair on its head. The bonobo is found in a 500,000 km2 (190,000 sq mi) area of the Congo Basin in the Democratic Republic of the Congo, Central Africa. The species is omnivorous and inhabits primary and secondary forests, including seasonally inundated swamp forests.

The bonobo is popularly known for its high levels of sexual behavior. Sex functions in conflict appeasement, affection, social status, excitement, and stress reduction. It occurs in virtually all partner combinations and in a variety of positions. This is a factor in the lower levels of aggression seen in the bonobo when compared to the common chimpanzee and other apes. Bonobos are perceived to be matriarchal; females tend to collectively dominate males by forming alliances and use sexuality to control males. A male's rank in the social hierarchy is often determined by his mother's rank.

Along with the common chimpanzee, the bonobo is the closest extant relative to humans. Because the two species are not proficient swimmers, the formation of the Congo River 1.5?2 million years ago possibly led to the speciation of the bonobo. They live south of the river, and thereby were separated from the ancestors of the common chimpanzee, which live north of the river. There are no concrete data on population numbers, but the estimate is between 29,500 and 50,000 individuals. The species is listed as Endangered on the IUCN Red List and is threatened by habitat destruction and human population growth and movement, though commercial poaching is the most prominent threat. It typically lives 40 years in captivity, though its lifespan in the wild is unknown.

As one can see from the Bonobos, sex occurs in all combinations including with young bonobos (kids). One can argue that it has many benefits for the community of Bonobos since it reduces the level of aggression between individuals. Now let's try to imagine a community of humans adopting the same behavior, pedophilia would be considered as normal because everyone does it and was brought up in such conditions.

All this is to say that we "humans" are distinct from the animal world because of our knowledge. We don't do things just because animals do it. We have our minds to discern right from wrong.

4- The case of Hermaphrodites This is falsely attached with the homosexual issue; Once a hermaphrodite chooses his orientation (because of physical or psychological reasons), he/she should be recognized as such (male or female) and allowed to get into a (heterosexual) relation. So no homosexuality is involved.

5- In the cases of male-male or female-female relations, it can be seen as masturbation with no expected outcome besides the lust. And like masturbation, nobody will complain about homosexuality if it is done in private; but if done in public, even if nobody is harmed, ....

6- Many males after many years in a heterosexual couple, and even after having children, they choose to change their sexual orientation. This is a proof that changing one's orientation is possible, and I think in both ways.

7- What about compulsive liars, thefts, murderers or cannibals that would argue that their condition is innate, that they didn't choose to be that way... in these cases, we have victims for such acts; But what to do when both are consenting adults (masochists)? should it then be considered as normal?

8- Sex in general, heterosexual or homosexual, is a private thing and should not be done in public. If everybody keep it private, there would be no one to argue about the sexual habits of the others.

9- Teens or kids claiming to be homosexuals should be checked for previous physical or psychological traumas that would have induced such behavior, and should be helped out of it. Hermaphrodites should also be helped to find their orientation and place in the community.

This is only my opinion.

Peace

neb87