The Lack of Science in Gay Debates
-
by the way i doubt you can come to the conclusion that "lgbt" was widely accepted in ancient times based on a few relics
there has always been people producing porn, and this includes any kinds of sexual acts
while homosexuals have always existed, the recent "lgbt" movement has an obvious agenda to push by attempting to make the movement as acceptable as possible for society
counter arguments seem to be stifled by the movement, even though the research is done academically by historians
example here http//fr.scribd.com/doc/103899573/Homosexuality-in-Ancient-Greece-The-Myth-is-Collapsing
so i wouldn't draw hazardous conclusions based on that wikipedia article -
maybe because that kind of behavior is to subjugate another man by sodomizing him, a way of humiliating another man and that is way it is sanctioned as "abominable" in the Bible, so the same in the Qur'an.
it does clearly say men approaching other men with lust, it doesn't talk about rape
either the men were homosexuals, or they were bisexuals and they go after men and women
problem is, if they're all homosexuals, wouldn't the population diminish as time goes? is it the act of sodomy that's punished? is it the act of two men having a go at it together? does it also include women? it can't be because they're just homos otherwise it would be written as such
and i doubt that homosexuals is the sole reason for the destruction of an entire people, as apparently the entire population was wallowing in sin, and there's no reason that populations of ancient times display different repartition of sexual attraction as displayed in the conference you posted here
i don't know how accurate the bible story is, i doubt it's very accurate, but if there's a group of people spontaneously knocking at your door to have some fun with new comers, then i could say sexual acts became a public event
but then i would be speculating and making assumptions, as in the quran the sinful acts so atrocious are not describedbottom line we know how to avoid getting into that situation and i would say that's enough
the western "lgbt" group doesn't seem to follow that guideline too much (likewise for the majority of "modern" western people)
-
Peace Lena,
I agree this is a good post, however, it does not answer the all important question, why did Lot offer up his daughters? God only writes what he needs to - and he wrote that Lot offered up his daughters to be gang-raped?
Dawn.
If the people of Sodom were inti gang rapes, it is disturbing to think that Lot would offer them his daughters. The Koran would have mentioned gangrape if it wanted to.
Still, there is a hint though that the men of Sodom were interested into forced sex. Because they storm into Lot's place to get the two men who have come to visit Lot. I don't think they knew their orientation or that they would be interested. But in that case they would have even wanted to rape Lot? But perhaps Lot was too old for them? And the messengers were young men.
The only case which can be argued powerfully is that the Koran prohibits gay sex. To prove anything else requires several assumptions...
Please look further into the Wording of the Story, there are details which are easily overlooked
-
Lot addresses his people as a community and group (i.e He talks to them as the first community of people, to commit homosexuality, not just isolated cases. They were the first group of people to completely forsake women and live in a community with thriving homosexuality) (781)
-
Lot offers his daughters while knowing that they would not accept them. He was trying to make a point, and that point was that "they are purer for you" (117.
This is derived from his people's answer to his statement, which was, "YOU KNOW, that we have no right with your daughters, and YOU KNOW what WE want ". (1179). Thus, Lot was trying to make a point to them again, that his daughters (women), are purer for them than men, and he knew They were going to refuse. Thus, he wasn't really offering up his daughters, he was making a point that women are for men. -
In the Quran there are limitations on whom we can and can't marry. We can't marry two sister, or the wives of our fathers, or the wives of our sons. (423).
Marrying the wives of our fathers (even if not our mothers) is also deemed "Lewed", hated, and bad/evil (422). So the limitations are not just about same-sex intimacy.
It is hard to support same-sex couples from the Quran, as There are no examples or citations of Same-Sex couples, and neither can same-sex intimacy be supported from any of the other Abrahamic scriptures. I say so because Lot's story is included in them all.
P.S I'm in no way a homophobe. I myself am Bisexual by attraction. I went through different phases of Sexuality, from Straight to Gay to asexuality/Celibacy. I am still attracted to the same gender but I cope with that, rather than act upon it. Also, I am working on a therapy of coping with SSA. I'm hoping to make a video about it soon, and write an article.
-
-
Peace Lena,
I agree this is a good post, however, it does not answer the all important question, why did Lot offer up his daughters? God only writes what he needs to - and he wrote that Lot offered up his daughters to be gang-raped?
Dawn.
rotfl
Good question @dawngoregeous, thanx
-
Please look further into the Wording of the Story, there are details which are easily overlooked
-
Lot addresses his people as a community and group (i.e He talks to them as the first community of people, to commit homosexuality, not just isolated cases. They were the first group of people to completely forsake women and live in a community with thriving homosexuality) (781)
-
Lot offers his daughters while knowing that they would not accept them. He was trying to make a point, and that point was that "they are purer for you" (117.
This is derived from his people's answer to his statement, which was, "YOU KNOW, that we have no right with your daughters, and YOU KNOW what WE want ". (1179). Thus, Lot was trying to make a point to them again, that his daughters (women), are purer for them than men, and he knew They were going to refuse. Thus, he wasn't really offering up his daughters, he was making a point that women are for men. -
In the Quran there are limitations on whom we can and can't marry. We can't marry two sister, or the wives of our fathers, or the wives of our sons. (423).
Marrying the wives of our fathers (even if not our mothers) is also deemed "Lewed", hated, and bad/evil (422). So the limitations are not just about same-sex intimacy.
It is hard to support same-sex couples from the Quran, as There are no examples or citations of Same-Sex couples, and neither can same-sex intimacy be supported from any of the other Abrahamic scriptures. I say so because Lot's story is included in them all.
P.S I'm in no way a homophobic. I myself am Bisexual by attraction. I went through different phases of Sexuality, from Straight to Gay to asexuality/Celibacy. I am still attracted to the same gender but I cope with that, rather than act upon it. Also, I am working on a therapy of coping with SSA. I'm hoping to make a video about it soon, and write an article.
Nice post with a personal touch, thank you.
Blessed be God the uncreated One
-
-
Idk if this will help but this is a black Muslim Imam talking about Homosexuality because he himself is homosexual Please listen to what he says
https//www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xu0S0aNTOFU
-
I found something in surah {2431}
2431 And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and keep covered their private parts, and that they should not reveal their beauty except what is apparent, and let them put forth their shawls over their cleavage. And let them not reveal their beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or the sons of their brothers, or the sons of their sisters, or their women, or those committed to them by oath, or the male servants who are without sexual desire, or the child who has not yet understood the composition of women. And let them not strike with their feet in a manner that reveals what they are keeping hidden of their beauty. And repent to God, all of you believers, that you may succeed.
can this refer about a men without sexual desire for women which in that case means a gay men
-
It can also refer to "Eunuchs" (men who are physically castrated) and Mukhannathan. In the not-so-distant past there were many eunuchs in Arabia. Although Islam forbade Muslims to castrate young boys, they were not forbidden from owning them as slaves. They were considered prized possessions, and huge sums were paid for them. They supervised women?s quarters, and helped at mosques where they were assigned to separate women from men.
Wikipedia says
Mukhannathun (Arabic "effeminate ones", "men who resemble women", singular mukhannath) is classical Arabic for people who would now be called transgender women, perhaps poorly distinguished from eunuchs. Various "mukhannathun" appear in several hadith. In one hadith the prophet Muhammad banishes a mukhannath to a region near Medina, but prohibits people from killing them. They could be said to be Muslim transwomen accepted as they are "within the boundaries of Medina and Mecca". Outside of the religious text they are strongly associated with music and entertainment.Gender/sexualityThe mukhannathun as a group do not fit neatly into any one of the prevailing categories of gender or sexuality used in the West at this time. While they were certainly not straight, it cannot be said that they were simply homosexual males. While they are gender variant, it seems that the intensity differs from one mukhannath to the next.SexualityIn "The Effeminates of Early Medina" Everett K. Rowson describes the very same Mukhannathun who appear in the Hadith, and who were companions of the prophet Muhammad. Rowson describes several other Mukhannathun who were contemporary to the Prophet Muhammad, in particular Tuways and Al-Dalal. Tuways was a talented musician and singer who lived to the age of 82. Tuways is known to have married and fathered children. From what is written, Al-Dalal clearly preferred men. Specifically it is written that though "Al-Dalal enjoyed women's social company any sexual demand made of her was in vain". Al-Dalal is said to have had a sexual encounter with a woman on her wedding night. Al-Dalal then later that same night had sexual relations with the groom. Similar stories exist about the other Mukhannathun of Medina.
According to Imam Muhsin Hendricks
Muhammad did deal with a group of effeminate men in Medina called "Mukhannathun". However, while this group of Mukhannathun did possess qualities of modern gay men, it cannot be said that the Mukhannathun fully represent modern gay men, as they were involved in practices not common to contemporary gay men.
-
Wikipedia says
Mukhannathun (Arabic "effeminate ones", "men who resemble women", singular mukhannath) is classical Arabic for people who would now be called transgender women,Can A Mukhannathun also mean a gay male not just transgender because gay man can resemble a women by there action but not by there looks
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
Can A Mukhannathun also mean a gay male not just transgender because gay man can resemble a women by there action but not by there looks
http//cavemancircus.com/2010/02/11/test-your-power-of-deduction-man-or-woman/
That is all.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
-
I found something in surah {2431}
2431 And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and keep covered their private parts, and that they should not reveal their beauty except what is apparent, and let them put forth their shawls over their cleavage. And let them not reveal their beauty except to their husbands, or their fathers, or fathers of their husbands, or their sons, or the sons of their husbands, or their brothers, or the sons of their brothers, or the sons of their sisters, or their women, or those committed to them by oath, or the male servants who are without sexual desire, or the child who has not yet understood the composition of women. And let them not strike with their feet in a manner that reveals what they are keeping hidden of their beauty. And repent to God, all of you believers, that you may succeed.
can this refer about a men without sexual desire for women which in that case means a gay men
Very good find!
Definitively so!Peace
-
The very word "gay" is in itself wholly unscientifical and the whole debate on human sexuality such as it is going on is completely devoid of science and full por political indoctrination and correction of every colour. Right now I find that it does not contribute much to make light of anything. Too many ideological encumbrances.
Salaam
-
Greetings and Peace, all group
http//cavemancircus.com/2010/02/11/test-your-power-of-deduction-man-or-woman/
That is all.
peace
~Abdul-Hadi
yes those are transgender im not talking about a trans guy im talking about a guy that looks normal without cosmetic surgery that can resemble how a female act not by look wise but by personality
-
Rational Ex-Gay Therapy (Explained)
http//www.youtube.com/watch?v=QTi823CM2-Y