Homosexuality LGBTQI and the deen

uq

Peace all,

I should make it clear that 416 cannot be proven linguistically to apply to homosexual relationships. The word They two who is used for two males as well as a male and a female in the context of 416. Whereas the word They who applies exclusively to females in the context of 415.

Abdul Hadi, you have the right to communicate your ideas without the fear of verbal reprisals or disrespect. I should like to think that we are an open-minded community who prioritise the use of reason in the pursuit of truth. If you feel a forum member has violated the forum rules then feel free to report that member to an admin and we shall deal with it inshallah.

Four points for Abdul Hadi

Please clarify

Lot (Peace upon all Prophets) said that the people did an evil not seen before. Since he wasn?t addressed as being wrong, and homosexual acts in organized societies existed long before the people of Lot, this indicates that homosexual acts are not the main issue here.

Please clarify

If one is being absolute in linking unrelated patterns, it could be argued that any society other than the people of Lot is a unique pattern and unrelated to the statements made by the Prophet Lot. It can be one way or the other, but not both at the same time.

I intentionally used the word 'refuted' as the inclusion of males to "what is beyond that" cannot be linguistically proven. It would stand as a major rhetorical anomaly if we were to expand the scope of the verse to include males.
The retribution incurred by L's people was as a direct consequence of their enticing his guests. The fact that his wife was also punished is unrelated to this particular event. I should also point out that the marital status of those who enticed L's guests is unknown. As such, we cannot rule out?linguistically?the possibility of their being blinded purely on account of their homosexual tendencies.

imrankhawaja

Is not LGBT related.
If you don't find any answers to your questions in the quran than maybe you have to search better.

Is not LGBT related.
But no thank you, I have no desire to have sex with animals. Besides that I don't have any desire for such acts, God also forbids that for me.

I also had one question for you, Adem, Rekkd and A Submitter. Maybe you missed it. It seems they had/have some trouble with it, but since you like to give answers I think it will be no problem for you.
On page 22 I had 2 quran verses I was interested in your opinion on the red parts. If you do not want to answer that question then I understand, it's ok.

i did not see any misunderstanding in those verses .. posted by you.. its very clear about a relationship between male and female...
if you have some different interpretation then you may share it with us .. i will look forward into it , hoping that discussion will come to an end.. -\

the only approach of a relationship valid in book is between male and female rest of the relations either with living or non living being autommatically get invalid ...

but as we know like u said if something is missing then we have to search for better understanding
in that case if it was blanked out i also sharing the same thing what you share withh slightiest change that i would said God knows best let God judge them...

but when we come to see that act through quranic lens we find it problemetic... due to some reasons
1 we can see lot nation was engagged in something which cause them immediate azab on special basis
2 and we see the nations who got punishment is a warning for all of us...
3 and if an act was not forbidden then God would never imposed such restriction or punishement on them..
4 it seems like disfiguring in nature or illogical... even it did not harm anybody but it is not liked by God due to which it is adviseable to stay away from such act...

i still wonder when people are sure 100% on something when their claim is based on false assumption at first hand ..like its absent in book.. it is not absent .. have a look in these verses given below please... then decide by yourself...

26163 "So be aware of God and obey me."(lot is indirectly expressing his feelings which is also a command of God)
26164 "I do not ask you for a wage for my reward is upon the Lord of the worlds."(he was not against it for personal wishes)
26165 Of all the creatures in the worlds, you approach males.(they were only interested in males)
26166 "You leave what your Lord has created for you of mates? You are an intrusive people!"(look into it deeply males to males are not created for the purpose of sex/relationship)...
26168 He said "I am in severe opposition to your acts!"(why he would oppose)

Adem

I should make it clear that 416 canNOT be proven linguistically to apply to homosexual relationships acts

Actually it can.

Who's the addressee (&#1605, linguistically ?

imrankhawaja

actually look into the context.. although God knows best i m not claiming anything but what i find out here is...

4/ 15 addressed to party A ( genitive feminine plural noun)
4/ 16 addressed to party B ( masculine dual relative pronoun)

party A is clearly women...
party B could be women and men... or two men or two females also (?)

if party A is already mention as women and also the set rules of punishment is there then party B must not be women.. there is not need of repeating same thing with different lingual rules .. i think we can assume the two applied to all catagories ... of fahisha incuding two males , two females and two male and female... sometimes Book use specific words due to a reason ..

God knows best...

Adem

Yes, the first penalty concerns women (fem pl) guilty of fahicha,
whereas the 2nd concerns a masc dual (which can be two men, or a man & woman) guilty of fahicha.

However, the addresse in both 4/15 and 16 are MEN, believing men. Ergo, the masc dual are both males, as far as context is concerned.

And those (fem.) who commit 'fahichah' AMONG YOUR WOMEN, penalty X as follows...

And the two (masc.) who commit IT AMONG YOU , penalty Y as foll

To verify, look up the addresse in the surrounding passages also, men P

imrankhawaja

whatever the case is... further reading the same chapter set rules for relationship and there, it is cyrstal clear that a relationship must between parties males and females ... there is no other catagory otherwise God would have mention it . this book is completed and i beleive God never run out of words..

even the people who using an excuse about lacking the information about this act(in quran).. are clearly wrong based on the events of nation lot .. and lot clearly make these acts fahish and was not happy with that...

i still dnt understand logically /naturally/ lawfully they dnt have any evidence in support...

virginia

But I like to know your opinion about the next 2 verses (the red parts),

2221

2432

btw I understand those verses totally different from the popular view, but I have a feeling that some of you will have some trouble to make this fit.

Bold @Bender

very pleaaaaaaaaaaaaaase, oh drunken master ;D

None of these passages address the issue in question, bender ! nope

No, they are absolutely in relation since they postulate which relationships are lawful.

221
a)
b)

What here?

a) Is Quran addressed only to men here too?
b) Did God forget to give women the right to choose their partners and if they want to be believers or rejecters? Do women belong to their fathers until they belong to their husbands?
c) Did God made a mistake in the plural masculine on b)?
d) Is there not an Arabic plural feminine ending for verbs that God forgot to use on b)?
e) Is God allowing men to marry another man or is God just giving men the right to give their daughters to whom they want or they want not? I want that Quran for ladies! > Where is it that Quran where women, along with obligations, have rights too? giveup
f) So there are 2 optinos here God is fine with the homo situation or He is a sexists? giveup
g) Maybe we can think a bit more considering that the very same verse ends up with ?He clarifies His revelations for the people that they may remember?... or are "people" again only men?

2432

And marry the single (MASCULINE PLURAL) among you (MASCULINE PLURAL)

And the good from among your MALE servants and your FEMALE servants.

a) to whom is addressed this verse now? Men or women or everybody?
b) Why did God reveal the Quran in Arabic? He could have used Japanese which has a pronoun for every category and genre so we would always know who is being addressed giveup I am sure a nihonjin prophet-san would be much cooler brickwall

I never said is stated clearly anything. As I don?t see clearly stated that homosexual marriage is allowed, I don?t see its prohibition. So when there is not a clear prohibition or permission, just use common sense and don?t condemn anyone without being sure 100%, that is all I know.

My point of view is veeeeeeeeeeery simple We are all more concerned about homosexuality than God is. If it were important we would have it written down this simple ?People, it is allowed? or ?people, it is not allowed?.

Let?s be concerned about evil, about oppression, about wars and the plutocratic word we live in and leave homosexual people to live their lives and believe in God and make good and develop themselves as human beings and God?s creatures. Because, really, a sincere, kind and discreet homo couple (as a hetero one) is not giving me the impression the world is all sin and sodomy.

Salam peace

Postscript If someone finds that Quran for ladies, please let me know yay

imrankhawaja

2221 And do not marry the female polytheists until they believe. For a believing female servant is better than a polytheist even if she attracts you. And do not marry the male polytheists until they believe. For a believing male servant is better than a polytheist even if he attracts you...

2432 And marry off those among you that are single, and the good from among your male and female servants. If they are poor, then God will grant them from His grace. And God is Encompassing, Knowledgeable.

@ virginia... both male and females are present there..

on the other hand where does these verses are allowing homosex?

instead of homosaphien can we use word homosexien? (part of joke) rotfl

virginia

2221 And do not marry the female polytheists until they believe. For a believing female servant is better than a polytheist even if she attracts you. And do not marry the male polytheists until they believe. For a believing male servant is better than a polytheist even if he attracts you...

@ virginia... both male and females are present there..

The verb on b) is masculine plural since I know, so since I know it can't say "you, WOMEN, don't marry polytheist men". If women are addressed in the second part with masculine plural, why women are not also addressed in the first part with masculine plural? hmm

Also look at the ajabakum (he pleases you), it is not -kunna but -kum

on the other hand where does these verses are allowing homosex?

You have 2 options you can translate b) as "and dont give your women to polytheist men", which first and only time happens in the Quran with this structure since I know (please correct me if I am wrong and forgive me) and so women are things to give and not addressed here, or translate b)
as "and you, MEN, dont marry polytheist men"

instead of homosaphien can we use word homosexien? (part of joke) rotfl

I would be proud of it O0

not part but fully rotfl welcome

You can't say yes and you can't say no 100%, so God knows better and we are not the ones to judge any human being who is not harming anyone

virginia

Actually it can.

Who's the addressee (&#1605, linguistically ?

Only men because there is not a Ladies Quran, don't you get it, Huruf? >

huruf

No se le pueden pedir peras al olmo.

Lately there seems to have sprung a new species of brains which are incapable of realising the use of words when it comes to the existence of women. Unles it is for something bad they are simply not there and it is forbidden for God to speak of them.

Verbs are masculine or feminine and there cannot and should not exist a verb form or pronouns or any other type of word that can include both sexes. SUCH A THING DOES NOT EXIST.

It is useless to attempt to reason or teach them grammar. They are impervious and they are not interested because women simple are not there nor, what is mor eimportant, SHOULD BE there.

I do not know why anybody still bothers to indulge talking to those peoples. If once they do no take any notice of what is explained to them, it is a waste of time to even bother taking any further notice of such contrived stupidity. For them a condition for being muslim is to be thouroughly stupid and brainless. Ignore them is the most charitable attitude towards and specially towards oneself.

Salaam

imrankhawaja

The verb on b) is masculine plural since I know, so since I know it can't say "you, WOMEN, don't marry polytheist men". If women are addressed in the second part with masculine plural, why women are not also addressed in the first part with masculine plural? hmm

oh common hun why making simple things complicated...

apply general rule of understanding...

do not marry O0 FM polythiest..
believing FM servant is better... (part 1)

do not marry O0 M polythiest
believing M servant is better (part 2)..

whats so hard to understand ?

You can't say yes and you can't say no 100%, so God knows better and we are not the ones to judge any human being not harming anyone

yes God knows better so thats why i already left the verses what God advised us...

look at this...

in that case if it was blanked out i also sharing the same thing what you share withh slightiest change that i would said God knows best let God judge them...

but when we come to see that act through quranic lens we find it problemetic... due to some reasons
1 we can see lot nation was engagged in something which cause them immediate azab on special basis
2 and we see the nations who got punishment is a warning for all of us...
3 and if an act was not forbidden then God would never imposed such restriction or punishement on them..
4 it seems like disfiguring in nature or illogical... even it did not harm anybody but it is not liked by God due to which it is adviseable to stay away from such act...

i still wonder when people are sure 100% on something when their claim is based on false assumption at first hand ..like its absent in book.. it is not absent .. have a look in these verses given below please... then decide by yourself...

26163 "So be aware of God and obey me."(lot is indirectly expressing his feelings which is also a command of God)
26164 "I do not ask you for a wage for my reward is upon the Lord of the worlds."(he was not against it for personal wishes)
26165 Of all the creatures in the worlds, you approach males.(they were only interested in males)
26166 "You leave what your Lord has created for you of mates? You are an intrusive people!"(look into it deeply males to males are not created for the purpose of sex/relationship)...
26168 He said "I am in severe opposition to your acts!"(why he would oppose)

think about it and take your time...

virginia

oh common hun why making simple things complicated...

apply general rule of understanding...

do not marry O0 FM polythiest..
believing FM servant is better... (part 1)

do not marry O0 M polythiest
believing M servant is better (part 2)..

whats so hard to understand ?

You (men and women -) don't marry FM polytheist ..... even if she - pleases you (men and women -*)
You (men and women -) don't marry M polytheist.... even if he pleases you (men and women -)

I don't have any problem, I thought you had.
So homosexual marriage is perfectly allowed yay

look at this...

hypno like this?

Where is homosexuality there? I see promiscuity, I see adultery, I see prostitution, I see rape, I see murder, I see torture, I see orgies BUT I DON'T SEE HOMOSEXIALITY

imrankhawaja

Only men because there is not a Ladies Quran, don't you get it, Huruf? >(

if its based on jealousy then i have no cure for it... elektro

yes there is a name of women in quran (mary) probably the only women name in whole scripture why only one
God knows...best..

another thing .. once there was a debate between sister huruf regarding giver and taker ... rotfl

man is giver women is taker... sister huruf was arguing with us why man is giver .. its woman who gives.. does it really make women giver , as we know the ignition call the starting point.. switching off the ignition is the ending point... ending and starting cannot be same likewise giver and taker cannot be same...

its better if u take this female stuff outside ... if somebody have problems with the injustice i mean the injustice according to secterian lens of women then they are wrong.. i did not see God is degerading any women in quran... but its a fact too that man lead the family its God who make man a leader of the family ... if somebody want to go againsst laws of God i have no comments for them instead of symppathy...

why God made man a leader of family its another question.. if i will go into details most of the women will not get it as its a natural attitutde of human they will not accpet the truth even they know it..

example

i say male and female are both humans so both deserve respect
make and female are humans they are same but not identical becoz the physical strenght of male is more than female
here some females start arguing on it.. as they will think we are considering them as weak...

instead of thinking positively most of them think negetively... its a part of human nature so i most of the times avoid discussing these issues...

but again with the fact , i still feel a kid loves his mother more than his father...
why becoz naturally mother loves his kid more than father... ?
father must not have issue with this thing becoz its truth...
same womens must have not any issue with leadership or strenght if its truth...

hope you got and sorry for offtopic

virginia

hope you got and sorry for fftopic

Dont be sorry (masc. singular) it is my (fem. singular) fault the fftopic

I (fem. singular) am sorry let's concentrate (masc. plural) on the subject peace

I am sorry for the () but it was so funny i had to rotfl rotfl rotfl
peace

I really mean it, I am sorry

imrankhawaja

You (men and women -) don't marry FM polytheist ..... even if she - pleases you (men and women -*)
You (men and women -) don't marry M polytheist.... even if he pleases you (men and women -)

I don't have any problem, I thought you had.
So homosexual marriage is perfectly allowed yay

hypno like this?

do i have to teach you abc 123 ... rotfl

if A=B
then B=A

if AB= CD
then CD= AB

A= FEMALE B= MALE
AB=females CD = males

whats so hard .. or you already make your mind... ?

Where is homosexuality there? I see promiscuity, I see adultery, I see prostitution, I see rape, I see murder, I see torture, I see orgies BUT I DON'T SEE HOMOSEXIALITY

did you not see the clear words there..? (26/ 163-16
do you want to make your eyes shut due to the ego ?
or did you already decided not to believe on this ?
this verse is just talking about homosex...

rest of the things what you mention like rape, murder torture are also comndem by God on different places?

so accepting a part of scriptures and rejecting part of it is the sign hypocrate rejector?

virginia

do i have to teach you abc 123 ... rotfl

Because it is NOT as you say. You are telling me that
A = B
A = C
Look at the words in the text and you will see your A and C are the SAME, why is THE SAME one for men and next time for women?

if AB= CD D?
then CD + D?= AB

There is no D in your equation, where is D?

giveup

A= FEMALE B= MALE
AB=females CD = males

The problem is that your A and B are just the same word so they can't be the saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaame

Anyway, I leave the topic

Have a greeeeeeeeeat day you all peace

imrankhawaja

Dont be sorry (masc. singular) it is my (fem. singular) fault the offtopic

I (fem. singular) am sorry let's concentrate (masc. plural) on the subject peace

I am sorry for the () but it was so funny i had to rotfl rotfl rotfl
peace

I really mean it, I am sorry

you dnt need to sorry its a natural fault of (fem. singular) rotfl they always misunderstood

haha i remeber once a women asked me its so unjustice that God will provide 72 virgins to man but not even a single O0 to women hahahahaha rotfl i said .. well lets see what happen may b there is a surprise for women.. and womens like surprises... yay

just kidding ... there are some natural fault of (masc plural)too ... they make things by their own wish due to the strength provided to them ... and women got issues with this thing.. hmm

imrankhawaja

Because it is NOT as you say. You are telling me that
A = B
A = C
Look at the words in the text and you will see your A and C are the SAME, why is THE SAME one for men and next time for women? There is no D in your equation, where is D?

giveupThe problem is that your A and B are just the same word so they can't be the saaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaame

Anyway, I leave the topic

Have a greeeeeeeeeat day you all peace

common hun never give up too early my day just started and you already ruined it rotfl kidding...
A represent females B represent males C represent homo/lesbian/bisexual rotfl
A=B
A= C

females vs males
females vs C LGBT (?)

verse is talking about males vs females
you bring other stuff inside its not my fault ...

if there is a catagory of C like Tranny rotfl then it would be another case...
the share in property , relatiosnhip ,wedlock, witnesses, all stuff being revised but its not present there...

if you are confused in single and plural then understand in this way..
a=single female
b = single male

ab =plural female
cd=plural male

if you take d out of males and b out of females then it will become
ac = tranny hahahahahaha oh my God you are right equation proved there are three genders of sex... !

Bender

i did not see any misunderstanding in those verses .. posted by you.. its very clear about a relationship between male and female...

I did not expect any other answer from, thank you!

if you have some different interpretation then you may share it with us .. i will look forward into it , hoping that discussion will come to an end.. -\

Sorry I am not in the mood for such discussions.

the only approach of a relationship valid in book is between male and female rest of the relations either with living or non living being autommatically get invalid ...

but as we know like u said if something is missing then we have to search for better understanding
in that case if it was blanked out i also sharing the same thing what you share withh slightiest change that i would said God knows best let God judge them...

but when we come to see that act through quranic lens we find it problemetic... due to some reasons
1 we can see lot nation was engagged in something which cause them immediate azab on special basis
2 and we see the nations who got punishment is a warning for all of us...
3 and if an act was not forbidden then God would never imposed such restriction or punishement on them..
4 it seems like disfiguring in nature or illogical... even it did not harm anybody but it is not liked by God due to which it is adviseable to stay away from such act...

i still wonder when people are sure 100% on something when their claim is based on false assumption at first hand ..like its absent in book.. it is not absent .. have a look in these verses given below please... then decide by yourself...

26163 "So be aware of God and obey me."(lot is indirectly expressing his feelings which is also a command of God)
26164 "I do not ask you for a wage for my reward is upon the Lord of the worlds."(he was not against it for personal wishes)
26165 Of all the creatures in the worlds, you approach males.(they were only interested in males)
26166 "You leave what your Lord has created for you of mates? You are an intrusive people!"(look into it deeply males to males are not created for the purpose of sex/relationship)...
26168 He said "I am in severe opposition to your acts!"(why he would oppose)

of course