gay people and islam
-
Peace idol-free and all.. The example of the dog would be that i have not consented,therefore it is harmful to me so i would move away from the dog. I take consent to be between the two parties.(not just one) Certain sexual behaviours can be harmful even if both parties consent(eg use of a whip in sex),but this has to be deemed harmful either by those indulging in it or 'neutral' people suggesting that this 'act is/can be harmful. We ourselves(or even 'universal law' )are not the sole judges of what is harmful.
Peace all. -
Peace be upon you Elena,
idolfree1 wrote
On another note, why cant we also address those Homosexuals that DO molest like the Catholic Priest Epedemic? Are they all born homosexuals also?Elena
every person who commits a crime, of course demand him, persecute him and jail him.Where is the rehabilitation aspect? (check Herekhuti in Maat 11 Laws Book). We should not be jailing people for a time then letting them go with teh very same mindset, or even worse. Thats theproblem with the business of prisons, but thats another topic.
you are resorting to my emotions. When we agree it is also my emotions that drive me?
How is asking you about Catholic Priests resorting to your emotions sister?
If that question causes you to get emotional, then you realize there is work to be done thier for your person. If this is an emotional topic for you, how will you expect to see clearly?
-
Peace be upon you Enquirer,
Peace idol-free and all.. The example of the dog would be that i have not consented,therefore it is harmful to me
I didnt say anything about "YOU", I asked of the sexual pervert who responds to the dog humping his/her leg, would they be wrong to respond to the dog, since they are both "consenting"?
We ourselves(or even 'universal law' )are not the sole judges of what is harmful.
By saying "sole" judges, you are saying that we are indeed judges, correct?
-
Peace idol-free and all. I feel that you are suggesting that your post is objective(not driven by emotions) whilst other posters posts are subjective(driven by by emotions). I would state two things. a) i dont believe humans can be absolutely objective.(which means you still have a subjective element to your thinking ) and b)you are implying that (beacause you are totally objective) that whatever final conclusion you come up with(ie knowledge or verification) that this is correct and absolute. However....This is a form of intellectual bullying(which big boys like me dont get intimidated by too often ) ) and can lead to the 'religious mentality' which you said you wanted to avoid.(ie dogmatic statements and opinions,self-righteousness etc..) we are always learning,we always have some incomplete opinions(or misunderstandings) and we are always subject to some subjectivity.
Finally a question,can anyone control their emotions totally? Im posting respectfully to try to understand /clarify a few points,not to argue or cause harm. Peace brother idol-free and all. -
Peace
How is asking you about Catholic Priests resorting to your emotions sister?
If that question causes you to get emotional, then you realize there is work to be done thier for your person. If this is an emotional topic for you, how will you expect to see clearly?
nooo, there is misunderstanding
I was referring to your previous post when you said
Respected sister, you have to understand it is your FEELINGS(emotions) about ths situation that are causing you not to make the two things fit.
-
Peace be upon you Enquirer,
Peace idol-free and all. I feel that you are suggesting that your post is objective(not driven by emotions) whilst other posters posts are subjective(driven by by emotions).
Did you make the observations I pointed out?
I would state two things. a) i dont believe humans can be absolutely objective.(which means you still have a subjective element to your thinking )
I disagree, if someone asks me to get a pound of sand, I can weigh and measure (objective) and get a pound. What is subjective about that?
and b)you are implying that (beacause you are totally objective) that whatever final conclusion you come up with(ie knowledge or verification) that this is correct and absolute.
Give me an example of where objective knowledge would be incorrect conclusion.
However....This is a form of intellectual bullying(which big boys like me dont get intimidated by too often ) and can lead to the 'religious mentality' which you said you wanted to avoid.(ie dogmatic statements and opinions,self-righteousness etc..)
Intellectual bullying? Big Boys? I am debating with you, nothing more.
we are always learning,we always have some incomplete opinions(or misunderstandings) and we are always subject to some subjectivity.
Yes, but we should be moving to VERIFY things objectively.
Finally a question,can anyone control their emotions totally? Im posting respectfully to try to understand /clarify a few points,not to argue or cause harm. Peace brother idol-free and all.
Until I fully "control my emotions, I cannot say yes definately, but based on the process I am implementing, it seems that one can indeed "control" thier emotions entirely, or at least to a very high level.
Actually, its about IGNORING emotions, not controlling them. Once we observe and reason something out, then emotion can (and must) follow.
-
Peace be upon you Elena,
nooo, there is misunderstanding
I was referring to your previous post when you said
Quote
Respected sister, you have to understand it is your FEELINGS(emotions) about ths situation that are causing you not to make the two things fit.Sorry. My response was based on the below statement
Elena
it is difficult to make the two things fit. I mean, every time that the word 'perversion' is used here or when equating homosexuality with children molestation I find those expressions denigrating for the homosexual people who don't commit children molestation, abuse, or any other crime. It is not direct violence but I find it intolerant, as much time it is repeated 'we are not against the person'What else is it but "feelings" that would prevent you from seeing a person being able to speak up against something without following up with violence?
Zenje
Can one say they're against something, as Kyle pointed out numerous times, and speak up against it, without the follow-up of violence? -
Peace idol-free. You know at one time an 'objective fact' was that the earth was flat. History is riddled with 'objective' facts that were later proved wrong.(earth being centre of universe etc etc.). And also 1 pound of sand is also an arbitrary and relative measure,which though useful for comparison,is not absolute. Why do we need absolute truths? Whats wrong with relative truths? And If we(humans) do not have access to all knowledge at once how can we make a universal,absolute conclusion?
example all frogs are green.( A so-called truth,absolute statement,verified and observed.) Then 20 years later a scientific discoverer finds white frogs,this is verified and observed. Therefore -End of objective statement(disproved) that 'all frogs are green'. (note,this is a hypothetical example,there may be white,green and pink frogs ) )
Peace. -
Peace be upon you Sawtooth,
idolfree.... When in adoleselce, SOME people find themselves confused over what they are feeling in regards to others. Some may find that they are atracted to an individual and feel that they are either one way or another sexually and look into those feelings. Some find out they are homosexuals, some find out they were confusing their emotions. THAT is experimentation. Emtions are not always easy to figure out, but sexual atraction coes down to how a body reacts. it DOES or it DOESN'T
Thats not true. The "body" reacts based on programming. There are heterosexual couples who "loved" each other but have gone through so much EMOTIONAL PROBLEMS (arguments or what have you) that they cant get excited for sex with each other anymore. Likes and dislikes change, they are not "YOU". They are not the "I".
and YES that goes for both genders. Sometimes the IDEA of a taboo can be a turn on while the reality proves to be a complete turnoff, but you don't know until you put it to the test SOMETIMES
So since there is KNOWLEDGE hat crack kills, you are saying thatit is natural for someone to "try it out" just to be extra extra sure?
GENDER WISE!!!!!! Either a woman is gonna get you hot or a man. What does crack have to do with it?
Oh I am so done with this debate. When poeple are not using the same standard in a debate, there is no conclusion. I think homosexuality is a part of human existence. I acept that and see no reason not (except for reasons based on subjetive religious beliefe). therefore there is no middle ground to meet on.
So it's done
-
Peace enquirer,
I'm totally with you on facts that once were, and then totally changed. I've always been saying this. Here's a quote from MIB...
A person is smart. People are dumb. Everything they've ever "known" has been proven to be wrong. A thousand years ago everybody knew as a fact, that the earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, they knew it was flat. Fifteen minutes ago, you knew we humans were alone on it. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow. - Kay
We're on the same page there. However, I will disagree in regard to the scale examples - 1 pound is 1 pound. 32 degree F is 32 degree F... now whether one believes or feels that 1 pound is heavy or light, that is relative, still doesnt change the fact that it's one pound. Whether one finds it to be hot or cold at 32 degrees F is not the question... it's still 32 degrees F. I hope you get my meaning.
Peace.
-
Peace be upon you,
Peace idol-free. You know at one time an 'objective fact' was that the earth was flat.
That wasn't a fact, nor was it objective. Further, you make the distiction between "facts" and "truth", which deals with relationships. Our topic is the TRUTH of the relationship of "plugs" and "sockets".
History is riddled with 'objective' facts that were later proved wrong.(earth being centre of universe etc etc.).
You are incorrect. There is evidence BEFORE these people you are referencing who KNEW the earth was round and revolved around the sun. SO what you are refering to was the guesses of other people, this has nothing to do with OBJECTIVITY and the relationships of teh earth to the sun, etc.
And also 1 pound of sand is also an arbitrary and relative measure,which though useful for comparison,is not absolute. Why do we need absolute truths? Whats wrong with relative truths? And If we(humans) do not have access to all knowledge at once how can we make a universal,absolute conclusion?
I am not following what you said above, truth deals with relationships.
example all frogs are green.( A so-called truth,absolute statement,verified and observed.)
Wrong. You are discussing facts, not RELATIONSHIPS. Truth deals with RELATIONSHIPS.
Then 20 years later a scientific discoverer finds white frogs,this is verified and observed. Therefore -End of objective statement(disproved) that 'all frogs are green'. (note,this is a hypothetical example,there may be white,green and pink frogs )
Your example was not valid in regards to truth.
-
Peace be upon you Sawtooth,
GENDER WISE!!!!!! Either a woman is gonna get you hot or a man. What does crack have to do with it?
Crack was stated as a comparison to help you understand, but I dont think you reflected on it. Also, since you asked what Crack has to do with it, there are people who have sex with the same gender in order to get money for crack.
Oh I am so done with this debate.
Easy, dont let emotions get to you D
When poeple are not using the same standard in a debate, there is no conclusion. I think homosexuality is a part of human existence. I accept that and see no reason not (except for reasons based on subjetive religious beliefe). therefore there is no middle ground to meet on.
There's nothing subjective about OB-serving form and function, that is OB-jective. The only subjectiviy seems to be that you feel it is "religion" that is motivating my position. The midle ground is teh verifyable ground, and all you have is guesswork that homosexuality is biological, do you realize that is your only foundation?
-
Peace be upon you Sawtooth,
I went to another thread and saw that you do understand form and function, so I dont know why you have trouble applying it in this case.
Sawtooth
Cow's milk is not great for humans because our digestive system is designed to handle human milk specifically. there are protiens in cows milk that can reak havoc on a human digestive system. think about it.... Do we breast feed cow's? Or offer other species our own milk?I agree with that by the way
-
obviously, through out this thread most of us who defend the legal rights of gay people use common sense and compassion, only leyla who presented the opinion with quran verses back up, even still, many disagree with her interpetration. and that's okay, because that is why we are here, to discuss issues like this, hopefully to come to conclusion and agreement, but it doesn't matter either if there is nothing to agree with.
we are still in our journey of understanding life, our understanding now might be right or might be wrong, but we are to endlessly seek the wisdom of life.
i only believe that god is the most merciful and loves his every human being, and we are not to harm each other. -
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!!