gay people and islam
-
Neither side is listening to each other in this debate. I will list my arguments so that at least I can be better understood
1.I don't know where anyone said that TV will turn a person straight person gay. What I do remember saying is that it in addition to societal acceptance of homosexuality may influence the emotions of young children who don't yet have a concept of their own sexuality. Please rebut that point.
2.I don't know who said that gays should be stoned. I certainly don't believe in stoning anyone,so this point is moot as far as the assertion that oppostion to homosexuality are intolerant and evil. I don't think I'm evil, I just don't agree with homosexual conduct.
3.Analogies to homosexuality and incest, bestiality, etc. have been made not to demonize gays, but to parallel it to other forms of sexually deviant behavior. Ex. if a man puts peanut butter on his penis and lets his dog lick the peanut butter off of it and enjoys oral sex with his dog, who also enjoys it b/c he gets to eat peanut butter, is this not sexually deviant? If this man only has this kind of sexual contact and does not have sex with anyone else, wouldn't we say that he probably has something wrong with him?
4.Rapists can be helped. The only sexual crime that cannot be rehabilitated is pedophilia b/c we just don't know enough about why they do what they do. Rape is a symptom of male aggression stemming from a lack of personal power. It is a form of control. A rapist can be rehabilitated to not need this form of control.
5.I think that sex is a matter of connecting the penis and the vagina for the purpose of reproduction. Every part of attraction is geared towards sex and the most efficient method of creating a baby. For example
a. men are more attracted to women when they are ovulating
b. ejaculation and orgasm are for the sole purpose of making the sperm reach the egg faster. When a woman has an orgasm, it causes her vaginal muscles to contract, helping to propel the sperm into the required space to fertilize the egg
c. after ejaculation the sperm stays in the "womb area" for a few days before it dies, making it more likely that at least one sperm will fertilize an egg
d. it is documented that when a woman is pregnant, men change their interaction with the woman subconsciously to protect her and the baby
e. every culture has a different conception of beauty, but this concept of beauty is always related to the ability to reproduce or how fertile the person looksSo as you can see, the enjoyment of sex is actually a biological mechanism that encourages greater chances for reproduction. The aspect of sex that makes it enjoyable also makes it a very efficient baby makign system, so sex is not solely for the sake of enjoying oneself. The point of sex is to make babies, it is simply our technology that allows us to protect aginst such a finely tuned system...and even so, condoms and pills only work 90-something% of the time. Without modern medicine which has only been in use for less than a century, sex would still = babies for the most part. The idea that sex is solely for pleasure is a big mistake.
- I really don't see what homosexual love has to do with anything. Human beings can love anything and it can still be perverted. Saying that perversion is ok since they are in love is rife with conflict. Also, understanding something doesn't mean that one must endorse it. I can very much understand why someone would be attracted to a man, as I am attracted to men. I understand it, but I don't have to agree with it.
Ok, now I get off my soapbox )
-
Peace
Can anyone(heterosexual) get turned on by a member of the same sex just becoz some charachter in tv does?
It may be possible with the thought implanted in one's head, "I can do this, and look, it's okay". I do not think anyone is stating that tv makes people do things, however it influences one's considerations. Keep in mind how God speaks of the power of suggestion.
Joe
-
1.I don't know where anyone said that TV will turn a person straight person gay. What I do remember saying is that it in addition to societal acceptance of homosexuality may influence the emotions of young children who don't yet have a concept of their own sexuality. Please rebut that point.
What are you saing here? Sexuality is a learned behaviour?
As for as I know Sexuality is wired in the Brain from Birth. This is what research points to.
Here is a interesting case. An American boy due to a terrible circumcision accident lost his penis completely. The parents decided to raise him as a girl. The doctors gave the boy hormone treatments to make him more feminine. The boy grew up looking like a girl and behaving like a girl. But in his teenage years his masculinity re-asserted itself and he stopped taking hormone treatments and lived the life of man.
So Sexuality is NOT a conditioned response as far as I can see.
2.I don't know who said that gays should be stoned. I certainly don't believe in stoning anyone,so this point is moot as far as the assertion that oppostion to homosexuality are intolerant and evil. I don't think I'm evil, I just don't agree with homosexual conduct.
Well some people here have argued to remove homosexuals from the positions of power like teachers from schools and universities etc and others want to Exile them to a desert Island.
3.Analogies to homosexuality and incest, bestiality, etc. have been made not to demonize gays, but to parallel it to other forms of sexually deviant behavior.
Homosexaulity have been observed in the Animal world. There seems to be a certain percentage of the population that show homosexual behaviour in all societies in past and now. Why? This question has not been resolved yet. And the comparison between homosexuality and incest is not correct because incest is NOT usually between two consenting adults. And this goes for bestiality too.
If a man puts peanut butter on his penis and lets his dog lick the peanut butter off of it and enjoys oral sex with his dog, who also enjoys it b/c he gets to eat peanut butter, is this not sexually deviant? If this man only has this kind of sexual contact and does not have sex with anyone else, wouldn't we say that he probably has something wrong with him?
This has not been observed in the animal world where one animal puts peanut butter on it's penis and gets another animal of different species to lick it off. So yes this person is not well and needs urgent medical attention wink but licking cholocate from your spouse...erm I will not go there wink -)
4.Rapists can be helped. The only sexual crime that cannot be rehabilitated is pedophilia b/c we just don't know enough about why they do what they do. Rape is a symptom of male aggression stemming from a lack of personal power. It is a form of control. A rapist can be rehabilitated to not need this form of control.
Yes that is the case. The Power and Control. That is why rapist are not born and neither are paedophiles. They are borne out of either of hatred and abuse. And "Good" tortured can turn Evil. Good torturted by itself can turn Evil.
5.I think that sex is a matter of connecting the penis and the vagina for the purpose of reproduction. Every part of attraction is geared towards sex and the most efficient method of creating a baby. For example
Yes, that is what it is in the Animal World. But we are human beings. We are much more than an animal. Humanity exeptionally is a different Species than the Animal Species. Sex is more pleasureable for us. Procreation follows if we want to. Sexual Pleasure first, procreation second. We have left behind our REPRODUCTION instinct long time ago. So reproduction argument is no longer tenable.
a. men are more attracted to women when they are ovulating
And women are more attracted to men when men are sweating? wink
You have reduced men and women to their reproduction. But we have become more than our biology.b. ejaculation and orgasm are for the sole purpose of making the sperm reach the egg faster. When a woman has an orgasm, it causes her vaginal muscles to contract, helping to propel the sperm into the required space to fertilize the egg
Yes that is just mechanics of reproduction. But you can have orgasm without ejaculating and you can also have a whole body orgasm instead of orgasm focused at the genital area. You can have orgasm in your dreams wink
c. after ejaculation the sperm stays in the "womb area" for a few days before it dies, making it more likely that at least one sperm will fertilize an egg d. it is documented that when a woman is pregnant, men change their interaction with the woman subconsciously to protect her and the baby
Yes this is all reproduction. But we human beings have become more than just a reproduction machine.
e. every culture has a different conception of beauty, but this concept of beauty is always related to the ability to reproduce or how fertile the person looks
I disagree. Beauty has it's own standard and is nothing to do with reproduction.
So as you can see, the enjoyment of sex is actually a biological mechanism that encourages greater chances for reproduction.
But we have gone beyond that. Sex is not for reproduction anymore.
Though nature may operate on Darwinian principles but we are living in an Anti-Darwinian world.The aspect of sex that makes it enjoyable also makes it a very efficient baby makign system, so sex is not solely for the sake of enjoying oneself.
Yes it is now. Sex is for pleasure. We have gone beyond "sex for reproduction" stage in our development as a species.
The point of sex is to make babies,
Not anymore. Baby making is secondary and is just a choice now.
The idea that sex is solely for pleasure is a big mistake.
If it is mistake then hey WHAT A GREAT MISTAKE IT IS. Sex is for pleasure now. That's why there are 10,000 different never endings at the tip of the female clitoris!!! and what a thing it is too wink Baby making is now is a matter of choice.
- I really don't see what homosexual love has to do with anything.
Love itself has nothing to do with SEX. There is no Sex in Love.
Sex can be part of LOVE but not always.Human beings can love anything and it can still be perverted.
Don't mix SEX and LOVE. SEX is the need of the body. LOVE is the need of the spirit. You may "love" your bag of chips or Chocolate Dunk'em but it is nothing to do with LOVE! LOVE is the need of the soul.
I can very much understand why someone would be attracted to a man, as I am attracted to men. I understand it, but I don't have to agree with it.
Regardless wether you agree or not. Homosexuality exists and has always existed in all societies in the past and will always exist in the future. We don't understand yet why certain percentage of population in a given society show homosexual tendencies. But homosexuality is observed in the Animal World. Why? We have no answer yet.
Homosexuality is quite easily accepted in other cultures. It is only societies borne out of Abrahamic Religions that see homosexuality in such a negative light. Why this inherent phobia against it?
Regards,
-
Peace lote-tree and all. You made a very interesting comment about societies derived from the three abrahamic religions having a problem with homosexuality. I think mis-use/over-reliance on religious texts and a mis-understanding of theology are what have tarnished the tolerant and respectful message that these texts are supposed to have. Karen armstrong in her book 'history of god' says that when a concept of god does not work or seems to be illogical then we will look to new concepts.(my own paraphrasing) I would be interested to know what hinduism,buddhism or other philosophies(pre or post muhammed) think of homosexuality?
I believe certain elements of 'faith' need to be reviewed,we need less dogma and illogical/unrealistic views and more 'open' mindedness and humanity. We all have our own minds and there is an unending amount of knowledge and ethics out there... The quran is not the source of all knowledge or the centre of the universe,it can be a kick-start to rational thinking....if you want it to be....
Peace all. -
Peace Lote
So Sexuality is NOT a conditioned response as far as I can see.
I'm aware of the following case of John who committed suicide in 2004 because of the scars he was left with. He was given hormones, etc, but he always stood out because he was a big man, a manly-looking figure. I'm not sure if you've heard of androgenic insensitivity syndrome, but it is a case where androgen receptors are defective. Read up on the case of Anne S. who was a genetic male. He was brought up as a female because he was feminine.
Joe
-
Peace be upon you,
But homosexuality is observed in the Animal World. Why? We have no answer yet.
Sure we do. Lust, as with all emotions, are the ANIMAL NATURE within you. Emotion and ANIMATION are the same thing (energy in motion).
This is why humans are compared to animals in "Koran" when they are called "dumb as cattle" or like "apes and swine", or like "parrots" etc.
Animals lick each other butts and other kinds of behavior, we cannot take the animals as our guide to correct behavior.
-
Peace be upon you,
The only problem here comes emotions leading your understanding. The process is to look objectively at an issue, look at form and function, then your emotion should follow that, not before that.
Anyway, lets take the most extreme example of this and see how it plays out
100% of people accept heterosexuality
100% of people accept homosexuality
Tell me the outcome of both.
I am not discussing how kind a person is, how much in "love" a person is, I am talking about he sex act.
-
Well if you were saying %100 of people TAKE PART in either I would say %100 of people being homosexual would not fair well (unless you facto in petri dish babies) But as for everyone accepting everyone? Well that would be fanfuckingtastic no? If people could live and let live (in this situation) without judgement, fear or hatred, think how nice the village in NYC could be.
Acceptance of eachother's differences is not going to be a BAD thing
-
Peace be upon you Sawtooth,
Well if you were saying %100 of people TAKE PART in either I would say %100 of people being homosexual would not fair well
Why not?
But as for everyone accepting everyone? Well that would be fan****tastic no?
I know the language on this thread has been very graphic, but please do not exceed the boundaries, respectfully.
My question was not about everyone accpeting everyone, it was comparing 100% hetero to 100% homo
If people could live and let live (in this situation) without judgement, fear or hatred, think how nice the village in NYC could be.
Why just that situation?
Acceptance of eachother's differences is not going to be a BAD thing
There is no compulsion, but the right way is clear from the wrong way.
-
Peace be upon you all,
In my opinion homosexuality is an immoral ACT, this however, does not mean the person is immoral. The reason I believe it is immoral is because of the fact that its only purpose is for pleasure, or to satisfy lust. With this line of reasoning though, people will say, that we shouldn't then go on roller coaster rides (they serve no purpose except excitement), we shouldn't watch a show like seinfeld, and on and on. Therefore, this argument won't stand ground, unless we decide that anything which only fulfills the purpose of pleasure or entertainment is something we shouldn't do. Unfortunately, I cannot foresee any arguments then that will work to discredit homosexuality, unless we simply say that its a test that some people have to overcome, just like we say eating pig meat is prohibited. This however, is one of the shittiest arguments, and doesn't sit well with logic. It's like saying "cause God said so". Since, I cannot come up with a good argument for why homosexuality is immoral, I will stop believing that it is so. I'll try to remain neutral on the subject.Lotetree made the argument that these days sex is for pleasure first, and procreation second. I agree with this view; today sex is foremost for pleasure, unfortunately this doesnt mean it is right. Simply because this view is in the majority, doesn't make it the right view. I think society has to turn this around, and make sex first for procreation and second for pleasure. People having sex just for pleasure, has led to a lot of unwanted pregnancies, and single parent families that pervade society today.
Another argument that has been made is that if nature does it (we are nature too I guess, but I mean the animal kingdom), then it's alright. This doesn't stand up to reason because animals do a lot of things that we've agreed aren't right. Should we run around killing our enemies children because animals in the wild do it? I doubt you'll say yes. We cannot therefore, rely on what animals do, to guide our actions as humans.
I think we have to analyze where we get our morals from, before we'll make any headway on this discussion. If it's from the book that people have titled the Quran, then we have to decide whether or not the Quran actually prohibits homosexuality. If it's from the conscience we all say we're born with, then we have to decide where we got this conscience, and can it be wrong (seems to create a lot of problems, and arguments that lead no where). Before we can decide why homosexuality is wrong, we must decide what wrong is, if we are going to be able to use reason and logic to solve this problem.
I hope I've made some sense,
Peace -
Peace
In my opinion homosexuality is an immoral ACT, this however, does not mean the person is immoral.
To me this statement is contradictory. How do you explain it? The person who sins is a sinner right? The one who abstains is an abstainer correct?
Joe
-
Peace Icephren,
I think Lote tree has adressed ur post quite well. I would have written similar.
These days sex is not only about conception. If every person in the world has unprotected sex every time like people of the past, we would have a population explosion.
Now a days, we pretty much pre decide the maximum number of children we want to have and then accordingly allow unprotected sex for the purpose. But otherwise, one has protected sex, is it not?
How many times do u think an adult has sexual intercourse with the intent of conception as compared to the number of times he has it for pleasure?
Peace!
-
Peace idolfree1,
Lets for a moment imagine a scenario here.
U r heterosexual, right? So u r naturally attracted to the opposite sex. Now lets say, homosexuality was what's considered right & moral and so, u r forced(by ur community) to feel attracted to a man instead of a woman. What would u do? How would u feel?
Peace!
-
Peace
The reading does not tell us to force people to do anything. There is a no compulsion clause. However, if YOU adhere to the reading you will not go against its knowledge lectures. So in your scenerio, if the reading said homosexuality was the way, then those who adhere to it are practicing homosexuals who do not force heterosexuals to be the same due to the clause of no compulsion.
O mankind! reverence your Guardian-Lord, who created you from a single person (female), created, of like nature, Her mate (the female), and from them twain scattered (like seeds) countless men and women;- reverence Allah, through whom ye demand your mutual (rights), and (reverence) the wombs (That bore you) for Allah ever watches over you.
Edited to fit new scenerio.
Joe
-
Peace
Peace
In my opinion homosexuality is an immoral ACT, this however, does not mean the person is immoral.
To me this statement is contradictory. How do you explain it? The person who sins is a sinner right? The one who abstains is an abstainer correct?
Joe
sure. The same contradiction when we say perversion - pervert - nothing against you though
-
Peace Nabi,
Can anyone(heterosexual) get turned on by a member of the same sex just becoz some charachter in tv does?
It may be possible with the thought implanted in one's head, "I can do this, and look, it's okay". I do not think anyone is stating that tv makes people do things, however it influences one's considerations. Keep in mind how God speaks of the power of suggestion.I agree there is something called power of suggestion. But not to the extent of turning one into a homosexual against his wishes.
We dont do things just becoz "I can do this, and look, it's okay", do we? Propably it is , ''I want to do this and look its okay''? And 'want to' comes from one's own decission(feelings) and not through tv.
And moreover, What do shows such as will & grace convey about homosexuality? The message I get from the show is that there might be some men who are gay and they are just normal people with a different sexual orientation. I dont see it promoting or suggesting homosexuality to viewers as such. We see all kind of things on tv. If u take all that as suggestions that every human being will act on without analysing it in their heads, then we would be a sorry lot.
Peace!
-
Peace Zenje,
Peace Elena,
It is not direct violence but I find it intolerant, as much time it is repeated 'we are not against the person'
This is true. Atleast with most I've seen are people who are against the act. Sure, those opposing equate the act (not the person) to other acts, like child molestation, because they believe both are a matter of choice, not that both do the same thing or interchange in any way. While some may be disgusted at the thought of abuse or public indecency or any other "crime"... others see it in the same light.Following the first lines underlined, I understand better them, just they compare both things based on they think both things are a matter of choice.
Why do they see it in the same light? Is it the same or it is not?Peace idolfree,
I still don't understand your use of the word perversion. You call perversion many things, even blindness, joined twins, homosexuality, hermafrodites, chilldren molestation and bestiality, all together and all those people are to blame for their condition you said in another thread where you and I discussed this.
-
Peace be upon you Peace,
In my opinion homosexuality is an immoral ACT
Well said! D
this however, does not mean the person is immoral
Correct, they are only immoral when the are performing sex with teh same gender, otherwise they could be very moral when it comes t other aspects of life, annd for this reason we do not attack the person, but we speak out against immorality.
The reason I believe it is immoral is because of the fact that its only purpose is for pleasure, or to satisfy lust.
Let me add to this, it is blind following of the emotional nature. It is not just that the person is seeking to satisfy an incorrect emotional urge, but the act itself leads to the end of mankind.
With this line of reasoning though, people will say, that we shouldn't then go on roller coaster rides (they serve no purpose except excitement), we shouldn't watch a show like seinfeld, and on and on.
Riding roller coasters and watching Seinfeld do not prevent the species from continuing. We reason first, if there is no harm in the action, hen we ALLOW pleasure to follow. This is the proper sequence, however, the majority of mankind FOLLOW emotions.
Therefore, this argument won't stand ground, unless we decide that anything which only fulfills the purpose of pleasure or entertainment is something we shouldn't do.
Pleasure is an emotional state, just like jealousy, envy, etc. Lets talk for a moment about what happens in the body when we get into an emotional state, our blood leaves teh vital organs and is moved to the organs of "fight or flight", and if this is maintained for too long, we starve our vital organs (brain for example). This is the OBJECTIVITY behind the statement "stress is deadly". So pleasure should not be maintained for long periods eaith, instead we should remain at PEACE, allowing pleasure in the proper amounts. So its not that we should avoid situations that cause pleasure, if the action is healthy and does not effect society, we can allow the pleasure to follow, but should soon get back to peace.
One should follow up and look at the statistics of lottery winners and thier death and illness rate.
Unfortunately, I cannot foresee any arguments then that will work to discredit homosexuality, unless we simply say that its a test that some people have to overcome, just like we say eating pig meat is prohibited. This however, is one of the shittiest arguments, and doesn't sit well with logic. It's like saying "cause God said so". Since, I cannot come up with a good argument for why homosexuality is immoral, I will stop believing that it is so. I'll try to remain neutral on the subject.
Please see my argument above. Also, please refrain from the foul language, respectfully.
Lotetree made the argument that these days sex is for pleasure first, and procreation second. I agree with this view; today sex is foremost for pleasure, unfortunately this doesnt mean it is right. Simply because this view is in the majority, doesn't make it the right view. I think society has to turn this around, and make sex first for procreation and second for pleasure. People having sex just for pleasure, has led to a lot of unwanted pregnancies, and single parent families that pervade society today.
Well said.
Another argument that has been made is that if nature does it (we are nature too I guess, but I mean the animal kingdom), then it's alright. This doesn't stand up to reason because animals do a lot of things that we've agreed aren't right. Should we run around killing our enemies children because animals in the wild do it? I doubt you'll say yes. We cannot therefore, rely on what animals do, to guide our actions as humans.
well said.
I think we have to analyze where we get our morals from, before we'll make any headway on this discussion. If it's from the book that people have titled the Quran, then we have to decide whether or not the Quran actually prohibits homosexuality. If it's from the conscience we all say we're born with, then we have to decide where we got this conscience, and can it be wrong (seems to create a lot of problems, and arguments that lead no where). Before we can decide why homosexuality is wrong, we must decide what wrong is, if we are going to be able to use reason and logic to solve this problem.
Universal law clarifies this all for us, but we have to leave emotions out to see it
I hope I've made some sense
Very much so.