Renaissance_Man

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/09/homosexuality-lgbt-iraq-iran-muqtada-sadr.html
 
BAGHDAD – Human Rights Watch (HRW) has praised Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr for publicly advocating a humanitarian stance toward the LGBT community, saying they should not be subjected to violence. Last month, Joe Stork, HRW's deputy Middle East director, said, “His statement represents an important change in the right direction and should be followed by concrete actions to protect LGBT people from violence.”

 
In a rare, unexpected statement on July 7 about the LGBT community, the leader of the Sadrist movement declared, “[You] must disassociate from them and provide them advice [but] not attack them.” His comment was in response to a letter by a Sadrist supporter who complained about men “acting like women” and “suspicious relations between people of the same gender,” referring to homosexual relationships.
HRW has documented “serious abuses” by various Iraqi groups, including Sadrists, against LGBT people, who have become a social community in the country. The human rights organization said, “We hope this [new stance by Sadr] will change behavior in successors to the Mahdi Army and other ranks and spur the government to hold accountable those who commit these crimes.”
The issue has grabbed the attention of Iraqi and Arab media. Sadr’s statement has generated controversy because it contrasts with the positions of other clerics and religious institutions, namely, other Shiite scholars in Iraq as well as in Iran. While clerics in both states preach that Islam forbids homosexuality, the difference lies in the way to address it.
Sheikh Hussein al-Hashan, a Lebanese Islamic scholar, said in a paper published in the electronic magazine Bayynat, “Forbidding homosexuality in Islamic law is unquestionable as stipulated in many Quranic verses.” Instead of dealing with homosexual behavior as a punishable offense, however, Hashan believes it should be approached as a treatable mental and physical issue. “Treating” people for homosexuality is a common perspective in Islam, but one challenged by the medical community, which considers sexuality an innate characteristic, not a condition in need of being “cured.”
In Iraq and Lebanon punishment for homosexuality is not stipulated by the law. The situation in Iran, however, is different. Iran's Sharia-based constitution holds homosexuality to be a crime punishable by death. Lesbians, however, can be punished with 100 lashes under Iranian law.
Commenting on the reasons behind the differing attitudes toward punishment between Iraq and Iran although both countries follow Twelver Shiism, Najaf Hussein al-Khoshaimi, a cleric and Islamic scholar, told Al-Monitor, “The judicial system in Iran is based on the velayet-e faqih [guardianship of jurists], by which Sharia is incorporated into the state. In [Iraq], however, the rules of Islam are separate from the democratic system.” In short, he explained, the two approach Shiite principles on the implementation of Islamic punishments from different perspectives. In Iraqi Shiite thought, Islamic punishments cannot be meted out until the 12th imam returns to create an Islamic state.
Although homosexuals in Iran face harsh conditions and punishment, the first supreme leader of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, left a door open for transsexuals by issuing a fatwa in 1986 allowing sex reassignment surgeries. In fact, such procedures are subsidized by the state.
Ali Murad, a political analyst, told Al-Monitor, “Clerics in Iraq are the most prominent and influential players in opinion making, influencing and orienting opinions. They have the moral right to interfere in all of the state's affairs and the smallest details of the people’s social life.”
The political author and analyst Hamza Genahee agreed, telling Al-Monitor, “Clerics have a role in Iraqi political and social life.” He added, however, “The religious authority in Najaf only interferes to regulate social affairs, and many of its fatwas are mere responses and answers to the people’s questions.”
Religiosity is widespread in Iraq, which has contributed to a social culture that requires people to essentially abide by the teachings of Islam. Thus wearing the hijab, for example, has become widespread, and other signs of religious commitment are visible everywhere. This in part stems from the efforts of Islamic preachers.
Such influence is perhaps why in June the Najaf police reportedly arrested two gay men celebrating their informal marriage. The men defended themselves by pointing to an unidentified fatwa to claim that their marriage did not contradict Sharia.
Mithal al-Alusi of the Civil Democratic Alliance told Al-Monitor, “Muqtada al-Sadr's position is in line with the stance of most Iraqis rejecting all forms of violence, be it against homosexuals or others,” calling Sadr's position a “message of tolerance.” Hassan Kallabi, a social researcher and health worker at the Hamza al-Gharbi Hospital, in part views the situation similarly. According to him, “The majority in Iraq renounces homosexuality but does not support violence against homosexuals.”

 
 
 

http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2016/09/homosexuality-lgbt-iraq-iran-muqtada-sadr.html
 
BAGHDAD – Human Rights Watch (HRW) has praised Shiite cleric Muqtada al-Sadr for publicly advocating a humanitarian stance toward the LGBT community, saying they should not be subjected to violence. Last month, Joe Stork, HRW's deputy Middle East director, said, “His statement represents an important change in the right direction and should be followed by concrete actions to protect LGBT people from violence.”

 
In a rare, unexpected statement on July 7 about the LGBT community, the leader of the Sadrist movement declared, “[You] must disassociate from them and provide them advice [but] not attack them.” His comment was in response to a letter by a Sadrist supporter who complained about men “acting like women” and “suspicious relations between people of the same gender,” referring to homosexual relationships.
HRW has documented “serious abuses” by various Iraqi groups, including Sadrists, against LGBT people, who have become a social community in the country. The human rights organization said, “We hope this [new stance by Sadr] will change behavior in successors to the Mahdi Army and other ranks and spur the government to hold accountable those who commit these crimes.”
The issue has grabbed the attention of Iraqi and Arab media. Sadr’s statement has generated controversy because it contrasts with the positions of other clerics and religious institutions, namely, other Shiite scholars in Iraq as well as in Iran. While clerics in both states preach that Islam forbids homosexuality, the difference lies in the way to address it.
Sheikh Hussein al-Hashan, a Lebanese Islamic scholar, said in a paper published in the electronic magazine Bayynat, “Forbidding homosexuality in Islamic law is unquestionable as stipulated in many Quranic verses.” Instead of dealing with homosexual behavior as a punishable offense, however, Hashan believes it should be approached as a treatable mental and physical issue. “Treating” people for homosexuality is a common perspective in Islam, but one challenged by the medical community, which considers sexuality an innate characteristic, not a condition in need of being “cured.”
In Iraq and Lebanon punishment for homosexuality is not stipulated by the law. The situation in Iran, however, is different. Iran's Sharia-based constitution holds homosexuality to be a crime punishable by death. Lesbians, however, can be punished with 100 lashes under Iranian law.
Commenting on the reasons behind the differing attitudes toward punishment between Iraq and Iran although both countries follow Twelver Shiism, Najaf Hussein al-Khoshaimi, a cleric and Islamic scholar, told Al-Monitor, “The judicial system in Iran is based on the velayet-e faqih [guardianship of jurists], by which Sharia is incorporated into the state. In [Iraq], however, the rules of Islam are separate from the democratic system.” In short, he explained, the two approach Shiite principles on the implementation of Islamic punishments from different perspectives. In Iraqi Shiite thought, Islamic punishments cannot be meted out until the 12th imam returns to create an Islamic state.
Although homosexuals in Iran face harsh conditions and punishment, the first supreme leader of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini, left a door open for transsexuals by issuing a fatwa in 1986 allowing sex reassignment surgeries. In fact, such procedures are subsidized by the state.
Ali Murad, a political analyst, told Al-Monitor, “Clerics in Iraq are the most prominent and influential players in opinion making, influencing and orienting opinions. They have the moral right to interfere in all of the state's affairs and the smallest details of the people’s social life.”
The political author and analyst Hamza Genahee agreed, telling Al-Monitor, “Clerics have a role in Iraqi political and social life.” He added, however, “The religious authority in Najaf only interferes to regulate social affairs, and many of its fatwas are mere responses and answers to the people’s questions.”
Religiosity is widespread in Iraq, which has contributed to a social culture that requires people to essentially abide by the teachings of Islam. Thus wearing the hijab, for example, has become widespread, and other signs of religious commitment are visible everywhere. This in part stems from the efforts of Islamic preachers.
Such influence is perhaps why in June the Najaf police reportedly arrested two gay men celebrating their informal marriage. The men defended themselves by pointing to an unidentified fatwa to claim that their marriage did not contradict Sharia.
Mithal al-Alusi of the Civil Democratic Alliance told Al-Monitor, “Muqtada al-Sadr's position is in line with the stance of most Iraqis rejecting all forms of violence, be it against homosexuals or others,” calling Sadr's position a “message of tolerance.” Hassan Kallabi, a social researcher and health worker at the Hamza al-Gharbi Hospital, in part views the situation similarly. According to him, “The majority in Iraq renounces homosexuality but does not support violence against homosexuals.”

 
 
 

The Qur'an uses the word Injeel to mean two different things. One is the revelation given to Jesus, which clearly can't be the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John. The other sense in which the word Injeel is used is to mean the teachings of Jesus in the Christian scriptures. It's certainly not 'the Bible', or even the New Testament.
And no, we don't believe the Bible is a corrupted version of the Qur'an. I have no idea where you got that from.
The idea that the Muhammad was taking inspiration for the Qur'an from the Bible, but simply got some details wrong is pretty laughable since the Qur'an clearly attacks some major Christian beliefs like the Trinity, Jesus being God, Jesus being crucified, God having a son, etc. These are hardly 'details'.
Now, what you are expecting us to believe is that the author of the Qur'an thought that the Bible wasn't corrupted, but at the same time directly contradicted major teachings of the Bible. How is that possible? You might say that he didn't know what was in the Bible, but then somehow he knew about all these Biblical stories in detail. Additionally Christians say that the Qur'an contains a whole host of non-Canonical Christian and Jewish literature. So it sounds like the author of the Qur'an had quite the impressive library. But yeah, he didn't know that the crucifixion of Jesus was in Christian scriptures, and was telling them that these were infallible...

Sheer nonsense.  The media portrayed the genocide of over innocent 300,000 civilians as a military victory, and most people have been programmed to believe that lie.  Just like the Iraq war and other military campaigns today.
Japan attacked a US military base.  Rather than hit back at their military, we instead chose to wipe out hundreds of thousands of unarmed civilians using one of the most horrific weapons in the history of mankind.

Sheer nonsense.  The media portrayed the genocide of over innocent 300,000 civilians as a military victory, and most people have been programmed to believe that lie.  Just like the Iraq war and other military campaigns today.
Japan attacked a US military base.  Rather than hit back at their military, we instead chose to wipe out hundreds of thousands of unarmed civilians using one of the most horrific weapons in the history of mankind.

Sheer nonsense.  The media portrayed the genocide of over innocent 300,000 civilians as a military victory, and most people have been programmed to believe that lie.  Just like the Iraq war and other military campaigns today.
Japan attacked a US military base.  Rather than hit back at their military, we instead chose to wipe out hundreds of thousands of unarmed civilians using one of the most horrific weapons in the history of mankind.

That is when the Quran and ahadith were revealed. That was the primary audience.
A possible answer to this was already discussed above.
We are born to fully human beings (body and fully human soul).
Adam and Eve were born to hominids that though human in material form, lacked the fully human soul that was first breathed into Adam.
This is not the time or place to recount this evidence. There are any number of university courses and books out there that will explain it in much more depth and competence than I can muster. I refer you to this body of knowledge.
There are no theories of QM that say anything, plus or minus, about God.
There is no comparison between any string theory and evolution in terms of degree of evidentiary support.
General and special relativity are much better analogies.
Practically, this is not a possibility. The precise details of the evolutionary process will be unearthed, and the hypotheses of today about the more minor points will shift accordingly. Researchers of evolutionary theory will readily admit what parts of the theory are solidly established, and which are still awaiting further research. These minor points are not essential to the question of reconciling religious and scientific accounts of human origins. What is important are the major thrusts of the theory, and these are solid and stable, with increasing solidity and stability as time goes by.
We do not bounce our beliefs about as the wind blows, but we need to make a sincere effort to maintain a coherent, consistent worldview based on the best information available. If you have solid information about the characteristics of reality, you need to take this into account when understanding your religion. If you don't, you result in either an incoherent mental structure in which you believe in mutually contradictory things depending on the situation, or you give up one or the other.
Our ability to understand reality through scientific study is God given and God encouraged. we pride ourselves, in opposition to Christians, that our faith is pro-science.
If decades of careful research shows us that man's physical form came from evolution, then so be it. We need to take this as part of our background understanding of reality we bring to the reading, just like the theory of gravity, electromagnetics, etc.
Otherwise, to be consistent, we either need to abandon all scientific knowledge, or conclude that the Quranic account of Adam and Eve is just a fairy tale.
Those who wish to abandon neither scientific knowledge or the Quran are forced to something like my point of view.
False.
For all meaningful intents and purposes, scientists will unanimously (aside from the occasional crank) state their certainty in this concept. It's that well established. An ivory tower philosopher of science academic who has never done any real science might lose sleep over this theoretical .00000001% possibility, but in the real world, this is not how we go about our lives on virtually any other subject. A reasonable and benevolent God does not expect us to suspend judgment in the face of 99.9999999% certainty, because there are few things in life 100% certain and we need to get on with our lives.
I'm not implying anything. It's an aside, an observation. There are people out there who read these verses in such a fashion. It's one of the ways modern readers have suggested for reconciling religious texts and evolutionary science. It's not my preference, but it's out there. Look it up.
Who said we don't agree on the literal existence of Adam? You are leaping to conclusions. Stick to what is actually said without inserting your own assumptions.

17 hour fasts can admittedly be pretty brutal sometimes.  But let's put it into perspective.  A 12 hour fast in the scorching Arabian desert a millennia ago was no walk in the park either.  
We only have to do it for a month.  For many impoverished people around the world, that's a way of life.  The point of fasting in Ramadan is to feel the pain of our brethren and develop some empathy.  

17 hour fasts can admittedly be pretty brutal sometimes.  But let's put it into perspective.  A 12 hour fast in the scorching Arabian desert a millennia ago was no walk in the park either.  
We only have to do it for a month.  For many impoverished people around the world, that's a way of life.  The point of fasting in Ramadan is to feel the pain of our brethren and develop some empathy.  

Good observation.  I think the percentage of Muslims would be be closer to 33% if you consider the entire Indian subcontinent prior to partition.
 
 

Imam Ali AS :
There are four causes of infidelity and loss of belief in Allah: hankering after whims, a passion to dispute every argument, deviation from truth; and dissension, because whoever hankers after whims does not incline towards truth; whoever keeps on disputing every argument on account of his ignorance, will always remain blind to truth, whoever deviates from truth because of ignorance, will always take good for evil and evil for good and he will always remain intoxicated without righteous guidance. And whoever makes a breach (with Allah and His Messenger) his path becomes difficult, his affairs will become complicated and his way to salvation will be uncertain.
Similarly, doubt has also four aspects absurd reasoning; fear; vacillation and hesitation; and unreasonable surrender to infidelity, because one who has accustomed himself to unreasonable and absurd discussions will never see the Light of Truth and will always live in the darkness of ignorance. One who is afraid to face facts (of life, death and the life after death) will always turn away from ultimate reality, one who allows doubts and uncertainties to vacillate him will always be under the control of Satan and one who surrenders himself to infidelity accepts damnation in both the worlds.
 

Sorry but to compare the hadith to the Christian New Testament is absurd.  The gospels were written by unknown authors with a theological bent not eyewitnesses, contradict themselves at every step, and the authenticity is dubious at best.  Compared to the Bible, the body of hadith is vast and we have a  complex system for tracing the chain of narration and verifying the authenticity of the hadith.
Moreover the Islamic tradition is far richer and full of wisdom.  While I respect the Bible, its moral teachings are rather simple and uninspiring.  There's nothing really revolutionary in the gospels. 

Sorry but to compare the hadith to the Christian New Testament is absurd.  The gospels were written by unknown authors with a theological bent not eyewitnesses, contradict themselves at every step, and the authenticity is dubious at best.  Compared to the Bible, the body of hadith is vast and we have a  complex system for tracing the chain of narration and verifying the authenticity of the hadith.
Moreover the Islamic tradition is far richer and full of wisdom.  While I respect the Bible, its moral teachings are rather simple and uninspiring.  There's nothing really revolutionary in the gospels. 

Sorry but to compare the hadith to the Christian New Testament is absurd.  The gospels were written by unknown authors with a theological bent not eyewitnesses, contradict themselves at every step, and the authenticity is dubious at best.  Compared to the Bible, the body of hadith is vast and we have a  complex system for tracing the chain of narration and verifying the authenticity of the hadith.
Moreover the Islamic tradition is far richer and full of wisdom.  While I respect the Bible, its moral teachings are rather simple and uninspiring.  There's nothing really revolutionary in the gospels. 

The number of executions has been skewed by drug offenders.  I'd like to see the breakdown of executions for drug crimes vs others.  Unlike Saudi Arabia, Iran isn't going around chopping people's heads off for voicing disagreement with the government.  

The number of executions has been skewed by drug offenders.  I'd like to see the breakdown of executions for drug crimes vs others.  Unlike Saudi Arabia, Iran isn't going around chopping people's heads off for voicing disagreement with the government.  

Trump's foreign policy is blanket xenophobia and he changes his positions so frequently you can't be sure what's going to do.  Yes he's criticized Saudi Arabia and wants to limit US involvement in the Middle East so in that sense he's better than Hillary who's BFFs with Israel and Arab dictators, but again there's no assurance there because he's so unpredictable.
 

Trump's foreign policy is blanket xenophobia and he changes his positions so frequently you can't be sure what's going to do.  Yes he's criticized Saudi Arabia and wants to limit US involvement in the Middle East so in that sense he's better than Hillary who's BFFs with Israel and Arab dictators, but again there's no assurance there because he's so unpredictable.
 

@-justbrowsing, there is more evidence for evolution than there is against it.  Paleontology, microbiology, and many other scientific disciplines all affirm it.  It's the basis for advances in modern medicine and science.
 Evolution does not preclude Allah (SWT) nor our beliefs as Muslims.  It only means Allah created man gradually.  He remains the source of creation.  

@-justbrowsing, there is more evidence for evolution than there is against it.  Paleontology, microbiology, and many other scientific disciplines all affirm it.  It's the basis for advances in modern medicine and science.
 Evolution does not preclude Allah (SWT) nor our beliefs as Muslims.  It only means Allah created man gradually.  He remains the source of creation.  

@-justbrowsing, there is more evidence for evolution than there is against it.  Paleontology, microbiology, and many other scientific disciplines all affirm it.  It's the basis for advances in modern medicine and science.
 Evolution does not preclude Allah (SWT) nor our beliefs as Muslims.  It only means Allah created man gradually.  He remains the source of creation.  

Salaam

Some traditions on wearing rings from the book "Tahdhib ul Islam":

-------------------------------------------------------------
Another tradition states that Imam Ali (A.S.) used to wear four rings on his hand - one of ruby (Yaqut) for beauty and dignity, the second of Turquoise (Firuza) for obtaining Divine help and victory, the third of Hadid Chini for strength and the fourth of Aqiq to protect himself against enemies and all types of misfortunes.

The metal of the ring should be made of silver.  It is makruk (and according to another tradition haraam for men) for both men and women to wear rings made out of iron, steel, or brass.  According to Imam Jaffer as-Sadiq (as), the Holy Prophet (as) used to wear a silver ring.

According to Imam Jaffer Sadiq (A.S.) the Holy Prophet (S.A.) used to wear the ring on the first finger of his right hand and has prohibited to wear it ont he middle finger.  The Imam (A.S.) further instructs that the ring should be worn at the lowest end of the finger, where it joins the palm.

Also the ring should be worn on the right hand, although some traditions do allow it to be worn on the left also.

AQIQ OR CORNELIAN

According to a reliable tradition from Imam Ali Riza (A.S.) wearing a ring set in which Aqiq not only drives away poverty but also removes ill-feelings and dissolves differences from the hearts.  According to Imam Jaffer as-Sadiq (A.S.) this stone ensures one's safety if worn during traveling.

Another tradition states that praying 2 rakats namaaz while wearing an Aqiq ring is better than praying a thousand rakats without it.

Other traditions state that there are mountains of red, yellow, and white aqiq in Heaven.  These mountains shade the palaces of the Holy Prophet (as), Bibi Fatimah (as), and Imam Ali (as) and are forever praising and glorifying Allah.  This stone also had affirmed the Oneness of Allah, the Prophethood of Muhammad, the vicegerency of Ali and paradise for the friends and Shi'ahs of Ali (as).  A person wearing any one of these aqiqs he will derive its benefits, his sustenance (rizq) will be increased, and he will be protected from dangers, disasters, misfortunes, and accidents.  It will also be a protection for him in frightening and terrifying circumstances, like facing the oppression of a tyrant.

FEROZA (TURQUOISE) AND JAZ-E-YAMANI

According to Imam Jaffer Sadiq (A.S.) a person who wears a ring set with turquoise (Firuza) will never become dependent on others.

According to the Holy Prophet (S.A.) if a person prays to Allah while wearing rings set in with Firuza (turquoise) and Aqiq (cornelian), Allah does not turn the prayers down unanswered.

In another tradition, Imam Musa Kazim (as) says the feroza stone was brought by Jibrail (as) as a gift from heaven to the Holy Prophet (as).  The Prophet had passed it to Ali (as) and it had come down to him through his Holy line of ancestors.

YAQUT (RUBY), ZABERJAD (JADE), AND ZAMARRUD (EMERALD)

According to 3 reliable traditions from Imam Ali Riza (A.S.) wearing a ring of yaqut (ruby) drives away anxieties and worries.  According to Imam Musa Kazim (A.S.) it solves problems and eases difficulties and hardships.

DURR E NAJAF, BILLORE HADID CHINI & OTHER STONES

According to a reliable tradition, Mufazzal ibna Umar visisted Imam Jaffer Sadiq (A.S.) one day while wearign a ring set in whith Durr-e-Najaf.  On seeing the ring the Imam addressed Mufazzal and said that the very sight of this ring [Durr-e-Najaf makes hte heart of all Muslim beleivers, whether male or female happy and it cures pain in their eyes.  The Imam continued that he would like every faithful to have five rings on his hand - the first of Yaqut (ruby) as it is the best of gems, the second of Aqiq as this stone has sincere love for Allah and the Ahl ul Bayt, the third ring should be of Firuza (turquoise) as it gives strength and light to the eyes, expands one's wisdom and outlook, and strengthens the heart.  Whenever a faithful sets out for a definite purpose with a turquoise ring on his hand, he always accomplishes his purpose.  Fourthly he should possess a ring set in with Hadid Chini, but it should not be worn constantly.  It should be worn for self-protection when confronting a tyrant or oppressor of whose wickedness one if afraid of.  it is also advisable to possess this stone as it wards off the devil.  And the fifth ring should be of that particular stone (Durre Najaf) which is found only in the land of Najaf.  When a person glances towards his ring n Durr-e-Najaf on his hands, he receives the reward for Ziyarat, Hajj and Umrah for every glance, and it is included in his record of actions.  This rewards is equal to the reward of Prophets and pious people.  Had Allah not been merciful towards the Shias, He would have made Durr e Najaf a rare gem so that each stone of it would have been costly, but Allah had made this stone easily available so that both the rich and the poor could wear and benefit from it.

There's also several traditions regarding engravings on the rings, which I'll post if anyone wants.

Considering that Shias aren't hunted for sport in India as they are in Pakistan, I'd say India is probably safer.  Yes there is discrimination towards Muslims in general in India, that's true of minorities everywhere, but at least Shias don't have the constant threat of terror looming.  Personally, I'd rather give up eating beef than run into a suicide bomber on my way to the imambargah.
The biggest problem in Sunni majority countries like Pakistan where the masses are ignorant, is Wahabbism can quickly gain a foothold and spread like cancer.  Just look at how terrorism has mushroomed throughout the country with Taliban, SSP, and other militant groups sprouting everywhere.  Now in India, there's no room for terrorism to take hold thanks to the Hindu majority.  Shias and Sunnis are both forced to band together to protect the common interest of Muslims.  It's sad, but it seems that without a non-Muslim majority to keep Sunnis in check, they will waste no time in turning to extremism.
And for the record, I am a Pakistani who prefers neither country.

Unfortunately, even if ISIS is defeated on the battlefield they'll exist in some form as long as their Saudi patrons continue to finance them.  And given the recent flare up with Iran, you can bet the Saudis and their gulf allies will ramp up the support to terror groups to counter Iran.

I highly doubt that. Bernie is more determined now than ever given his surging popularity.  If anything, it's Trump who is running to win not to become President.  
Hillary is a bought and paid for Wall Street and AIPAC puppet while the other Republican candidates are itching to start WW3.  Bernie is the only sane option.