Jump to content
In the Name of God بسم الله


Veteran Member
  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Bakir last won the day on July 27 2019

Bakir had the most liked content!

Profile Information

  • Religion

Previous Fields

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

21,690 profile views

Bakir's Achievements

  1. World war against who? They are killing civilians. It's absolutely asymetrical. Any war against Israel and their allies is asymetrical. In the other hand, the cultural war, which imo was the last hope we could have, also seem to be completely lost. You don't stand a chance against so much lies and manipulation.
  2. I'm not ignoring you, I just consider I have already addressed your points rationally for future readers. If I consider the rest of the points or replies with severe flaws in their argumentation, it's not a matter of discomfort, but a matter of efficiency. I'm not convincing you nor any person who finds in your replies some logic and good reasoning. But it's not discomfort. I just felt discomfort when you spoke about the colonization of indigenous people in America in that way. I tolerate homophobia much better than racism and cruelty, as there may be many sociological reasons for the existence of the first one, but the second one is a different thing. Anyway, that's up to you to reconsider. This way of thinking is really scary abu hadi. Again, I would prefer homophobia to this discourse of yours. Homophobia is just plain hate, this is justified oppression disguised as rights. You are saying that our (gays) freedom is oppressing yours, without realizing that it is the exact contrary. I don't oppress you if you do mutah, or have more than one wife. This belongs to your personal life. You say gays mock your faith, but what about doing the effort of empathizing a bit? and consider that maybe you considering gay people untolerable in any decent society is also mocking not just their beliefs, but their existence and identity. Seriously, this discourse of yours is very oppressive in the worst sense of the word, and I don't really think it truly represents you or Islam. Historically, this way of thinking has been part of the worst people of humanity. Give a second read to your posts, we all fail in choosing the proper wording oftenly, but this is another level man...
  3. By the way, I believe gay Muslims do skip that 'phase' merely because there are many barriers to reach it: alcohol consumption, drugs, gay sex, etc. But the emotional and psychological harm of taboos, criminalization, shame and fear are still there. All of them aren't a good company for any person who want to build a serious life project, especially if they plan to marry someone of the opposite sex. They already start with a significant problem (which is lack of physical desire for them), and adding more to the mix is a pain.
  4. I cannot continue debating about the fictional responsability of gays to bring more kids to an overpopulated world to justify repression under the banner of some type of humanity. These ideological aberrations are not solved in an internet forum. There are diverse social and historical reasons to explain the relation between the homosexual community and HIV transmission. There is no doubt there is a link, but we cannot make transcendental assumptions out of sociological realities. It's like saying that black people are more ignorant in general without taking into consideration the lack of universities, for example, in the areas and cities where there is higher black population. Homosexuals have historically lived in highly repressive contexts. After reaching an age where they experience some freedom, there is a "phase" where sexual exploration becomes almost like an addiction. And this has transformed gay culture itself, turning its spaces and entertainment activities all related to sex (and also drugs due to the disinhibition they offer to their users). I think it's very positive to talk against this, to do efforts to change this, instead of criminalizing gays altogether and blaming them for HIV transmission. To be honest, I fear that this gay culture so related to sex is something that is gradually changing in younger generations that have been educated with more freedom, or at least lacking the fear that others like me have grown with. I feel we need to change gay (sex) culture urgently, but that is not by returning to the culture of taboos, because that has already failed. I believe in a culture where we can talk about these feelings without terrible shame or fear. And I believe that is still compatible with considering the acts a sin. I would have loved to be able to freely say how I felt to my close ones even though I had no plans on acting against Islam (and as I have always said, I didn't leave Islam for this issue).
  5. There is absolutely no evidence for this. I'm VERY exhausted of people lile you who bring ideas with zero support and expect us to debate them. No, I'm not debating the idea we have the power to turn straights into gays. There is no record in history of this ever happening. In fact, the only thing that we know for sure that happens because there is actual social research to back it up is the systematic non-scientific and usually oppressive conversion therapies, and their goal is to turn gays into straights. Hope you realize the injustice of the content of your discourse. I'm doing my best to understand why you lack so much humanity. I can understand the causes of your homophobia, and bear it in a debate. But this is utterly disgusting. WHAT THE ****** HELL IS WRONG WITH NATIVES LIVING IN THEIR LAND? Guys, for real, do you think this is tolerable in a forum where we are in search of the best of morality and manners? Is this even normal? You don't have to imagine alternative realities to demonstrate a point. You have to live in THIS world. And in this overpopulated world, let me be skeptic about the problems of the existence of queer people. Moreover, if reproduction was your only concern, I'm sure you wouldn't be against cis-gay trans-gay couples that, in fact, can reproduce. You can say "hey, but this is not the norm so it's not a valid point". And you will be right, but your point about Mars is not just not common, but absolutely not real. So if we are going to talk about the reality of things in general, let's work to increase the level of this conversation. Lastly, forcing people to have kids is against people's individual freedom. If a specific society wants to have more kids, instead of repressing the freedom of their citizens, they should support the circumstances that may make it more attractive. In a world where economy goes worse and worse, many straight couples are avoiding consciously having kids because of the increased life costs. If a society needs more workforce, the system/community shall support it. Putting all the blame on people who naturally lack desire for the opposite sex is nothing but inefficient repression, which can only be explained by one reality, which is why I'm here debating with you: Homophobia.
  6. Wow, what a spin... We are talking about sex, not about family structure and child's rights, which is an entirely different topic. By "sex is not a right" I was referring to the maths you were doing when saying that a couple of two men would deprive two women of having a man for them. Nobody has the right to be with a man or a woman, there is freedom of choice. If, for whatever reason, no one wants to be with you, either because there are no available partners or because no one wants you, you have to cope with it. You don't have the right to be with a person, because that would affect other people's freedom. So, depriving someone from having a partner of the opposite sex available isn't a point against homosexuality. It is as if you criminalize being single merely because a person of the opposite sex isn't going to have a partner. That is what I was implying when I said that "sex is not a right". And I acknowledge our point. In fact, I celebrate it more than you can imagine. Because if the existence of homosexuality in society doesn't break Muslim communities, it means there is room for tolerance without the need for acceptance. I personally know it doesn't, but I sometimes read here the damage it does to the "social fabric" (you have said this in more than one ocassion yourself) and I honestly don't see Muslims dying because of the existence of LGBTQ people. Rather, what may be killing Muslims in the West is racism and islamophobia. And as incoherent as it may sound, the people who actively fight against these also fight against LGBTIphobia. By the way, regardless of its etimological construction, this word doesn't relate as much to "fear" as it related to hate, prejudices, prosecution, and support for unjust legal and social structures against the LGBT community. Homophobic people don't fear gays, I wish they feared us. In this case, it is much more than their will. It is their very own moral judgement. As a former Muslim, I had no problem in surrendering my will to Allah. But I couldn't look the other way when it came to the moral judgement. The amounts of moral crimes that can be done in the name of Islam and be legal from a religious perspective is astonishing, and I won't support any ideology or religion this far. Moreover, one shall understand that regardless of our beliefs, we live in a diverse (and secular) society, and our freedom ends where others' start. Individual freedom must be respected, otherwise, if you expect to impose a repressive law on society (such as the prohibition of homosexuality), don't expect to do so with words, but with weapons (as they do in Muslim countries where prosecution and murdering is rather common, both from the State -police, and citizens or militia). Guess Islam supports that too (at least their "representatives" do). This whole paragraph is a bit messy. Human beings and society can make their own morality. This is a fact, as we have in history different non abrahamic moralities, before and after. Moralities are socially built within the creation of societies. And as societies change, moralities may also change. The appearance of religions themselves supposed a social moral change which made sense to their respective societies. Or do you think Muhammad or Jesus made magic and turned everyone into believers? They convinced their respective societies, acknowledging their respective problems, impressing them in their respective cultures. The poetry of Islam and the universality of its concepts isn't the result of a coincidence, but a crucial social factor that was genuinely taken into consideration. If the content of Islam didn't made sense at a moral and political level in early Arabia, it wouldn't have had support. We can say that Allah chose the right moment to send Islam, but lets not be naive to think that we were animals before Islam and Muhammad made magic to turn Arabs into believers. Islam itself acknowledges the human moral agency you seem to criticize. However, it says that one shall surrender and have faith in Allah, regardless of the doubts this moral agency may arise (I always point at the story of Moses and al Khidr regarding this dichotomy). It is also, as I said previously, the reason I left Islam. To recognize and preserve my moral agency. As what is good for society, it depends. It depends on each society and its conditions. That's the thing. It is relative. I understand that selfishness is there and it puts in risk the rest of society. We have seen that in this pandemic in many countries. But the moral discourse is intact. People can have a secular morality that speaks against their own selfish desires, and can obey that morality and its principles for reasons that go beyond their selfishness. I know you don't. Most Muslims I have met don't. They just reject homosexuality for religious and spiritual reasons, and that's perfectly ok. I currently work with the local government in a study group for LGBTQphobia here, and there isn't any link with Islam to be honest. Muslim communities in the West just tend to have problems with queer people when it is within their own ranks (kids, basically). I don't really like to link LGBTQphobia with Islam in general, even in Muslim countries, but certain discourses shall really change in favour of peace and tolerance to avoid legitimazing death squads.
  7. Happy to hear the doctors are positive about her situation. I wish her a swift recovery God willing. Usually once the recovery starts, things go well unless there are highly risky factors that may make her vulnerable (previous health problems mostly). Hopefully everything will go well. Take much care!
  8. Most media aren't covering these crimes. Social media platforms are in fact also censoring related hashtags. You barely can see any decent government condemning this. Same goes with the brutality in Colombia.
  9. You realize this can be strongly used against Islam, right? The bonds of society are constructed by society itself. A Muslim society as we know it would be broken with the acceptance of homosexuality. Not all types of societies. It depends on the society and how it shapes its morality. You can call it ad hoc morality, but the morality of people tolerating and respecting LGBT rights isn't worse than yours. Rather, it seems closer to the golden rule, and acknowledges rights universally. Believing in a God given religion justifies your discourse, but your point is far from universal.
  10. The integration and assimilation of LGBTQ people in society is the result of political fight, not some sort of hidden agenda. Otherwise they wouldn't have been repressed for centuries. Anyway, this may require much more than a quick google search. Sex is NOT a right.
  11. And even political. It has a name and it is "pink-washing". The major part of LGBTQ movements rather criticize this exploitation of the community. Not all of it, but the major part of politically active movements do criticize such exploitation. One shall know which started first. Feminism, or the Capitalistic adaptation and exploitation of it? Queer rights movements or the Capitalistic assimilation and adaptation of them? Any well learned feminist or queer activist know for well that thia fight is intersectional, and there is no long term goals within the capitalistic system, which is a crucial part of the historical oppression of women, queer people and other minorities (not to mention the rest of the world that doesn't belong to a rich country). Of course, you will also see queer people who don't share this discourse the same way you see latinos voting for Trump. Political analfabetism is destroying the world. From an Islamic standpoint, I understand there can't be support of LGBTQ groups, but mostly because Islam opposes same-sex romantic/sexual relations of any type. The only thing in common may be the fight against homophobia in its most apparent way. And even though Islam doesn't tolerate the practice of homosexuality or same sex couples, this is not based on some sort of demonization but on a religious commandment. I don't feel comfortable calling that "homophobia", nor I believe it justifies any type of prosecution or physical abuses. Nonetheless, as I said many types, these abuses take place frequently without the condemnation of religious authorities sadly.
  12. This claim doesn't support itself historically. The idea of non-normative families and households didn't benefit the economy and social structure of any modern society. Moreover, non-reproductice couples don't produce the most useful asset for the capitalistic system, which is workforce. Of course, you will see "gay culture" adopted and exploited by capitalism, as any other thing in society. But this is the consequence of the inevitable existence of gay people in society, not the other way around. Capitalism didn't create gays. They never have been of any benefit to it. There are a signficant number of queer people who act and lead a life according to their respective religions. Being gay doesn't define the way you lead your life (even though it influences you in many ways due to social stigma). Many of you who talk about feminism as an individualistic selfish movement seem to have no idea about feminism at all. Wanna know a good approach on feminism from an economic lens? Go read Silvia Federici. Considering that the LGBT or feminists movements are pro-Capitalistic or a creation of Capitalism is rather a sign of having no idea about these movements, both historically and about their own political discourses. I understand and know that Islam clashes with these movements in certain aspects, but that doesn't mean these movements are a creation of Capitalism or evil world elites.
  13. Absolutely. I honestly dislike debating people a lot about this topic when they complain about mandatory masks, restrictiond and vaccines, but the fact is that remaining silent leaves the door open for further misleading discourses that may end up even discouraging people from taking a vaccine that will most likely save their lives if they belong to a vulnerable group. My father died recently of covid and my mother is doubtful about the AZ vaccine due to the alarmism regarding the potentially lethal secondary effects (even though the % in which these effects take place are minimal). She can't be safe forever, the virus is definitely out of control and mutating. We can just rely on effective vaccines so far...
  14. This is something rarely seen on this site Abu Hadi, especially on this topic. People spit constant claims to speak about this topic with very little knowledge on it, and speak about solutions that have proven zero reliability. I wonder how there is so much support for conversion therapy in this site when not only it has no scientific support, but that actual research on the topic by the UN has proven that there are scam practices that are usually against basic human rights that take place behind these so-called "therapies". We can agree there is no biological evidence on the origins of homosexuality, and even if there was, biology was never a sacred or universal tool to justify the morality or inmorality of anything, so why does this even matters to anyone? The whole topic is pointless at all levels because it's not relevant for anything.
  15. You mention science but then speak of the revelations of God. I admitted speaking from ideology, because it has nothing wrong to it. I don't build my ideology on false or unexplained premises, but on reasoning. There must be reasons to do so as well. Reasons can be based on social norms, antropological taboos, or ethics. Those who choose to repress their homosexual desires due to social or religious norms are free to do so, I'm not judging that. In fact, I think such support groups can be helpful for those who enjoy them and are looking for others in their situation fighting against their own desires. Of course, repressing desires isn't good or bad by itself. I must also add that I have deep respect for all queer people who decide to strictly follow Islamic rules out of personal decision. I have much more respect for them than many of their so called Muslim brothers. I'm just pointing out that no demonization of homosexuality is required to convince gay Muslims to follow Islamic rules. Those who follow them do it because they believe in Islam, not because they see homosexuality as many homophobes see it. It's not repulsion what they feel for homosexuality, it is the love they have for Islam what makes them choose this path. Hope I've explained myself.
  • Create New...