Jump to content
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!) ×
Guests can now reply in ALL forum topics (No registration required!)
In the Name of God بسم الله
Sign in to follow this  
Abu Lulu

Benefit For Punishing Homosexuals

Rate this topic

Recommended Posts

The reason they're trying to justify it, is because the media has done well to alter the nature of society. Next we'll see 'Muslim' participants in entourages at Mardis Gras'.

It's disregard for the severity of the sin that's let people down to this level.

Many people I know don't even want to send their kids to high-school because of the level of social corruption they can fall into there.

Nearly 60% of American youth have committed adultery by the time they've reached 18.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

.

If the secular world wants to apply this consenting adults criteria consistently, then it should immediately legalise polygyny, polyandry, group marriages, incest, and anything ese consenting adults might choose to do. Will they do that? Well, not with polygamy, which is at least moral and has a long tradition, but incest cases are going through the courts in some places. It's probably only a matter of time before it becomes legal too.

I agree, theres no obvious reason why any of those things should be illegal in secular society.

As for beastiality, it's not clear why consent should all of a sudden be required, when nobody asks the animals consent before making them breed, taking their offspring away, locking them up, force-feeding them, or slaughtering them

Breeding, is natural for them. I know some modern breeding practices are not natural and theres an argument that this constitutes abuse, but money talks. I became a vegetarian precisely because of the unnatural and cruel treatment of animals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I agree, theres no obvious reason why any of those things should be illegal in secular society.

Breeding, is natural for them. I know some modern breeding practices are not natural and theres an argument that this constitutes abuse, but money talks. I became a vegetarian precisely because of the unnatural and cruel treatment of animals.

I'm glad to see you are consistent in your beliefs on this subject, but I think you will agree the secular world is completely inconsistent on these issues, with none of the arguments they use to justify homosexuality being consistently applied in other areas.

With regard to animals, I could also have added animal testing and forced labour. Nobody ever cares about animal consent at all, and do much more things than beastiality to them, but then suddenly it comes about in the context of a homosexuality debate. Once again, it's just an excuse. You don't need consent to torture or kill an animal, but you need it to commit beastiality (has it even been proven this harms the animal)? Does this make sense?

Until secular principles get applied across the board in society, then it will be impossible to take their arguments seriously. Does anyone seriously want to live in such a society though?

If the consistent applications of principles leads to bad consequences, then that should tell people that the principles are flawed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't agree that bestiality, paedophilia and incest are comparable (as my ramblings in this thread have shown), though I do agree that there are many inconsistencies and double standards in western society, not only in legislation but also in public opinion. Polyandry, group marriages amongst others are frowned upon for no apparent reason (by their own standards surrounding consent and so forth) - other than what has has been ingrained into their moral subconscious by their predecessors. I suppose that such transitions and paradigm shifts take a while, one step at a time. In a secular society, distinctions should be made between the relative ethical grievances of different religious and cultural groups, and objective, scientific imperatives over legislation.

Edited by Psychopath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

but you need it to commit beastiality (has it even been proven this harms the animal)? Does this make sense?

Distress caused would very much depend on the animal and what was taking place i would think, unlike a child, an animal isnt going to grow up to perceive abuse of power the way a person would, but i think the issue isnt just the effect on the animal, its what it does to a human being to indulge such a perversion.

Edited by ~Ruqaya's Amal~

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Distress caused would very much depend on the animal and what was taking place i would think, unlike a child, an animal isnt going to grow up to perceive abuse of power the way a person would, but i think the issue isnt just the effect on the animal, its what it does to a human being to indulge such a perversion.

Yes, but homosexuality is a perversion too, but that doesn't stop people accepting it.

I don't agree that bestiality' date=' paedophilia and incest are comparable (as my ramblings in this thread have shown), though I do agree that there are many inconsistencies and double standards in western society, not only in legislation but also in public opinion. Polyandry, group marriages amongst others are frowned upon for no apparent reason (by their own standards surrounding consent and so forth) - other than what has has been ingrained into their moral subconscious by their predecessors. I suppose that such transitions and paradigm shifts take a while, one step at a time. In a secular society, distinctions should be made between the relative ethical grievances of different religious and cultural groups, and objective, scientific imperatives over legislation. [/quote']

Regarding the comparsion between homosexuality, incest, and beastiality, I have already said they are not the same. Homosexuality is not the same as the other two, and neither are the other two similar. All I am doing is showing the exact same arguments used to justify homosexuality also work for incest and beastiality, and any attempt to keep them illegal on other grounds just shows up inconsistencies in other areas of law. The reason for using these examples is that they are all sexual perversions (and have been seen as such since the dawn of time), but only one has been the subject of an large amount of sympathetic propaganda.

I find your comment about things being ingrained into people's moral subconscious interesting. Do you not think it is possible that accepting homosexuality, which has been the subject of an enormous amount of propaganda in the past few decades, is also something that has been ingrained into the moral subconscious, rather than the result of some kind of sudden evolution in the perceptions of the public, reversing attitudes that have been held for mellennia? I mean, just look at what a previous poster wrote, using Ellen as a reason to think there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. Are you really going to say the media does play a significant role here? In fact, I doubt that prior to the mass-media age, it would have been possible to overturn society's views on homosexuality in the way that they have been recently.

Edited by Haider Husayn

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

(salam)

Don't use religion to justify your hate, since it's really disgusting.

When I was in high school, I would get myself in trouble with teachers for condemning gays. I remember once they showed us a documentary, and one of the guy's was dying from aids, and he said his mom would ask him to repent to God but he would say "why should I, I've done nothing wrong", I said "I don't feel sorry for him, because he is refusing to repent and acknowledge his wrong"

I would have an attitude of hating them and condemning them.

And I would be so upset at the Muslims whom act sympathetic towards them.

Believe it or not, I had no reason for my hate and condemnation but religion. Religion justifies hate when you believe in the religion...

Everyone acts according to their belief.

Just as you want people to tolerate gay people, you should also tolerate people whom condemn gay people.

You have to understand that not everyone is going to be right or agree on everything.

As of now, I don't have an opinion on gay people. I really don't know if they should be condemned or not, and I've basically condemned them through a religious cultural perspective.

I haven't thought of the issue enough to have an opinion not influenced by religion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Regarding the comparsion between homosexuality, incest, and beastiality, I have already said they are not the same. Homosexuality is not the same as the other two, and neither are the other two similar. All I am doing is showing the exact same arguments used to justify homosexuality also work for incest and beastiality, and any attempt to keep them illegal on other grounds just shows up inconsistencies in other areas of law. The reason for using these examples is that they are all sexual perversions (and have been seen as such since the dawn of time), but only one has been the subject of an large amount of sympathetic propaganda.

I find your comment about things being ingrained into people's moral subconscious interesting. Do you not think it is possible that accepting homosexuality, which has been the subject of an enormous amount of propaganda in the past few decades, is also something that has been ingrained into the moral subconscious, rather than the result of some kind of sudden evolution in the perceptions of the public, reversing attitudes that have been held for mellennia? I mean, just look at what a previous poster wrote, using Ellen as a reason to think there is nothing wrong with homosexuality. Are you really going to say the media does play a significant role here? In fact, I doubt that prior to the mass-media age, it would have been possible to overturn society's views on homosexuality in the way that they have been recently.

Yes, yes, I am aware of the point you are making. I'm not saying that there is no validity to using the same consenting adults arguments used for homosexuality for incest and bestiality. I am saying that in spite of this, they are non-comparable - but on different grounds. Whether society grows to accept incest and bestiality is not necessarily a reflection on whether it is good or bad. My stance is grounded on the genetic distortion that poor sexual selection - in particular, incest - will indubitably cause. Wider acceptance poses the risk of incest (just as in the case of homosexuality, in fact), becoming widespread. Once the taboo is eliminated from the equation and people ignore the obvious harms attached to incest, over a period of time, it is quite possible that incest will be integrated into the quotidian cycle of mate selection. The harms, for me, make the comparisons made with homosexuality false in their entirety. The issues surrounding incest embrace ethical dilemmas exceeding those which homosexuality involves.

I have no doubt that the media must have played a very significant role in penetrating the moral subconscious of the wider society. Indeed, as I mentioned to a different poster (and to you), this drifts away from the crux of the issue. As such, all it does is that it highlights one of innumerable variables which assist the transition or shift from one paradigm to another. They have little bearing on whether these things should beaccepted or not. The factors which lead to the change of norms and beliefs will certainly at some point, lead to the acceptance of things which shouldn't be accepted but equally, may lead to the acceptance of things which should be accepted (in a secular society, in particular). What may be considered a 'perversion' by a religious group should have no bearing on a diverse society with a number of different belief systems. It should be a little more objective - but this not even the case in Western countries; like you pointed out earlier, there are many inconsistencies.

Edited by Psychopath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My stance is grounded on the genetic distortion that poor sexual selection - in particularly incest - will indubitably cause. Wider acceptance poses the risk of incest (just as in the case of homosexuality, in fact), becoming widespread.

Incest will never become wide spread because it's disgusting to people whom don't even know about the genetic problems. People think it's evil and disgusting to think like that about your sister and brother, without the fact of genetic problems.

If there was no genetic problems, people would still feel it's evil and disgusting. It would never become common.

What may be considered a 'perversion' by a religious group should have no bearing on a diverse society with a number of different belief systems.

Why do you think religions condemned it and found it evil? Just a random feeling of humans? Why did humans in the past feel it was condemned?

Edited by MysticKnight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Incest will never become wide spread because it's disgusting to people whom don't even know about the genetic problems. People think it's evil and disgusting to think like that about your sister and brother, without the fact of genetic problems.

If there was no genetic problems, people would still feel it's evil and disgusting. It would never become common.

I have been reading your posts for a while now, and I have read about how you rejected Islam and so forth. I don't have so much of an issue with that though (your life; your choice), as much as I have an issue with how your reasoning seems to be lacking. I don't mean this in an offensive way at all but it does seem like you need to put more organisation to your thoughts and coherently structure what you have decided as being acceptable and unacceptable, and the rationale behind them. An example of this can be seen in your own post; you are still sitting on the fence when it comes to homosexuality. You have also conceded that your past beliefs caused you to 'hate' without reason - but even now, you haven't provided any explanation.

Homosexuality too, was once seen as 'evil and disgusting', but the tide has now shifted. If you had read my post, you would have seen my point about the impact 'taboos' have and how eliminating them will lead to an overall shift in social attitudes. This can be applied to a lot of things.

Why do you think religions condemned it and found it evil? Just a random feeling of humans? Why did humans in the past feel it was condemned?

It could be due to a whole variety of issues; I think it would be rather incongruous of me to speculate. Many different religions and belief systems consider many different things to be 'evil and disgusting', just as they consider different things to be righteous and virtuous. Different belief systems condemn one another all the time, and the reasons for their own convictions are also often limited. For this reason, I don't feel that this particular question is worth entertaining in the full context of this debate.

Edited by Psychopath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are a Muslim, 'gay people' absolutely do not have the same moral code as you do. Hell, the vast majority of straight non-Muslims don't either.

I don't agree. Honestly, I believe gay people can have the same moral you have. Having homosexual feelings doesn't mean you actually practice homosexuality. The same way, if a straight married man looks lustfully to another woman, it doesn't mean he committed adultery. You can overcome your homosexual desires, and you aren't forced to commit sodomy. Being gay isn't a sin itself, so why the hate? A good community would forbid any social expression of homosexuality, in order to prevent the spread. But there is no place for hate. People who suffer from homosexuality should be helped in case they want to overcome themselves. However, if a homosexual person is one of those people who blindly follow their desires, they deserve no help. And in any case, whether he/she wants to change or not, hadd must be applied.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have been reading your posts for a while now, and I have read about how you rejected Islam and so forth. I don't have so much of an issue with that though (your life; your choice), as much as I have an issue with how your reasoning seems to be lacking. I don't mean this in an offensive way at all but it does seem like you need to put more organisation to your thoughts and coherently structure what you have decided as being acceptable and unacceptable, and the rationale behind them. An example of this can be seen in your own post; you are still sitting on the fence when it comes to homosexuality. You have also conceded that your past beliefs caused you to 'hate' without reason - but even now, you haven't provided any explanation.

Your telling me a person find it's disgusting to sleep with his sister because of society Taboo? I never heard any school, preacher, or any propaganda about how it's digusting and evil to have sex with your siblings, it's a natural feeling.

I think the problem with you is that you think everything we think is dictated by society. Society through out history all around the world all condemn incest, and you think it's just because society decides, and not our notions of disgusting and evil.

It could be due to a whole variety of issues; I think it would be rather incongruous of me to speculate. Many different religions and belief systems consider many different things to be 'evil and disgusting', just as they consider different things to be righteous and virtuous. Different belief systems condemn one another all the time, and the reasons for their own convictions are also often limited. For this reason, I don't feel that this particular question is worth entertaining in the full context of this debate.

I think you have to prove we feel incest is wrong and taboo because of society. As a child, I was never told "don't think of your sister in this way because it's wrong", I felt t was wrong, disgusting. The reason society has always made it taboo was because of that feeling.

It's like saying we think it's wrong to have sex with your parents, because society thinks so. It's absurd. Whom feels this is the reason?

Your basically telling me the reason why I find it disgusting and evil to have sex with my mom or dad or brother or sister, is because society dictates it?

I was arguing we naturally feel it's evil and disgusting, and society won't move towards it period because of that.

There is no way you can take away this natural feeling. It wasn't propaganda that made us feel strongly against it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not saying that it is the reason why it is wrong. I am saying that once the taboo is eliminated, social attitudes will shift and it is very possible that it will gradually become accepted - just as the case of homosexuality demonstrates! If you are going to keep throwing words like 'propaganda' and 'natural feeling' (there is little proof or evidence for the latter - though there could be evolutionary reasons), this is a complete waste of time. You are getting emotional when anything being said threatens your own perspective - even if it is at a negligible level and randomly shooting points about natural feeling and intuition.

Edited by Psychopath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If you are going to keep throwing words like 'propaganda' and 'natural feeling' (there is little proof or evidence for the latter - though there could be evolutionary reasons), this is a complete waste of time. You are getting emotional when anything being said threatens your own perspective - even if it is at a negligible level and randomly shooting points about natural feeling and intuition.

There is nothing random about it. You are giving the impression why feel is wrong is because of society dictating a taboo. You make it seem possible this will become non-taboo in society. This is giving the impression that society can eliminate the natural feeling that is wrong, evil, and disgusting.

This is basically what you are saying. Which gives the impression, the reason why we find disgusting and evil, is because society is dictating it. Making it possible for society to remove the taboo and make it common, is giving that impression.

The fact is arguing for homosexuality based on consent liberty and all that stuff, is not good argument. The argument should be to shown why people feel it's evil are wrong. Not simply dismissing all our feelings of sexual immorality as dictated by society.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is nothing random about it. You are giving the impression why feel is wrong is because of society dictating a taboo. You make it seem possible this will become non-taboo in society. This is giving the impression that society can eliminate the natural feeling that is wrong, evil, and disgusting.

This is basically what you are saying. Which gives the impression, the reason why we find disgusting and evil, is because society is dictating it. Making it possible for society to remove the taboo and make it common, is giving that impression.

The fact is arguing for homosexuality based on consent liberty and all that stuff, is not good argument. The argument should be to shown why people feel it's evil are wrong. Not simply dismissing all our feelings of sexual immorality as dictated by society.

You may call it a natural thing, but you this was literally the same argument people brought (and still bring) against homosexuality. They will say we find it naturally abhorrent, or it is not the way nature intended, etc.

Hey Presto! Today we have a society which accepts it. I don't think you realise the sheer impact of taboos and traditional inclination towards certain issues.

This getting tiring. I don't want to keep repeating myself (and indeed others) over and over. I don't think you have seriously considered all the issues and I will no longer be replying to your posts on this thread. It is depressing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You may call it a natural thing, but you this was literally the same argument people brought (and still bring) against homosexuality. They will say we find it naturally abhorrent, or it is not the way nature intended, etc.

Hey Presto! Today we have a society which accepts it. I don't think you realise the sheer impact of taboos and traditional inclination towards certain issues.

This getting tiring. I don't want to keep repeating myself (and indeed others) over and over. I don't think you have seriously considered all the issues and I will no longer be replying to your posts on this thread. It is depressing.

You are proving my point, I know it's a natural feeling for sure, and it has nothing to do with society that I feel that way. If it's true that same reason we feel incest is wrong is the same reason we feel homosexuality is wrong, then this proves homosexuality is wrong for most people, because 99% of people will not be convinced the reason they find incest wrong and disgusting is because society dictates to them. Your view of morality is a minority opinion. You might as well dismiss morality all together and just believe it's an illusion. To dismiss it as social engineering our thought is absurd to most people, because they feel we have morality. Most people believe we have morals that are not just there because it's dictated by society.

You can dismiss homosexuality being wrong on the ground all our sexual morality is based on dictation of society. But it's a real weak argument.

People can even dismiss our natural feeling towards parents and brothers and family, as all dictated by society. It's absurd.

This is why I always thought homosexuality is a red line. If all our concept of sexual morality is wrong, then why not question our concept of incest? If that is based on nothing, then why not question our feeling of family and parents?

Basically it will break the foundation of family and ties of blood. Our feeling towards our uncles and parents and all that, is all baseless. We shouldn't feel anything more towards our family then towards other humans. But if that is wrong, why should we feel compassion and love for humans as well, maybe our whole concept of morality is wrong.

Basically you break the whole fabric of society. This is why homosexuality may very well be a red line. You cross that, then everything will eventaully be crossed.

"Yeah we feel it's wrong, but so what. We feel naturally it's corrupt but so what." This type of thinking is very dangerous.

This is why I am not taking this issue lightly.

Gay rights should not override the very fabric of society. You cannot say the reason why society has always felt negative towards homosexuality is baseless and not based on real morality by simply asserting so.

You have to prove that.

I'm confused on the issue, only because that I've been so use to condemning solely based on religion saying so. Now that I can think outside of that, I am going to have investigate if it stems from morality or not.

Edited by MysticKnight

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

God hasten the reappearance of Imam Mahdi (AF) so this world can have justice and order. So many "Shia's" on here are completely misguided and brainwashed, it's quite sickening to read. How anyone could defend homosexuality when it's in clear writing is mind boggling.

Edited by blazini

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Your telling me a person find it's disgusting to sleep with his sister because of society Taboo? I never heard any school, preacher, or any propaganda about how it's digusting and evil to have sex with your siblings, it's a natural feeling.

I think the problem with you is that you think everything we think is dictated by society. Society through out history all around the world all condemn incest, and you think it's just because society decides, and not our notions of disgusting and evil.

I think you have to prove we feel incest is wrong and taboo because of society. As a child, I was never told "don't think of your sister in this way because it's wrong", I felt t was wrong, disgusting. The reason society has always made it taboo was because of that feeling.

It's like saying we think it's wrong to have sex with your parents, because society thinks so. It's absurd. Whom feels this is the reason?

Your basically telling me the reason why I find it disgusting and evil to have sex with my mom or dad or brother or sister, is because society dictates it?

I was arguing we naturally feel it's evil and disgusting, and society won't move towards it period because of that.

There is no way you can take away this natural feeling. It wasn't propaganda that made us feel strongly against it.

The claim that society throughout the history has condemned incest is historically incorrect. Incest was accepted and practiced in more than one societies in more than one eras. Take for instance the case of Ancient Egypt. Incest was more commonly practiced by the royalty but it existed among the people too. Even as late as second century C.E., incestuous marriages were common in Ancient Egypt.

If incest was wrong not due to societal taboos but due to some undefined 'natural feeling', like human feeling of disgust toward foul smells, which can be justifiably called natural, incest should have been equally disgusting and abhorrent to all people in all societies at all times, barring, surely, individual exceptions which existed and still exist. It leads us to think that there are other reasons for viewing incest as an abhorrent practice. This is where societal norms and taboos, ingrained in people through history, moral paradigms, practicality and surroundings, kick in.

It is rather easy to speculate why incest didn't come to be accepted as widely as it could have been. Surely people of the past didn't know of the exact extent of genetic damage it causes to kids born off such unions (but they did have an idea as some Egyptian inscriptions indicate), a more potent reason I can think of is that incest blurred familial relationships. It is a cause of extreme confusion in identifying the familial relationship of an incestuous couple, whose issues (children) would have more than one relation with their biological fathers and mothers. Repeat it twice or more down the family tree and it is absolutely confusing. It is interesting to note that "sister" for Egyptians was a term increasingly used to refer to lovers, concubines and such, other than being the daughter of one's own biological father or mother.

As to your point that you were never explicitly told that sexual feelings toward your sister or mother was morally wrong (or disgusting), and that you still strongly feel it is disgusting, I think it betrays your understanding (no offense) toward how societal norms and taboos are absorbed by people as they grow in a particular sociocultural surrounding. Practices and customs which carry a perception of extreme harm are passed down in a society in a kind of invisible fashion to which humans accustom themselves and, colloquially speaking, turn it into their 'second nature'. You don't need a religious fatwa to work that out. You also don't need any explicit instruction to start feeling in a particular way about a particular custom.

Edited by Marbles

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

how societal norms and taboos are absorbed by people as they grow in a particular sociocultural surrounding. Practices and customs which carry a perception of extreme harm are passed down in a society in a kind of invisible fashion to which humans accustom themselves and, colloquially speaking, turn it into their 'second nature'.

Which is why a divine message is needed as a guide and to keep the definition of 'human and social norms' in perspective. Eating ham is normal and natural to most non-jews/muslims, yet jews/muslims are sickened by it. Similarly, eating beef comes naturally to Muslims yet to some hindus eating beef is unquestionable. Drinking alcohol is also similar in this regard. Rasoul (sawa) has a saying that repetition of a sin can reach such a level that when committed it's shoved away like a fly on the nose; and then warns by saying don't look at the smallness of the sin, but look at whom you sinned against.

And adultery&sodomy have become like that too. Major sins that are just shoved off and ignored.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't think we need to confirm that something is awful to say it's haraam. Surely there are halal acts that we dislike, and haram acts that we like (not ideologically, but lets say for example, listening to haraam music is something that some muslims like, although they know it's haraam). We can't differ halal from haraam based on our personal likes. No Book and no Prophet would have been needed if it was like that.

Same happens with homosexuality. It's haraam, like it or not. Don't justify it's haraam saying it's something awful, since it's not for some people. That's the reason we need guidance.

Edited by Bakir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do we explain this valid point that homosexuals bring up:

"if I was merely experiencing psychological deviance or if all this was just a 'passing faze', why would I go through all these family problems and face people condemning me? No one would face such tribulations .. unless they're Actually inherently Gay!"

This is something a gay person would bring up in order to prove that his sexual preference is an inherent part of him. How would you counter this?

I mean, it is a valid point if you think about it. If someone told you to stop going for Ziyarah or to stop reciting Salawaat, would you compromise that even if you're being condemned for it by your own family? Of course you wouldn't, and neither would I. Perhaps the same goes for homosexuals! Ever thought about that?............

Edited by Çåá ÇáÈíÊ

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You may call it a natural thing, but you this was literally the same argument people brought (and still bring) against homosexuality. They will say we find it naturally abhorrent, or it is not the way nature intended, etc.

Hey Presto! Today we have a society which accepts it. I don't think you realise the sheer impact of taboos and traditional inclination towards certain issues.

This getting tiring. I don't want to keep repeating myself (and indeed others) over and over. I don't think you have seriously considered all the issues and I will no longer be replying to your posts on this thread. It is depressing.

What angle are you trying to justify homosexuality? Are you stating that it can be justified within Islam?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The claim that society throughout the history has condemned incest is historically incorrect. Incest was accepted and practiced in more than one societies in more than one eras. Take for instance the case of Ancient Egypt. Incest was more commonly practiced by the royalty but it existed among the people too. Even as late as second century C.E., incestuous marriages were common in Ancient Egypt.

If incest was wrong not due to societal taboos but due to some undefined 'natural feeling', like human feeling of disgust toward foul smells, which can be justifiably called natural, incest should have been equally disgusting and abhorrent to all people in all societies at all times, barring, surely, individual exceptions which existed and still exist. It leads us to think that there are other reasons for viewing incest as an abhorrent practice. This is where societal norms and taboos, ingrained in people through history, moral paradigms, practicality and surroundings, kick in.

It is rather easy to speculate why incest didn't come to be accepted as widely as it could have been. Surely people of the past didn't know of the exact extent of genetic damage it causes to kids born off such unions (but they did have an idea as some Egyptian inscriptions indicate), a more potent reason I can think of is that incest blurred familial relationships. It is a cause of extreme confusion in identifying the familial relationship of an incestuous couple, whose issues (children) would have more than one relation with their biological fathers and mothers. Repeat it twice or more down the family tree and it is absolutely confusing. It is interesting to note that "sister" for Egyptians was a term increasingly used to refer to lovers, concubines and such, other than being the daughter of one's own biological father or mother.

As to your point that you were never explicitly told that sexual feelings toward your sister or mother was morally wrong (or disgusting), and that you still strongly feel it is disgusting, I think it betrays your understanding (no offense) toward how societal norms and taboos are absorbed by people as they grow in a particular sociocultural surrounding. Practices and customs which carry a perception of extreme harm are passed down in a society in a kind of invisible fashion to which humans accustom themselves and, colloquially speaking, turn it into their 'second nature'. You don't need a religious fatwa to work that out. You also don't need any explicit instruction to start feeling in a particular way about a particular custom.

I would also add that most people would consider a marriage between an uncle and his niece incestuous, yet this is allowed in Orthodox Judaism (based on the fact that such marriages are not forbidden in the Torah), and such unions are even supposedly praised in the Talmud. In some societies first cousin marriages are considered incestuous, yet in others they are extremely common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do we explain this valid point that homosexuals bring up:

"if I was merely experiencing psychological deviance or if all this was just a 'passing faze', why would I go through all these family problems and face people condemning me? No one would face such tribulations .. unless they're Actually inherently Gay!"

This is something a gay person would bring up in order to prove that his sexual preference is an inherent part of him. How would you counter this?

I mean, it is a valid point if you think about it. If someone told you to stop going for Ziyarah or to stop reciting Salawaat, would you compromise that even if you're being condemned for it by your own family? Of course you wouldn't, and neither would I. Perhaps the same goes for homosexuals! Ever thought about that?............

Decades from now, I can speculate pedophiles making the same argument. Therefore, this argument is at best of a strawman...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How do we explain this valid point that homosexuals bring up:

"if I was merely experiencing psychological deviance or if all this was just a 'passing faze', why would I go through all these family problems and face people condemning me? No one would face such tribulations .. unless they're Actually inherently Gay!"

This is something a gay person would bring up in order to prove that his sexual preference is an inherent part of him. How would you counter this?

I mean, it is a valid point if you think about it. If someone told you to stop going for Ziyarah or to stop reciting Salawaat, would you compromise that even if you're being condemned for it by your own family? Of course you wouldn't, and neither would I. Perhaps the same goes for homosexuals! Ever thought about that?............

Such and argument could be used to justify all kinds of deviance, but in this case it's easier because there is a large community of homosexuals out there, and there is also acceptance within the wider community. Even the more secular Muslims are starting to accept it.

How about if a person living in a Muslim country converts to Christianity based on some 'spiritual experience'. He could ask why he would do such a thing, and have his family turn against him, and in some places risk physical harm, if he wasn't absolutely convinced that he was on the true path. Does that mean that he is though?

The only reason you are having any kind of moral issues at all with regards to homosexuality is because the wider society around you accepts it and the culture you live in is saturated with pro-homosexual propaganda. If you were living 60 years ago, you would not even think twice about this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you were living 60 years ago, you would not even think twice about this.

I believe not all people are influenced by propaganda. I mean, I'm sure there are people who are really in favour of not punishing homosexual people. Though it's true that most people accepts homosexuality nowadays because of mass media.

Anyway, as far as I know, in Islam we weren't commanded to hate homosexual people (this doesn't mean we should go and have homosexual friends, that's definitely not a good idea), we were commanded not to commit any homosexual act and punish those who commit them if there are 4 witnesses that testify against them. I believe that the source of hate is just prejudice, or maybe because it's just disgusting, but faith isn't the source of hate. What I believe we should do in the West is ignoring them. We can't fight homosexuality because there is no place for that in the West. It's like if you condemn music in the West, they will call you crazy. The only homosexual people I would support are those who avoid homosexual acts and thoughts, since they are actually passing this difficult test. If there weren't homosexual people who overcome themselves to please Allah, I wouldn't care about any homosexual person in the world, since sodomy isn't considered a sin, but kufr.

Edited by Bakir

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I believe not all people are influenced by propaganda. I mean, I'm sure there are people who are really in favour of not punishing homosexual people. Though it's true that most people accepts homosexuality nowadays because of mass media.

Virtually everyone living in Westernized societies is influenced by the propaganda (and don't think I'm making myself exempt from this), the only difference is whether you realise it or not. You can't have something constantly pumped into your brain almost from birth and then think you are not influenced by it. The problem is most people are in complete denial, and mistake deliberate brainwashing for an 'evolution in human consciousness' (or whatever other nonsense terminology they want to use). The problem isn't even so much with homosexuality, it's more to do with a complete mindset. The acceptance of homosexuality is but one of the more obvious and severe symptoms of this brainwashing among Muslims. For the most part, Muslims living in the West (or generally in Westernised societies) do not view the world through the lense of Islam. They view everything, including Islam, through the lense of Western secular principles and morals. And then when they find a clash between Islam and Western secular humanism, what is it that they question? Islam of course.

That's not to say there aren't people who are not in favour of punishing homosexuals. Of course there are, just as there are people who don't believe in war under any circumstances. In my view, those who are squeamish about punishing people who engage in homosexual acts don't have that much to complain about with regards to Islam. The conditions under which someone could be punished under Islamic law are extremely restrictive, and almost impossible to meet in practice.

Anyway, as far as I know, in Islam we weren't commanded to hate homosexual people (this doesn't mean we should go and have homosexual friends, that's definitely not a good idea), we were commanded not to commit any homosexual act and punish those who commit them if there are 4 witnesses that testify against them. I believe that the source of hate is just prejudice, or maybe because it's just disgusting, but faith isn't the source of hate. What I believe we should do in the West is ignoring them. We can't fight homosexuality because there is no place for that in the West. It's like if you condemn music in the West, they will call you crazy. The only homosexual people I would support are those who avoid homosexual acts and thoughts, since they are actually passing this difficult test. If there weren't homosexual people who overcome themselves to please Allah, I wouldn't care about any homosexual person in the world, since sodomy isn't considered a sin, but kufr.

What makes you think I have any hatred towards people who are attracted to members of the same sex, or people who indulge in homosexual acts? I have already said in another thread that the Muslim community should do it's best to help those who have these types of feelings, and by acting in a biogted way it just makes it more difficult for people to seek help. As for those who actually take parts in these acts, I think they are sick and depraved people, but I don't 'hate' them anymore than I hate any other sinner.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What angle are you trying to justify homosexuality? Are you stating that it can be justified within Islam?

Nope. There isn't an atom of doubt that performing homosexual acts is haraam in Islam. My arguments are against comparing homosexuality with bestiality/incest/paedophilia. I'm not justifying homosexuality in Islam itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would also add that most people would consider a marriage between an uncle and his niece incestuous, yet this is allowed in Orthodox Judaism (based on the fact that such marriages are not forbidden in the Torah), and such unions are even supposedly praised in the Talmud. In some societies first cousin marriages are considered incestuous, yet in others they are extremely common.

Good examples. Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A true story:

Nearly a year ago, someone within the family told me that he was gay. After the news broke out in 2010 that the constitution of california endorsed same-sex marriages, i had a debate with my family friend about this (i was obviously obviously anti and he was pro). It was during this debate that he told me he was gay. I was shocked. I didn't expect it at all. Of course, he only told a few people, like myself, but he has kept his sexuality under the radar from his family. He told me that he thought that he liked girls but that this was simply due to peer pressure, and he realized he was actually attracted to guys. He even said he would marry a guy and even sleep with him if it came to that.

He said that Islam is very ambiguous when it comes to 21st century homosexuality and that there's a vast difference between the story of Sodom and todays Gays.

I'm still his best friend, since he's a really nice guy and i try not to let this get in the way. I don't think there is anyway i can convince him otherwise since he has good counter arguements. I feel sorry for him though. I find it hard to think that God would punish a good person like him.

Would it be right to be friends with him if he married a dude?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A true story:

Nearly a year ago, someone within the family told me that he was gay. After the news broke out in 2010 that the constitution of california endorsed same-sex marriages, i had a debate with my family friend about this (i was obviously obviously anti and he was pro). It was during this debate that he told me he was gay. I was shocked. I didn't expect it at all. Of course, he only told a few people, like myself, but he has kept his sexuality under the radar from his family. He told me that he thought that he liked girls but that this was simply due to peer pressure, and he realized he was actually attracted to guys. He even said he would marry a guy and even sleep with him if it came to that.

He said that Islam is very ambiguous when it comes to 21st century homosexuality and that there's a vast difference between the story of Sodom and todays Gays.

I'm still his best friend, since he's a really nice guy and i try not to let this get in the way. I don't think there is anyway i can convince him otherwise since he has good counter arguements. I feel sorry for him though. I find it hard to think that God would punish a good person like him.

Would it be right to be friends with him if he married a dude?

It wouldn't be right. If he's a good person, with a sincere heart, I'm sure God will give him the opportunity to change his mind, to think twice about it. God doesn't test anyone with an impossible test, he should be able to overcome that test. Islam isn't ambiguous about homosexuality, and the acts of the people of Sodom aren't much different from the acts of the 21st century gays. Sodomy is perfectly defined in Islam. He should be 100% sure about the choices he makes in his life, since sodomy, as I said before, isn't a sin, but kufr. I would recommend him to think about this life, about God, instead of what is good and bad according to the Western view. He won't fight his animal desires unless he realizes that the only divine guidance he will find in this world is Islam.

@Haider Husayn, thanks for answering. I really appreciate your view, I believe this would change the view of some homosexual people (probably only a few of them) towards Islam.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

He told me that he thought that he liked girls but that this was simply due to peer pressure, and he realized he was actually attracted to guys.

What does this mean exactly? Is he attracted to girls, just not as much as he is to guys? If so, then what he is doing is pure self-indulgence, without even having the mitigating factor of having absolutely no attraction for women.

He said that Islam is very ambiguous when it comes to 21st century homosexuality and that there's a vast difference between the story of Sodom and todays Gays.

This is nonsense. He is likely just parroting the argument pro-gay 'Christians' use. The problem is the story of Lut (as) is more explicit in the Qur'an as to why those people were punished. Also, does he not believe in hadiths, because there are plenty of them condemning homosexual acts. You could also ask him how he thinks a 'gay marriage' would work in Islam. Who would pay the mahr, amongst other things? The whole marriage process and contract makes no sense with two people of the same sex. This is because it was designed for a man and a woman.

I'm still his best friend, since he's a really nice guy and i try not to let this get in the way. I don't think there is anyway i can convince him otherwise since he has good counter arguements. I feel sorry for him though.

He doesn't have good arguments (none of them do), just appeals to emotion, and arguments based on unislamic premises (consenting adults, blah, blah).

I find it hard to think that God would punish a good person like him.

That is because your concept of good and evil is distorted. Define good as acts that God loves, and evil as acts that God hates. Now, do you think God loves people who engage in homosexual behaviour? If not, can you consider a person who repeatedly indulges in severely evil acts to be good? If we take 'good' to just mean 'a nice kind of guy', then God shouldn't punish anyone who has a nice personality.

Would it be right to be friends with him if he married a dude?

No. Do your best to guide him before that, but once he gets to that point leave him. To remain friends would be tacit approval, and you have an obligation of amr bil mahroof wa nahi anil munkar.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...