You thought LGBTIQ was it? Bestiality is next.

[AbdusSibtayn]

On 1/14/2023 at 5:25 PM, 313_Waiter said:

In Shia sources, we find the mention of a Hadith mentioning signs of the end times. One part of this Hadith has already come true with the acceptance of homosexuality and homosexual marriage in particular:

“And you will see men earn a livelihood from homosexuality and women earn a livelihood from prostitution.”

وَ رَأَيْتَ النِّسَاءَ يَتَّخِذْنَ الْمَجَالِسَ كَمَا يَتَّخِذُهَا الرِّجَالُ

The next part of this Hadith is yet to come true, namely bestiality:

”And you will see bestiality (sex with animals)”

 

وَ رَأَيْتَ الْبَهَائِمَ يَفْرِسُ بَعْضُهَا بَعْضاً

Source: Al-Kulayni, Al-Kaafi, vol. 8, pg. 36 - 42, hadeeth # 7, Mir'aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 25, pg. 82, Al-Majlisi, Bihar Al-Anwar, vol. 52, pg. 256 - 260, hadeeth # 147

https://www.al-islam.org/universal-government-mahdi-naser-makarem-shirazi/signs-beginning-revolution

 

May Allah protect us from this fitna.

Search about the 'otherkin' trend. They're already halfway there. 

[Borntowitnesstruth]

9 hours ago, kadhim said:

I can’t help but notice that you don’t have a response. 

I gave you all my responses, I provided you with ahadith that tell it's a forbidden act because it has no good thing to offer yet you obstinately saying words which do not have any connection to the ahadith to prove your point that it's unlawful in one way but lawful in other while you know that Ahadith have no conditions attached to it. All ahadiths are saying it's forbidden act but you want to make it your way as if Allah (عزّ وجلّ) has left religion open for fallibles to insert their own opinions. It's not like that brother. So, good luck with that 

[313_Waiter]

Guess I was wrong. 
The correct abbreviation to use is “LGBTIQA+”. With the + indicating that it’s ever evolving.

[Guest what]

On 1/17/2023 at 2:22 AM, Borntowitnesstruth said:

homosexuals make use of emotional blackmail to psychologically hack the straight people and turn them into gays and lesbians which is actually altering the natural behavior of unaware youth.

You cannot emotionally blackmail someone into being gay.. I agree that human sexuality may be influenced externally but you cannot turn someone who is attracted to the opposite gender into someone who is then only attracted to the same gender
 

On 1/17/2023 at 2:22 AM, Borntowitnesstruth said:

Well, it's you who is saying that gays have small impact world wide, the facts say otherwise. Haven't you witnessed world cup where it was being promoted at larger level? And, your thinking that it's not affecting birth rates may appear correct to you because you are unable to see it's effects whereas people are led astray by the homosexuals and turned from the natural behavior to unnatural one which actually ends in no procreation that is blow to birth of children.

As mentioned in the thread, gay people have had a small somewhat stable existence in the population for the past few decades. They have not dramatically increased because they are now “promoted” (also we are seeing more of them because they probably don’t feel as threatened to hide). Reality is it is 2023 where same sex marriage has been legalised in a number of countries and heterosexual couples are still the overwhelming majority (as in probably 97-99%) in those countries and everywhere else in the world. The legislation of same sex marriage did not suddenly mean half the heterosexual population want to be homosexuals. Birthrates have not significantly decreased as a result of same sex marriages so where is this threat of human extinction   

 

[VoidVortex]

10 hours ago, kadhim said:

 

Well, what do you know, here we have it. We have a couple of explicit texts saying “here’s the reason—It’s about preserving lineages and preserving population.” If those are the only reasons that were ever explicitly stated, it seems pretty silly to suggest those are not in fact the most important reasons. To suggest such would be to suggest that the aimmah just speak randomly on things without any measure or balance. If these are the only reasons named, it goes to reason those are, if not the reasons, then the most important reasons to talk about. If you want to claim otherwise, I think it’s on you to explain why the Imam would randomly only specify reason #47.

Imams speak to people according to their capacity. So did the Prophets.

It has been narrated an Imam proved the existence of God to an atheist of his time with an egg. We both know that if you tried to do that with a modern day atheist it wouldn't work. This is because it was sufficient for that atheist to believe in God with that example whilst an atheist today would ask for all sorts of scientific proof. If Imam Mahdi was not in occultation and an atheist asked him to prove the existence of God, the Imam would certainly satisfy him intellectually to a point where if the atheist rejected he would certainly be blameworthy.

It could be what the Imam said was one of the main reasons, however there are also other main reasons. I don't see how it would be possible to substantiate what the Imam said is the main reason. It would merely be an assumption unless someone analyses all sorts of things like the arabic used etc. which is above my paygrade. If your argument is based on this assumption that preserving lineages is the reason, then this argument can crumble pretty easily if this assumption is false.

My personal opinion which does not hold any real scholarly value, I feel that if Imam Mahdi were here today, he would provide the reasons why its been prohibited to a point that lgbt advocators would be intellectually satisfied, and their rejection of his proof would be out of pure arrogance or emotion and they would be blameworthy at that point. 

10 hours ago, kadhim said:

 

How many times do reformers argue along the lines of, “the most likely reason for this law historically was X, but that reason no longer applies or doesn’t apply to group Y, so we need to tweak it,” and then folks like you and Abu Zahra respond and say, “you’re just speculating; if you want to say X is the reason you need a text that says that explicity.” If I then bring you a text that says in fact the reason was X, and you try to dismiss that by saying, “well, maybe that’s just reason # 47,” then I think you need to admit that you were arguing all along in bad faith and that you’re moving the goalposts to preserve your original opinion regardless of what is presented to you. 

I never said that if you want to say X is the reason you need a text to say that explicitly, I asked whether you can prove that what is said in the text is the reason something is prohibited. You may be able to prove it, I'm only asking for that proof, I never said you need it to be explicitly mentioned as the main reason.

Its certainly the case that what reformers argue actually does apply sometimes, hence why rulings changed, such as the rulings on chess, or the rulings on music. Those who went against the consensus however justified their arguments very strongly and do not speculate, hence why their opinion is accepted, whereas normal reformers usually are lay people, which doesn't automatically mean their argument is bad, but in most cases because they are not equipped with the proper skills they make mistakes and are not able to present good arguments. For example, I as a lay person don't really know the basics of logic, let alone advanced books of logic. If a person doesn't have mastery of logic, their arguments will easily crumble to the ground. If a person doesn't have a mastery of arabic, they will make very easy mistakes whereas arabic can be very sensitive to the point where two minor differences in a sentence can change the entire meaning. 

some qualified reformers specifically some past maraje' unfortunately are pushed to the side which I disagree with, and I believe that instead of this, there needs to be more dialogue. I'm all for improving jurisprudence, but it has to be done by qualified individuals. 

[Guest what]

8 minutes ago, VoidVortex said:

If your argument is based on this assumption that preserving lineages is the reason, then this argument can crumble pretty easily if this assumption is false

It was not his argument it was yours. I asked why homosexuality is immoral in islam and number one answer everyone gave is that it can lead to human extinction (or something along those lines). It is not an assumption on his behalf either, because that is the reason you guys presented with hadiths. You cannot then call it an “assumption” and then say well it doesn’t matter if you refute our reason because you’re the one “assuming” it’s the main cause.. 

Aren’t scholars going to be some of the first to be questioned when the Imam does arrive or in the hereafter? If scholars are getting almost everything right then why are they being questioned 

[VoidVortex]

10 hours ago, Guest what said:

10 hours ago, VoidVortex said:

 

It was not his argument it was yours. I asked why homosexuality is immoral in islam and number one answer everyone gave is that it can lead to human extinction (or something along those lines). It is not an assumption on his behalf either, because that is the reason you guys presented with hadiths. You cannot then call it an “assumption” and then say well it doesn’t matter if you refute our reason because you’re the one “assuming” it’s the main cause.. 

I did not actually present a hadith nor did I give a reason for why homosexuality is prohibited. I also never assumed preserving lineage was the main reason. 

10 hours ago, Guest what said:

Aren’t scholars going to be some of the first to be questioned when the Imam does arrive or in the hereafter? If scholars are getting almost everything right then why are they being questioned 

The Prophet will be questioned although he is the greatest being.

Quote

“The Messenger of Allah has said, O community of the readers of the Holy Quran be pious before Allah, the Most Majestic, the Most Holy, in the matters of the responsibility that He has placed upon you toward His book. I will be questioned and you will be questioned. I will be questioned about the preaching of the message and you will be questioned about your responsibility toward the book of Allah and my Sunnah (the laws). - al kafi

those who have undertaken something which has responsibility will certainly be questioned. Scholars will be questioned because they bore the responsibility of guiding the community and deriving God's law especially in the time of the Imam's occultation. Someone being questioned does not necessarily mean they are deficient or they did something wrong, it could be because of the great responsibility that was placed on their shoulders when they were here on Earth. 

[Borntowitnesstruth]

22 hours ago, Guest what said:

You cannot emotionally blackmail someone into being gay.. I agree that human sexuality may be influenced externally but you cannot turn someone who is attracted to the opposite gender into someone who is then only attracted to the same gender

I have seen examples in the society where people were normal and because of a bad company turned to homosexuality. So, it's bad thing to do to someone. You should think before defending something awful.

 

22 hours ago, Guest what said:

As mentioned in the thread, gay people have had a small somewhat stable existence in the population for the past few decades. They have not dramatically increased because they are now “promoted” (also we are seeing more of them because they probably don’t feel as threatened to hide). Reality is it is 2023 where same sex marriage has been legalised in a number of countries and heterosexual couples are still the overwhelming majority (as in probably 97-99%) in those countries and everywhere else in the world. The legislation of same sex marriage did not suddenly mean half the heterosexual population want to be homosexuals. Birthrates have not significantly decreased as a result of same sex marriages so where is this threat of human extinction   

They are spreading like fire and affecting normal people, if you cannot see that you don't have any practical experience and you are just running on fake news. Birth rates have not significantly decreased? Are you sure about those who turned to gays and lesbians. They don't reproduce so it's reduction in birth rates. Humans are getting extinct as result of gays and lesbians, they do not have generation after them and if it gets recognition in societies, it will produce more gays and lesbians which will lead to human extinction.

[kadhim]

On 1/18/2023 at 5:40 AM, VoidVortex said:

Imams speak to people according to their capacity. So did the Prophets.

It has been narrated an Imam proved the existence of God to an atheist of his time with an egg. We both know that if you tried to do that with a modern day atheist it wouldn't work. This is because it was sufficient for that atheist to believe in God with that example whilst an atheist today would ask for all sorts of scientific proof. If Imam Mahdi was not in occultation and an atheist asked him to prove the existence of God, the Imam would certainly satisfy him intellectually to a point where if the atheist rejected he would certainly be blameworthy.

It could be what the Imam said was one of the main reasons, however there are also other main reasons. I don't see how it would be possible to substantiate what the Imam said is the main reason. It would merely be an assumption unless someone analyses all sorts of things like the arabic used etc. which is above my paygrade. If your argument is based on this assumption that preserving lineages is the reason, then this argument can crumble pretty easily if this assumption is false.

My personal opinion which does not hold any real scholarly value, I feel that if Imam Mahdi were here today, he would provide the reasons why its been prohibited to a point that lgbt advocators would be intellectually satisfied, and their rejection of his proof would be out of pure arrogance or emotion and they would be blameworthy at that point. 

I never said that if you want to say X is the reason you need a text to say that explicitly, I asked whether you can prove that what is said in the text is the reason something is prohibited. You may be able to prove it, I'm only asking for that proof, I never said you need it to be explicitly mentioned as the main reason.

Its certainly the case that what reformers argue actually does apply sometimes, hence why rulings changed, such as the rulings on chess, or the rulings on music. Those who went against the consensus however justified their arguments very strongly and do not speculate, hence why their opinion is accepted, whereas normal reformers usually are lay people, which doesn't automatically mean their argument is bad, but in most cases because they are not equipped with the proper skills they make mistakes and are not able to present good arguments. For example, I as a lay person don't really know the basics of logic, let alone advanced books of logic. If a person doesn't have mastery of logic, their arguments will easily crumble to the ground. If a person doesn't have a mastery of arabic, they will make very easy mistakes whereas arabic can be very sensitive to the point where two minor differences in a sentence can change the entire meaning. 

some qualified reformers specifically some past maraje' unfortunately are pushed to the side which I disagree with, and I believe that instead of this, there needs to be more dialogue. I'm all for improving jurisprudence, but it has to be done by qualified individuals. 

I don’t know man. I just find this to be a weird flex.

If this is the only information the aimmah gave us to reason about why it’s a problem for too many people to turn to same sex acts, it seems rather obvious we need to give that overwhelming primary weight.

Speculating about the existence of hypothetical other information that for whatever unknown hypothetical reason was not actually shared seems like grasping to be honest. This is not a stable foundation for legal reasoning. If you talk to people in the hawza, or people who have gone there, they will tend to tell you that they are rather serious about reasoning primarily/solely on what is actually preserved in the texts. Because that’s all we have. What’s the point of that information if we don’t actually take it seriously? 

I do tend to agree that the aimmah tailored their speech to their time and spoke to people in terms that people of the day understood. (This is, after all, a key reformist observation) The problem in this specific case is that, even today, with much greater knowledge about these things, preserving lineage and population is by far the most obvious, rational reason to be fearful of too widespread a practice of same sex relations. Straight sex and procreative relationships are how babies are made, so too many people don’t do that, we slowly or rapidly go bye bye. This is the sort of simple insight that was just as obvious then as now. That’s precisely why I don’t advocate relaxing the prohibition in general, only for exclusively gay and lesbian people. In general, all things being equal, the prohibition makes a lot of sense. It’s just pointless for those people specifically. 

So it just seems like you’re grasping to avoid acknowledging that I have a point here. 

[Ashvazdanghe]

On 1/19/2023 at 5:37 PM, kadhim said:

rational reason to be fearful of too widespread a practice of same sex relations. Straight sex and procreative relationships are how babies are made, so too many people don’t do that, we slowly or rapidly go bye bye.

Salam it depends on many things which you have just pointed western countries which in opposition of your claim we see more making children in war torn countries likewise Yemen or Afghanistan or etc which even China has stopped it's one baby procedure in order to increase it's population .

On 1/19/2023 at 5:37 PM, kadhim said:

That’s precisely why I don’t advocate relaxing the prohibition in general, only for exclusively gay and lesbian people. In general, all things being equal, the prohibition makes a lot of sense. It’s just pointless for those people specifically. 

The punishment is for grave sinners likewise gay and lesbian people not for ordinary people so therefore normal people must not face prohibition but on the other hand  gay and lesbian people must face too much prohibition & difficulty in oreder to leave their sin or at least don't spread it.

[Borntowitnesstruth]

On 1/19/2023 at 7:07 PM, kadhim said:

The problem in this specific case is that, even today, with much greater knowledge about these things, preserving lineage and population is by far the most obvious, rational reason to be fearful of too widespread a practice of same sex relations. Straight sex and procreative relationships are how babies are made, so too many people don’t do that, we slowly or rapidly go bye bye. This is the sort of simple insight that was just as obvious then as now. That’s precisely why I don’t advocate relaxing the prohibition in general, only for exclusively gay and lesbian people. In general, all things being equal, the prohibition makes a lot of sense. It’s just pointless for those people specifically. 

If a terrorist ideology does not affect other regions at the moment, it cannot be thought that it will not affect those region during the coming times and because of that it is an obligation upon a human to eradicate it. Although there are other reasons for it's prohibition too but the fact that rise in homosexuality may cause depopulation should be sufficient for you to reject it because how small an evil there be against goodness, it is to be uprooted. Homosexuality is one of soul diseases that cannot be regarded as normal behavior like the disease of serial killers who are addicted to kill people such an addiction is no benefit but only bad effects. 

I also wonder about how you take quotes of Imams. You think that Imam lived in a different time than ours and want to give an impression that yeah whatever they said for what happened back then but now time is different. The only thing that is different in our times is that our life is advance than theirs but human psychology and behavior is still same not to forget that Imams were ahead of all the people of their time and us. Our imams saw and solved those problems which baffle the minds who read their accounts today. They solved biological problems without the aid of DNA and helped people to understand psychological behavior. So, the problem of homosexuality was also know to them and also it was known to them that a behavior can be altered that's why they said anyone who tries to affect the manhood of man will be inflicted with terrible disease in this world. But, in all cases, they said homosexuality is forbidden not a single case where they have said it's allowed. Anyone who goes against our Imams just shows that his belief in him is weak. No one knows better than them regarding any jurisprudential issue.

Edited January 21 by Borntowitnesstruth

[notme]

On 1/16/2023 at 1:14 PM, Borntowitnesstruth said:

I didn't say that it is not. Didn't quote of Imam Reza (عليه السلام) made it clear to you that one of cause for which it is Haram that if it be practiced, it will bring human extinction. In another Hadith, it's written that homosexuality causes 72 ills in this world and hereafter. So what you didn't understand?

I really can't comprehend the claim that homosexual relations threaten human survival.  I only know my own point of view, but it's incomprehensible to me that apparently a lot of very vocal people either dislike heterosexual relations or desire homosexual relations to the extent that they believe that nearly nobody would form families and produce offspring if homosexual relations were not prohibited by the religion. 

Surely there must be other reasons.  Are any other reasons cited in our traditions, at any time, even just one of the 72?

[Abu Hadi]

4 hours ago, Borntowitnesstruth said:

If a terrorist ideology does not affect other regions at the moment, it cannot be thought that it will not affect those region during the coming times and because of that it is an obligation upon a human to eradicate it. Although there are other reasons for it's prohibition too but the fact that rise in homosexuality may cause depopulation should be sufficient for you to reject it because how small an evil there be against goodness, it is to be uprooted. Homosexuality is one of soul diseases that cannot be regarded as normal behavior like the disease of serial killers who are addicted to kill people such an addiction is no benefit but only bad effects. 

I also wonder about how you take quotes of Imams. You think that Imam lived in a different time than ours and want to give an impression that yeah whatever they said for what happened back then but now time is different. The only thing that is different in our times is that our life is advance than theirs but human psychology and behavior is still same not to forget that Imams were ahead of all the people of their time and us. Our imams saw and solved those problems which baffle the minds who read their accounts today. They solved biological problems without the aid of DNA and helped people to understand psychological behavior. So, the problem of homosexuality was also know to them and also it was known to them that a behavior can be altered that's why they said anyone who tries to affect the manhood of man will be inflicted with terrible disease in this world. But, in all cases, they said homosexuality is forbidden not a single case where they have said it's allowed. Anyone who goes against our Imams just shows that his belief in him is weak. No one knows better than them regarding any jurisprudential issue.

Exactly. The only thing that has changed since the time of the Imams((عليه السلام)) is various technologies. Technology comes from the the word 'art, craft', from the greek

https://www.google.com/search?q=technology+entimology&rlz=1C1GCEA_enUS865US865&oq=technology+entimology&aqs=chrome..69i57.5830j0j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

It is related to 'technique' or how we do a certain thing. We drive cars, buses, ride in airplanes, etc. That's how we get around. In the days of the Imams people rode horses and camels. Its a way of getting around, just a different way. People assume that because technology has changed, that means human behaviour and the spiritual / emotional/ psychological structure of human beings has also changed. I haven't seen any evidence that it has. The Sharia addresses this nature, it has nothing to do with technology. We use technology like the Internet to have discussions about Sharia that happened in person before or thru writing letters, but again that is just technology not content. 

Also some aspects of culture, even Arabic culture, has changed since the time of the Imams((عليه السلام)), but technology and culture have been constantly changing throughout human history. 

Culture and technology are part of the smaller picture of humanity and human experience. They are this way one day and that way the next. Islam addresses the big picture, i.e. the entirely of human existence both in this world and the next and gives humans beings the 'path' to happiness in both worlds. 

Edited January 21 by Abu Hadi

[Borntowitnesstruth]

4 hours ago, notme said:

I really can't comprehend the claim that homosexual relations threaten human survival.  I only know my own point of view, but it's incomprehensible to me that apparently a lot of very vocal people either dislike heterosexual relations or desire homosexual relations to the extent that they believe that nearly nobody would form families and produce offspring if homosexual relations were not prohibited by the religion. 

Well, it is incomprehensible to you because you don't want to look at that side and not impartial to it. If you were impartial, you would have seen how media programming is trying to distort the minds of children to believe that it is just a natural phenomenon while you and I know that bad habits can be instilled in a human and they can't regarded as natural because natural things always have positive results unlike bad habits. 

About the second part, it is to be noted that Allah (عزّ وجلّ) and Ahlebait (عليه السلام) considered it Haram and threat to human survival both physically and spiritually, you should not really be worried about what other vocal people have to say if you really believe in Ahlebait (عليه السلام). Thus, if they said that it's evil, it must be considered as final words.

4 hours ago, notme said:

Surely there must be other reasons.  Are any other reasons cited in our traditions, at any time, even just one of the 72?

Well, for that you should read about the ahadith of Ahlebait more. But, what I know from those ahadith, I will tell you. One of the reason that it's Haram is because Allah (عزّ وجلّ) has created pairs in creation such that each one forms pair with the opposite, thus, declining such a law is actually is saying that Allah (عزّ وجلّ) has mistaken. The Hadith say that the place of the sperm of male is womb of his woman. Thus, anyone who does other than that deliberately has sinned. It is because of that Prophet (PBUHHP) said that commiting homosexuality is kufr. Another reason is that it affects the manhood of a man and womenhood of a female that's what Imam Ali (عليه السلام) said that anyone who alters the manhood of a man will be engulfed with severe punishment. Another reason is that spreading any unlawful thing which is forbidden in Islam, makes a man so wicked that he trangress all the boundaries ending finally into pit of infidelity that is what we learnt from history of all those people who tried to make their own way against the divine will.

[notme]

2 hours ago, Borntowitnesstruth said:

don't want to look at that side and not impartial to it. If you were impartial, you would have seen how media programming is trying to distort the minds of children to believe that it is just a natural phenomenon

You're right I'm not impartial.  I have children.  I work with children.  It is still absolutely incomprehensible to me that some people believe that homosexuality is a threat to the survival of humanity. I don't know about adults, but most middle school aged children are not gay. Yes, it is forbidden.  Surely other reasons were given besides just "it is forbidden", "it is a sin" and "it is a threat to the survival of humanity". I'm not a hadith expert, but surely something must have been recorded, with as much importance as many Muslims give this issue.

[kadhim]

9 hours ago, Borntowitnesstruth said:

Although there are other reasons for it's prohibition too but the fact that rise in homosexuality may cause depopulation should be sufficient for you to reject it

You really need to pay attention to the argument and think it through. 

I advocate relaxing the rules for gay and lesbian people.

I don’t advocate relaxing the rules for people other than that.

Gay and lesbian people are about 1% of the people. The rest are 99%.

If these revised rules are followed, there is no added risk of depopulation, because gay and lesbian people don’t naturally reproduce.

It’s really that simple. There is no argument you can bring against that. It’s just basic facts. 

9 hours ago, Borntowitnesstruth said:

I also wonder about how you take quotes of Imams. You think that Imam lived in a different time than ours and want to give an impression that yeah whatever they said for what happened back then but now time is different. The only thing that is different in our times is that our life is advance than theirs but human psychology and behavior is still same not to forget that Imams were ahead of all the people of their time and us. Our imams saw and solved those problems which baffle the minds who read their accounts today. They solved biological problems without the aid of DNA and helped people to understand psychological behavior. So, the problem of homosexuality was also know to them and also it was known to them that a behavior can be altered that's why they said anyone who tries to affect the manhood of man will be inflicted with terrible disease in this world. But, in all cases, they said homosexuality is forbidden not a single case where they have said it's allowed. Anyone who goes against our Imams just shows that his belief in him is weak. No one knows better than them regarding any jurisprudential issue.

Again, you’re clearly not reading the argument, or else you wouldn’t post this.

Precisely because of those narrations, I advocate keeping the same rules for everyone else.

However, there is no evidence whatsoever that any of the imams knew that gay and lesbian people existed. I reject the assumption that the imams knew anything beyond what God chose to allow them to know as ghuluww. 

Moreover, the reasoning behind the texts from the imams doesn’t apply to gay and lesbian people. As I showed above. So again, I advocate relaxing the rules for these few people the imams were apparently not even aware of. Again, quite simple, for those who want to think it through. 

 

[313_Waiter]

Since this thread has been derailed and taken a turn from eschatology to why homosexuality is forbidden, I thought I might chime in by posting what I wrote a while back in another post.

Islamic Pulse brings standard empirical arguments already stated and argued above, like that of AIDS, HIV, and Br Muzaffer also analogises homosexuality with incest. I wonder why LGBTIQ activists don’t have the same vigour in defending incest (e.g. two brothers)? It’s “too consenting adults” after all!

https://islamicpulse.tv/ivideo/homosexuality-is-a-grave-sin-biskit/ 

Sheikh Sekaleshfar brings esoteric rationalisations, where he describes the  woman as a manifestation of “The Nurturer” and establishes how men and women complement one another (i.e. the way God intends for it to be):

From a symbolic perspective, Jonathan Pageau elucidates how LGBTIQ+++ studies and queer theory sort of infects the social order, tries to de-essentialise and destabilise the ideas held as normative, and glorifies the exception; essentially like a virus. He also explains how we are living in times which are eerily a combination of the dystopian novels 1984, Brave New World and Fahrenheit 451

This below series may not exactly help understand why Islam is against homosexual acts, but it hypothesises there may be a sinister agenda in relation to feminism and lgbtq studies where the globalists are infiltrating the minds of our children and there are even children’s books highlighting homosexual families and transgender people. It also espouses a conspiracy theory in relation to Bill Gates and population control (very relevant for today).

How LGBT activists push their agenda:

https://islamicpulse.tv/ivideo/how-lgbt-sex-activists-push-their-agenda-the-makinations-7/

 

Enforcement of LGBT in society:

https://islamicpulse.tv/ivideo/the-enforcement-of-lgbt-on-society-makinations-8/

Disturbing messages in children’s books:

https://islamicpulse.tv/ivideo/disturbing-lgbt-messages-in-childrens-books-the-makinations-1/

Another argument is that there is a perennial wisdom from Allah in condemning homosexuality amongst the Abrahamic traditions (Judaism, Christianity and Islam). Both in the books of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jam'ah and Ahl Tashayyu’, the prevalence of homosexual and lesbian relationships and marriages are a sign of the end times. (Shaykh Hamza Yusuf said the very word “marriage” was used in one of the hadiths).

Quote

Shi’a Sources:
And you will see fisq (immorality) become apparent and men being satisfied by men and women being (satistified) with women.
Source:
1. Al-Kulayni, Al-Kaafi, vol. 8, pg. 36 – 42, hadeeth # 7
Grading:
1. Al-Majlisi said this hadeeth is Hasan (Good)
 Mir’aat Al-`Uqool, vol. 25, pg. 91
 

And you will see women marry women

 وَ رَأَيْتَ النِّسَاءَ يَتَزَوَّجْنَ ال

http://www.revivingalislam.com/2011/04/signs-of-day-of-judgment.html 

Sunni source:

“You will see homosexuality and lesbianism widespread” (Al Mu'jam Al Kabir (10/228), by Imam Sulaiman ibn Ahmad At-Tabarani)

I say all of this knowing that it will not convince someone who is a stubborn “non-religious” person. The non-religious follow their own whims and desires or society or a made up principle such as the Harm principle, whereas our morality is from Allah alone.

Quote

Allah draws an example: a man jointly owned by several contending masters, and a man belonging entirely to one man: are the two equal in comparison? All praise belongs to Allah! But most of them do not know. (39:29)

One of the most famous atheists, Richard Dawkins says that the belief that rape is wrong, is as arbitrary as us evolving 5 fingers rather than 6. 

As Muslims, we don’t need any utilitarian justifications for a jurisprudential ruling. Once we have accepted the veracity of Islam, we know that Allah knows best, and that we need not always seek naturalistic or human-centric justifications.

Quote

Have you seen him who has taken his desire to be his god and whom Allah has led astray knowingly, and set a seal upon his hearing and his heart,and put a blindfold on his sight? So who will guide him after Allah?Will you not then take admonition? (45:23)

Yet it may be that you dislike something while it is good for you, and it may be that you love something while it is bad for you, and Allah knows and you do not know. (2:216)

 

 

Originally posted in this thread:

 

Edited January 22 by 313_Waiter

[Guest what]

3 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

Since this thread has been derailed and taken a turn from eschatology to why homosexuality is forbidden, I thought I might chime in by posting what I wrote a while back in another post.

If you are making a thread grouping gay and lesbian people in the same boat as pedophiles and people who commit bestiality then we are not derailing the thread by asking you why do you consider it on the same level as immorality as the rest.

The analogy between incest and homosexuality is derailing the thread. I am asking you why homosexuality is immoral, not incest.

And for the hundredth time, not procreating or not being able to procreate does not destroy the family unit. Society will not lose its family units because ~2% of its population are not interested in procreating with the opposite gender.

 

3 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

Originally posted in this thread:

 

This thread proved nothing other than the fact that muslims do not actually have a rational justification as to why homosexuality is immoral and hence harmful to society. The gay members in this thread did a great job of highlighting how muslims thinking of homosexuals as sex crazed diseased people is not actually reality, and how that is just their perception of them which they use to justify why they consider it a sin. 

[Borntowitnesstruth]

10 hours ago, notme said:

You're right I'm not impartial.  I have children.  I work with children.  It is still absolutely incomprehensible to me that some people believe that homosexuality is a threat to the survival of humanity. I don't know about adults, but most middle school aged children are not gay. Yes, it is forbidden.  Surely other reasons were given besides just "it is forbidden", "it is a sin" and "it is a threat to the survival of humanity". I'm not a hadith expert, but surely something must have been recorded, with as much importance as many Muslims give this issue.

If it's still incomprehensible to you despite mentioning of the reasons which you asked for then it's not the insufficiency of reasons but it's your own decision that you are not willing to accept what the reality is. I am sure that like the reasons I have mentioned for the prohibition of homosexuality, you can find many other reasons of it's prohibition. You just need to be impartial and open to accept the information.

[Ashvazdanghe]

10 hours ago, kadhim said:

However, there is no evidence whatsoever that any of the imams knew that gay and lesbian people existed. I reject the assumption that the imams knew anything beyond what God chose to allow them to know as ghuluww. 

Salam these people have existed even before birth of prophet Muhammad (pbu) which some examples have been recorded about Arab men during ignorance era which even after prophe Muhammad (pbu) some reports about it  have been recorded about Abbasid dynasti so therefore Imams have been aware of it  in similar fashion of other people in their  community anyway they could have  more information about this matter if they wantedd to know more  because of their authority over people & other means likewise they could become aware of what happens in house of people in similar fashion of prophet Isa (عليه السلام) which by divne authority he could tell what people do in their houses or  what things they have stored in their houses  which certainly it's not Ghuluww .

10 hours ago, kadhim said:

I advocate relaxing the rules for gay and lesbian people.

Thisi is against all Shia teaching which only infallible Imam (عليه السلام) or his deputy which has permission  from him  can decide about relaxing or hardening rules not anyone else who one day affects with a man made rule so then another changes his mindset due to affection by another man made rules.

10 hours ago, kadhim said:

Gay and lesbian people are about 1% of the people. The rest are 99%.

If these revised rules are followed, there is no added risk of depopulation, because gay and lesbian people don’t naturally reproduce.

It’s really that simple. There is no argument you can bring against that. It’s just basic facts. 

percentage doesn't matter  also natural reproducing is not the matter because it's about standing aginst grave sins which will be grave sin until judgmnet day which  changing in any condition likewise changing in statistics & percentages   doesn't change the rulling about it which even they will be  99%  rest will be 1% so then it doesn't change standing &agianst it & punishing  sinners in similar fashin even  gay and lesbian people could naturaaly reproduce so then it doen't change the rules.

[Borntowitnesstruth]

11 hours ago, kadhim said:

Gay and lesbian people are about 1% of the people. The rest are 99%.

If these revised rules are followed, there is no added risk of depopulation, because gay and lesbian people don’t naturally reproduce.

You are running on outdated data brother, the way it is getting attention through media and people like you who are advocating it, it is actually brainwashing the weak minds to become like that. 

Gays and lesbians are not work of nature bro, you have to get that in mind. Either they are normal male or female who have reproducing organs so supporting their such behavior is actually making them without generation and also causing damage to the normal weak minds who then turn to homosexuality which equal to altering their natural behavior which is a crime.

11 hours ago, kadhim said:

However, there is no evidence whatsoever that any of the imams knew that gay and lesbian people existed. I reject the assumption that the imams knew anything beyond what God chose to allow them to know as ghuluww. 

Moreover, the reasoning behind the texts from the imams doesn’t apply to gay and lesbian people. As I showed above. So again, I advocate relaxing the rules for these few people the imams were apparently not even aware of. Again, quite simple, for those who want to think it through. 

Lolz, you need to correct your belief about Imams brother. Imams were not kept unaware about this jurisprudential problem about which they can be held not to have guided humanity, it is both an accusation upon Allah (سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) and Imams that they did not guide well. Like ghulw, lowering the status of Imam is also a sin which you are showing in your comment. Imams considered homosexuality as a sin and disease which is actually what it is like other soul diseases. 

Where does the quotes of imams say it does not apply to gays and lesbians? There is no indication in ahadith that they are immune from it. On the other hand, there are narrations which tell about gays and lesbians where in some were punished by death and in one incident, one person was pardoned because he repented.

Edited January 22 by Borntowitnesstruth

[notme]

In non- human animals homosexual activity becomes more common when there is too much stress on the community, such as overpopulation, instability, or lack of resources. Some animal biologists theorize that this is a natural population control mechanism.  

Obviously humans have our own rules for society, but we're still biological creatures.  We have to consider the possibility of parallels.  

(Violence, depression,  and other mental illnesses also increase in stressed communities of animals. Not that we see the same in our current human society, of course. )

I'm not saying what is innate is correct.  

[notme]

9 hours ago, Borntowitnesstruth said:

If it's still incomprehensible to you despite mentioning of the reasons which you asked for then it's not the insufficiency of reasons but it's your own decision that you are not willing to accept what the reality is. I am sure that like the reasons I have mentioned for the prohibition of homosexuality, you can find many other reasons of it's prohibition. You just need to be impartial and open to accept the information.

You're claiming that the reality is enough humans would prefer to avoid heterosexual relations that the prohibition of homosexual relations must necessarily be to preserve the human species, and as a female person who is attracted to a male person, I find this assertion incredible. Almost all people who I know are straight or straight-passing, and I don't think we are biologically configured for that to change.  

Also, you don't seem to understand that I'm asking for other reasons.  Nobody has yet provided any.  Maybe recorded reasons from our prophets and imams don't exist. I'm not saying we should always know reasons behind the laws, but it's certainly helpful. Sometimes it's ok to acknowledge that we have no idea.  

[kadhim]

18 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

Since this thread has been derailed and taken a turn from eschatology to why homosexuality is forbidden, I thought I might chime in by posting what I wrote a while back in another post.

Dude, all due respect, but just a reminder that the origin of the thread was the earnest claim that people are poised to accept bestiality as normal. I mean seriously. We’re doing you a favor to change the channel. 

18 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

Sheikh Sekaleshfar brings esoteric rationalisations, where he describes the  woman as a manifestation of “The Nurturer” and establishes how men and women complement one another (i.e. the way God intends for it to be):

You know, it’s funny. Anyone brings a philosophical argument suggesting people need to adjust their views, it’s always “just stick to the words of the Quran and the ahlulbayt; that is enough.” When someone brings philosophizing that confirms people’s biases, suddenly it’s mashallah. 

These sorts of word castles in the air are no doubt beautiful, and they resonate because deep down there is something to them. But at the end of the day, it’s just something someone came up with to organize their thoughts and help to explain part of things. It’s not Truth. It’s truthy. But it’s not The Full Truth. 

But the thing is, you can totally believe in the beauty and harmony and rewards of the male-female pairing, the wonder of procreation through that union, all that good stuff — and still be honest and acknowledge the reality that a small proportion of people are just clearly not built for that for whatever inscrutable reason in God’s plan. One thing doesn’t take away from the other. Does that mystical harmony of man and woman disappear suddenly? No. It’s just not the full story. 

18 hours ago, 313_Waiter said:

This below series may not exactly help understand why Islam is against homosexual acts, but it hypothesises there may be a sinister agenda in relation to feminism and lgbtq studies where the globalists are infiltrating the minds of our children and there are even children’s books highlighting homosexual families and transgender people. It also espouses a conspiracy theory in relation to Bill Gates and population control (very relevant for today).

You know, there’s certainly darkness and conspiracy in the world. But when conspiracy theory is always someone’s first instinct to explain complexity in the world that makes them uncomfortable, it just becomes laziness and makes the conversation impossible. 

Edited January 22 by kadhim

[kadhim]

9 hours ago, Borntowitnesstruth said:

On the other hand, there are narrations which tell about gays and lesbians where in some were punished by death and in one incident, one person was pardoned because he repented.

There are narrations about men and women engaging in sexual activity with people of the same sex.

That’s not the same thing as someone being gay or lesbian.

If you can’t understand the difference between these two things, maybe this conversation is not for you. 

One is an action, the other is an internal orientation. Classical Arabic had no term for gay or lesbian, because people then had no concept that such a thing existed. 

[kadhim]

On 1/19/2023 at 1:27 AM, Borntowitnesstruth said:

They are spreading like fire and affecting normal people, if you cannot see that you don't have any practical experience and you are just running on fake news.

In terms of specifically gay and lesbian people, demonstrably not true. For example, here’s data from Gallup from the US, covering four generations of people, an 80 year trend. As you can see, the gay and lesbian columns show numbers between 0 and 2% over that time period. Variations totally explainable in terms of younger people more comfortable being open about themselves. 

Bisexuals it’s a more complex story—that needs to be reasoned about and handled differently from the case of gays and lesbians. 

[VoidVortex]

3 hours ago, notme said:

 

Also, you don't seem to understand that I'm asking for other reasons.  Nobody has yet provided any.  Maybe recorded reasons from our prophets and imams don't exist. I'm not saying we should always know reasons behind the laws, but it's certainly helpful. Sometimes it's ok to acknowledge that we have no idea.  

I agree, I have no problem acknowledging we have no idea. As it was said before, Imam Mahdi is aware of all the reasons by God's permission, and if he were here, he would give reasons that would satisfy us. Until then, we can speculate. 

[Borntowitnesstruth]

13 hours ago, kadhim said:

In terms of specifically gay and lesbian people, demonstrably not true. For example, here’s data from Gallup from the US, covering four generations of people, an 80 year trend. As you can see, the gay and lesbian columns show numbers between 0 and 2% over that time period. Variations totally explainable in terms of younger people more comfortable being open about themselves. 

Bisexuals it’s a more complex story—that needs to be reasoned about and handled differently from the case of gays and lesbians. 

Well, this data represents one kind of mindset who after it got acceptance is showing results in these different categories so you can't say it is not having an effect. Bisexuals, gay, lesbian and transgender are variation of one class and that's increasing immensely if put together. It doesn't show that it's decreasing like we say for terrorism. Those who advocate this need to understand that this mindset is the result of psychological manipulation of mind just like extremism is. It needs to be curtailed and not allowed to rise with the rise in population.

Edited January 23 by Borntowitnesstruth

[Borntowitnesstruth]

18 hours ago, notme said:

In non- human animals homosexual activity becomes more common when there is too much stress on the community, such as overpopulation, instability, or lack of resources. Some animal biologists theorize that this is a natural population control mechanism.  

Obviously humans have our own rules for society, but we're still biological creatures.  We have to consider the possibility of parallels.  

(Violence, depression,  and other mental illnesses also increase in stressed communities of animals. Not that we see the same in our current human society, of course. )

I'm not saying what is innate is correct.  

Lolz, animals are not guide for human beings because of their low level of intelligence, they do many unnatural and unethical works which cannot be regarded as suitable for preservation of life and healthy atmosphere such as lions and lionesses sometimes kill their cubs while playing with them, a human cannot be allowed to do that. Similarly, why the animals turn to homosexuality is found to be because of error on the part of animals. It, thus, cannot be regarded as natural conduct. 

[Meedy]

I would not be surprised if that happens :/  lol

[notme]

15 hours ago, Borntowitnesstruth said:

animals are not guide for human beings

You have completely misunderstood the point I was attempting to make.  I did not say we should take animals as a guide.  I said that animal behavior may have similar causes and effects as human beings because humans are also biological creatures. 

[Ashvazdanghe]

Salam

Have you seen him who has taken his desire to be his god? Is it your duty to watch over him? (43)

Do you suppose that most of them listen or exercise their reason? They are just like cattle; indeed, they are further astray from the way. (44)

https://tanzil.net/#trans/en.qarai/25:43

https://tanzil.net/#trans/en.qarai/25:44

Quote

Certainly We have winnowed out for hell many of the jinn and humans: they have hearts with which they do not understand, they have eyes with which they do not see, they have ears with which they do not hear. They are like cattle; indeed, they are more astray. It is they who are the heedless. (179)

https://tanzil.net/#trans/en.qarai/7:179

Quote

Do not be like those who say, ‘We hear,’ though they do not hear. (21) Indeed the worst of beasts in Allah’s sight are the deaf and dumb who do not exercise their reason. (22)

https://tanzil.net/#trans/en.qarai/8:22

Quote

 Indeed the worst of beasts in Allah’s sight are those who are faithless; so they will not have faith. (55) —Those with whom you made a treaty, and who violated their treaty every time, and who are not Godwary. (56)

https://tanzil.net/#trans/en.qarai/8:55

[Borntowitnesstruth]

12 hours ago, notme said:

I said that animal behavior may have similar causes and effects as human beings because humans are also biological creatures. 

Yeah this may be true and we should try to find cure for these problems.

[Vindemiatrix]

On 1/14/2023 at 11:55 AM, 313_Waiter said:

The next part of this Hadith is yet to come true, namely bestiality:

Just saying, it's already here and it's actually been around for ages and ages. Without going into too much detail, I remember this viral YouTube video about a girl talking about her experiences which was a few years ago now. Also on a documentary they talked about this South American tribe that did it. I also remember reading this history book and it says people have been doing it for centuries. Dating back to 1st century AD even. 

Even on Wikipedia look at this: The Kinsey reports of 1948 and 1953 estimated the percentage of people in the general population of the United States who had at least one sexual interaction with animals as 8% for males and 5.1% for females (1.5% for pre-adolescents and 3.6% for post-adolescents females), and claimed it was 40–50% for the rural population and even higher among individuals with lower educational status.

So there you have it. Is it really that much of a surprise though? With everything else that goes on these days I mean? 

[Guest Blue]

Alas Kadhim, for all your attempts at reform, the only words we have from the Final Prophet of God on the matter of same-sex acts is a No. Had there been reason to distinguish between two types of same-sex actors, we trust that God would have ensured His Final Messenger would clarify. 

He didn't. So there isn't.

He didn't appoint you or any other person to reform something so obvious than the prohibition of same-sex acts, which is found in the Qur'an, the New Testament, the Torah, in the Zoroastrian Vendidad, even in ancient Assyria, and even in the Laws formulated and argued philosophically by Plato. 

Islam is submission to the revealed will of God. Something so manifestly and literally and illustratively revealed as the prohibition of the act of sodomy, and with no exception even hinted at, and easily understood and universally accepted by the mobeds, rabbis, priests and jurists of all these scriptural communities, despite their disagreements and disputes in all sorts of matters, can't be brushed away because of a tiny but hugely financed pressure group in the West that is desperately looking for a new moral cause to justify blacklisting other civilisations and motivate future crusades into all corners of the globe. 

I'm sorry Kadhim that you feel no shame in rebelling against your Lord with your smug sophistry, condescending to the religious who only wish to submit to what is manifestly and necessarily and universally known from the Abrahamic scriptures. 

I pray you be guided.