That's what he's saying but his "someplace in the world" now encompasses the entire middle east. (I may be putting words in his mouth but) And being a good muslim I assume he would like that "someplace in the world" to include the entire world (ie the entire world under muslim rule). Then the entire world can be someplace where he doesn't have to be around homosexuals. That may sound extreme but I beleive that is the goal of Islam.
Let me ask both you and Sammy this: I'm presuming that both of you are straight if so why did you choose to be straight? Considering there is less of a stigma to being gay than in the past have you considered being attracted to men?
I think one can choose to be straight. I believe there are many homosexuals who choose to be "straight" to avoid problems that come with being gay in today's society. I suppose I should have clarified that. By choose to be gay I mean choose to date people of the same sex much in the way a gay person may choose to date someone of the opposite sex. At least for many of the "gay" females that I know, classifying themselves as 'gay' isn't so much about an innate attraction to women as it is a means for attention. Though I suppose you could say they're not really gay which would make my point obsolete. But to answer your question no I have never considered dating someone of the same sex but just because I haven't doesn't mean nobody has. I've stated that I think the vast majority (no % because it'll just be me making it up) don't choose it but rather that some do. I mean I've never considered becoming a transsexual but some people have. Just because it's not normal or what some would consider a rational choice doesn't mean that it's not made by some. (Before you type it, I know there's a huge difference between being gay and being transsexual. I'm merely pointing out that it's possible for someone to make a choice that will make their lives more difficult and/or bring more attention to themselves).
True. I suppose I was drawing a conclusion based on a redefining of a term that I shouldn't have made. I guess what I was comparing it to was the choice to live life as an openly gay person. Allow me to restate. I think which sex you are attracted to is genetic but I just feel that there are more people who are willing to live life with the label of 'homosexual' today than there were in past generations. That's probably how I should have worded it before. In this case I was most likely missing the definition of "choosing to be gay." You'll have to excuse my misstep as I'm currently brain-dead from finishing my first round of law school finals.
I saw this in an only slightly related article and though of this thread. Apparently in Saudi Arabia suggesting that there is a genetic component of homosexuality is enough for the religious police to accuse you of promoting homosexuality. (The linked article is on a Saudi civil rights lawyer and some of his cases; it is interesting by itself.) source [rquoter] Another client, Rabbah al-Quwai'i, a journalist, was arrested this year for "harboring destructive thoughts" and accused of promoting homosexuality by commenting on Internet forums that it was a genetic predisposition. The case was thrown out of court. [/rquoter]
Your use of the word "guide" implies that the future is not written already, which it is according to Islam. However, I understand the point you're trying to make. My answer is that if scientists discovered beyond a shadow of a doubt that being gay was genetic, then Islam would be under scrutiny. People's faith in it would be tested. As I said earlier, for some, if homosexuality is genetic, then maybe the Qura'an is not divine. For others, they will look at it as a test of their faith, and they will construct theories about how maybe the scientists had an agenda or about how most of the scientists are atheists. Who knows. I don't know how anyone would reconcile with their faith because I think each person will act differently and no one will be able to claim that "this" is the proper way to react. As for pork, what I know is that they eat their own crap and that they are more prone to being worm-infested. Now I'm sure we have become top notch at handling these things with modern technology, but I won't be able to get the images out of my head so I personally will never be able to eat pork volntarily.
I didn't change my opinion here. First, I was stating what can be concluded from research today. Then, I stated what I believe according to my faith. It's not a progression, both of those two things are true. I'll put it in a sentence: - What we can conclude from all research gathered on the topic is that homosexuality may or may not be a choice, however, I believe it is NOT genetic. Because if it's not a choice, then the Koran is under scrutiny. If you are born a certain way, why should it be a sin? That would be absolutely ridiculous. But it is important to seperate another two things as well: there's a difference between being born a certain gender and being born with (for example) a temper problem. Being male/female is something you can not control, but having a temper problem is something that should be kept under control as much as possible. It shouldn't be ok for you to do certain things if you were born with a temper problem. If I don't have a temper problem and another guy does, and we both walk into a bar and smash a chair against a wall, it does not matter that he has a temper problem, despite him having a temper problem which (again, for example) runs in the family.
One last time: just because there are Muslims who practice homosexuality, doesn't mean it's ok. Ofcourse it matters if it were divine or not. I explained it in one of my previous posts. If homosexuality is genetic, then Islam is under scrutiny. If I weren't Muslim, I would probably have a different opinion. So whether the Qura'an is valid or not is central to my argument.
Who the hell told you to shut up? Talk all you want. But look at this: If you have the right to meddle with us because you disagree with something we do, such as in the case of homosexuality, then we have the right to meddle with you for anything we disagree with too. Such as homosexuality. Sorry but I am in an Islamic country, accordingly I have the right I find your tolerance to be as depressing and ridiculous as your country's work in Afghanistan and Iraq - as well as accompanied by a good deal of hypocrisy.
Assumption. You have absolutely nothing to back that up. Now, Iran has a population of around 75 million, so generally speaking, even 0.005% is a "ton" of people. So you may be right there. In Tehran, you can't have a party without cocaine or heroine being involved. You really think they can't practice homosexuality if they liked?
As I said you're free to believe whether its OK or not that doesn't change the fact of its existence and whether anything done legally, or religiously can change that. Except that you're central argument is whether the Qu'ran is valid since you say that if it was genetic then why would God, in this case as expressed through the Qu'ran, make it a sin. That is is basing your argument on the Qu'ran as the justification. The obvious problem is I don't believe the Qu'ran mentions genetics along with a whole lot of other things but the other problem is that this argument could also could be proof that homosexuality is innate and not a cultural choice. Given that a document written 1,400 years ago mentions homosexuality as a practice in a culture very different shows that homosexuality existed. Now given that such a practice has existed across history and across cultures is stronger evidence that there is something innately in humans that causes homosexuality. So far from the Qu'ran being an argument for why homosexuality isn't genetic it provides circumstantial evidence that it is.
This is where you are falling into what I believe to be a false dichotomy that many both religious and non-religious have set up between religion and science. You're saying that if science proves that homosexuality is genetic then that must mean that the Qu'ran is wrong that homosexuality is a sin since it doesn't make sense that God would make something that is akin a sin. Well there are many things that religions consider a sin that are biologically innate. For instance the Shakers considered sex a sin but obviously if we didn't have sex there wouldn't be people around. Is it possible to consider that maybe homosexuality is biological but that God believes it to be a sin anyway and recognizes that humans are inherently sinful but hopes we can overcome it? You seem to recognize this in another post when pointing out that people may have a biological predispostion towards anger but that its still hoped that they can overcome it. For that matter things like anger and aggressiveness are important traits to our makeup and likely the product of societal survival mechanism hardwired from evolution. There's lots of evidence that adultery may also have a biological component as it helps spread our genes wider. None of that necessarily invalidates the Commandments against adultery or murder except only if you view science and religion as a winner take all zero-sum gain dichotomy. My point is that if your religion teaches you that homosexuality is a sin that's fine. That's your belief and nothing anyone not of that religion says should change that. The problem though is if you take that belief to then argue that homosexuality isn't innate and use that as your justification. The question of whether its a sin or not has no bearing on whether it is genetic except as circumstantial evidence that it has historically existed and existed accross cultures meaning it might be innate. Here you even contradict yourself. Halal forbids the eating of pork yet many can eat pork without any problems thankfully due to good agricultural and meat handling practices. Why would God forbid the eating of something that isn't bad for you? Science and technology have defeated the potential threat of bad pork so under your own argument that if science can prove something in opposition to the Qu'ran then Islam must be in question. This should present as much of a challenge to your world view as homosexuality.
I've only read a few posts in this thread. Just wanted to make a couple of points. I went to a lecture yesterday at the Texas Dawah Conference held at the George R. Brown Convention Center. Sh. Yasir Qadhi discussed the role of reason and logic in Islam. He wanted to clarify how much of Islam is based on reason and logic vs. blind faith. For if Islam were based purely on blind faith, then we as Muslims would have no right to call others to our way of life. He said that the 4 main purposes for reason and logic in islam are: 1. For non-Muslims to ponder the world around them in order to realize that the world was indeed created by one creator, Allah. The Qur'an repeatedly calls non-Muslims to consider the world around them. For example: "Behold! In the creation of the Heavens and the Earth; In the alteration of the Night and the Day; In the sailing of the Ships through the Ocean for the profit of Mankind; In the Rain which Allah sends down from the Skies, and the Life which He gives therewith, to an Earth that is Dead; In the Beasts of all kinds that He scatters through the Earth; In the change of the Winds, and the Clouds which they trail like their slaves between the Sky and the Earth; (Here) Indeed are Signs for a People that are Wise." (Surah Al-Baqarah:164) 2. Reasons should be used To look at the lives of the prophets, and realize their outstanding character and truthful nature shows that they were bearers of truth. Also, they had pure intentions and did not have alterior motives. These 2 uses of on the intellect bring one to realize that their is no deity worthy of worship other than Allah, and that Muhammad is his messenger. Belief in that statement separates a muslim from a non-muslim. 3. Muslims should use their intellect to study the world around them in order to appreciate Allah's creation and come closer to him. So we are encouraged to study secular sciences and be productive members of society for numerous reasons, and one of which is to better appreciate this world that Allah has created for us so that we come closer to him. 4. I don't remember the fourth reason, sorry. The point is that there are also limitations to use of the intellect. As Muslims, we use it to come to the conclusions that Allah is One and Muhammad is his messenger, and that we should submit to the message of Islam. Once we get there, we follow what is prescribed for us in the Qur'an and what Muhammad taught us. A previous post asked why we don't eat pork if we can live healthily and enjoy it. Well, although I disagree that it's healthy and fine to eat it, it wouldn't matter to me if what you said were true. Allah prohibited eating swine, and my reason and logic has taught me that I should submit to what He has commanded because He is my creator and knows what is best. Philosophers and many people today believe that all you need is the intellect, and from there you can figure out the real truths. I disagree. The human mind is of limited capacity. There is no way we could figure out everything there is to know about the world, and we should submit to the one who does. No 2 philosophers have ever agreed on every question of philosophy. This shows that the human intellect leads different people to different conclusions, and therefore cannot be the sole criterion for deducing truths. I know I was created by Allah and that Muhammad is His messenger, therefore I will submit to His will.
As for the question regarding homosexuality, I don't know if people can be born gay. But to me, it doesn't really matter if they are or not. I never agreed with the argument that "hey, i was born this way!" because that doesn't make it right. I was born with a short temper, does that give me the right to blow up on people unnecessarily? No, I need to control my tendency to get angry quickly, because that is what is right. Similarly, homosexuality is wrong, and if one is born gay, then he should whatever he can to avoid the temptation to be with someone of the same gender. I believe that no one is tested beyond what they can endure, and that Allah rewards those who struggle in their effort to please Him. And Allah knows best.
I have to leave but I'll answer this tidbit quickly.... So it is known that Pork is harder to "keep clean" than any other meat products?
Who says that Muhammad was the true messenger? Are we to take the word of Muhammad alone? That is where it all breaks down for people like me, because we see it as one man starting the religion, not God, or Allah...but man, a man named Muhammed said to follow what God told him, and that it would all be well. But, as you pointed out, man is not perfect, and our intellect is not able to fathom the creator (or God) therefore how do we know that Muhammed or Jesus, or Buddha were all getting their message from God? Maybe they ate some bad fish, and hallucinated that they were talking to God...wouldn't that be the same to them? Until God comes down and says...."Right, I am God, and this is the truth" I think you will have serious doubt. God created us, and gave us a free will to think for ourselves, and for me, rather than follow someone else's path, I will take the one that God put before me...PERSONALLY, and seek his truth in my own way - eating a nice big ole Bacon and tomato sandwich ! DD
