Muslim academic claims homosexuality can be compatible with Islam

If only people would believe this..

 

I'm a practicing Muslim, and I believe that homosexuality and Islam are compatible. He's certainly not the first to address it, as there's been previous Muslim scholars (current century and previous centuries) that have held similar views on this, part of the argument is that culture as a whole has influenced interpretations and translation.

 

on "some people want to write history" from excerpt.

er, some people always want to rewrite history for agenda

 

Given that Islam hasn't yet renounced jihad, death penalty for apostasy, and countless other disgusting teachings, I don't really like the idea of us be compatible with it.

 

You really shouldn't say stuff like that.

First off, you're going on the same tangent that practically everyone else does. You're speaking about the fundamentalists which make up a part of the Islamic community. Just as there are insane homophobic and zionists Christians, there are fundamentalists Muslims.

In every single religion there are extremists, if you go by your logic then no religion is applicable. Most of the Muslims I know (which make up practically 90% of everyone I met) are nice, decent people who are disgusted by the ideas of death penalties and such things.

Take Judaism into account. The laws of the Jewish faith are basically almost identical to Islam. Only the Haredi ones practice it, a very small minority. Yet no one speaks against them now do they? Take the Christians who raped and killed women in Iraq simply because they thought 'They're an insult to Christ' and you never mentioned them? Religion breeds extremism as a side-effect, and the fact that you say that basically isolates millions and millions of liberal Muslims who make up the majority of the large and vast Muslim community.

The issue is not a religious one but rather a sociological one. Muslims in Saharan nations lack proper education. Most of them live in poverty and in conditions you couldn't bare to imagine. Have you ever seen the Lebanese refugee camps during 2006? You cannot blame the ignorant if they cannot prevent their ignorance.

The Christians who invaded Iraq could be considered terrorists. The Druze who are massacring the Syrians could be considered terrorists. The Buddhists who killed the Hindus could be considered terrorists. Most of them did it based on purely religion reasons. The murders in Iraq were based upon whether you are Muslim or Christian. Why do you think most Assyrians managed to escape Basra and Baghdad whilst the Muslims have large restrictions? The IDF could also be considered terrorism based on the amount of deaths and children jailed and injured.

And finally, the Muslims who do such things could also be considered terrorists. In EVERY single religion there are disgusting laws and forms of teachings. In EVERY social and ethnic group there is blood. To simply isolate the Muslims and to imply that their religion is inferior is simply buying into the same circle of hate.

Take it from a Christian. Muslims here in the Arab world who are well-educated are much much more open minded than you think.

Biggest example; Nizzar Qabbani.

 

Islam really hasn't renounced either jihad or the death penalty for apostasy. Nice words urging tolerance don't change those facts. Ask your friends that don't like the death penalty if it should be removed from Islamic teaching - if they say yes, then excellent because that is what we need. Tell them to encourage their religious leaders to think the same way.

Yes, other religions are equally as awful. But they have at least tried to move against this, to some degree.

Acceptance of homosexuality is much less important than these two things, as far as I'm concerned, and to argue that it can come beforehand is baffling to me.

 

Zionism has TRIED to move forward? Are you joking? The IDF bombed the hell out of my city in 2006. I still remember how bad it was. Zionist ideologies are just getting worse and worse. Segregation of Palestinians, torture of prisoners and children in Israeli jails, illegal settlements, ALL of them done in the name of the all-mighty Yahweh. As far as I'm concerned those Judaism-inspired zionist laws are worse than Islam. See? Judaism bred Zionism. Yet Zionism is not Judaism. Same thing with Islam.

You have literally no idea what Jihad is. I full-heartedly support the notion of fighting for the weak. That is Jihad.

'آخي لقد جاوز الظاامون المدى فحق الجهاد و حق الفدى'

Here's a famous line of poetry that Muslims (and Christians) consider to be the definition of Jihad, it reads;

'My brother the oppressors have stepped beyond their rights, we are thusly given the right to fight and survive.'

Jihad as it was described is completely OK. When a people are being killed, there is nothing wrong with standing up to the oppressors.

There are hardly any well-educated Muslims who support the death penalty (they make up the majority of the Muslim population) Islam itself has mentioned Jihad and death penalties only 11 times whilst mercy and forgiveness has been mentioned over 600 times. The religion does not support it.

As for encouraging religious leaders; they are.

انتظر الى حين ما ينام الحمام في دبادة مهجورة ان لم يجد منزلا في سرير العاشقبن

في حارتنا ديك سادي سفاح، ينتف ريش دجاج الحارة كل صباح

These lines were from Nizzar Qabbani and Mahmoud Darwish they read respectively;

I wait whole-heartedly to see the doves nesting in an abandoned tank if they are unable to find a home within the bed of lovers (It's a line from something he wrote, he was talking about religious wars)

In our neighbourhood there is a fascist, murderous rooster, who takes everyday the feathers of his fellow chickens (He's describing the religious leaders)

Both of them were Muslims.

A recent survey showed that Muslims are growing more and more well-educated and the rate of people who support the laws of death penalties and cutting off hands are decreasing. They are getting better for god's sake. They don't have proper education.

I can't blame people who don't have proper education and ask them to acknowledge their ignorance. However, I can very well scold people who do have proper education.

The American led coalition, during the invasion of Iraq. Look at how many lives were destroyed. Why? Simply because it was a religious war. No WMD's were found, no plans for 'world domination' NOTHING.

If the U.S REALLY wanted to stop terrorism, why didn't they stop the 3 billion foreign military aid to Israel which was inspired by Zionist Christian beliefs which supports the deaths of innocent Palestinians? Wouldn't that be a nice move?

Most radical Muslims lack proper education, whilst most radical Christians and Zionist Jews possess it yet they continue killing people.

The 'evil' Muslims took in TONNES of Lebanese, Palestinians, Iraqi and Syrian refugees which otherwise would've been completely killed, destroyed and massacred by American, British and Israeli made weaponry, all inspired by imperialist plans hiding behind the cover of religion.

Yes, radical Muslims exist, I know that. However, radical Christians and Jews exist as well. None of them are different in any way.

I'm Christian and I've met more open-minded Muslims than I have met open-minded Christians.

Take the Maronites for example. I was raised in a deeply Christian society, I was raised to believe all Muslims are evil, disgusting human beings, and all dark-haired, dark-skinned people are evil terrorists. Yet when I managed to come to Jordan, I found that Muslims opened my eyes to a world I never knew existed. However, personal experiences are most likely useless in this argument.

How about this? The amount of children killed in Israel and Palestine since 2000 by Israelis is 12 times larger than the amount of children killed by Palestinians (Muslims and Christians)

Face it, everyone's insane. Radical Muslims, Christians, Jews, they're ALL the same. No difference whatsoever. But to isolate one group and simply claim they're behind is just awful. I would defend Jews and Christians were you to have claimed the same thing about them. It's just not right.

 

That's a rather pale representation of it and you know it.

I'm not going to continue this argument here as you are obviously very emotionally invested in it.

 

First off, I take offense to that entire statement.

Second of all, that's what Jihad means in the Qu'ran, it's the description that's written in their holy book.

Why would it matter whether I'm emotionally invested in it or not? It has in no way hampered my ability to argue and I have presented facts and statistics which constitute as proof to further help my argument.

You should quit when my emotional investment clouds my judgement.

By quitting now you are basically admitting that you are unable to continue arguing. I'm sorry, but in all seriousness, you still haven't presented a proper counter-argument.

I'm not biased, I presented facts, and I've respected everyone as best as I could. To simply claim that you wish to stop this argument because I'm 'emotionally invested' comes out as an insult. You're basically claiming that I don't possess the proper ability to continue the argument despite the evidence I presented.

I don't think you managed to continue reading my argument since you only took a part of it and didn't bother to respond to everything. Please, don't take me for a fool who just shouts out radical phrases and raises pan-Arab flags. It gives me the feeling that others think I'm inferior.

Last but not least; I am trying to educate you on some things. You don't understand Islam or the Arab community well enough to make a statement as bold as your previous one.

 

Honestly, you shouldn't make assumptions based on what the media is feeding you or what you hear/see/read as you have to look beyond what it is saying. Earlier in the UK, there was a killing of Lee Rigby (a soldier) by 2 supposedly Muslim men - when the media said 'Islamic Extremists' most people saw this as an opportunity to go onto Facebook and post hate comments about Islam, the prophet, Allah; EDL protests went crazy all over the UK and the things they were saying about Allah and the Prophet were hurtful and disgusting. Loads of well known people like Boris Johnson, David Cameron, Russel Brand, etc. were talking about how people shouldn't blame Muslims and that EDL are just as bad as those men that killed the Soldier. I bet you more than half of the people bashing Muslims online didn't even know the Soldier's name. Most of my Muslim friends wouldn't come out to even the Cinema, I really didn't give one what people thought or said to me because I know that what happened was wrong and I don't support it but In the UK we have equal rights and a NO discrimination act set up in 1976 (learned it in R.E). Now, people complain that Muslims are segregated and don't involve themselves into the community but the reason that is because people that are hateful don't promote racial harmony or community cohesion which is why you see loads of Asian filled cities because people from Asia feel better with their own community (not all, but majority)

Secondly, I don't think you understand the concept of Jihad. There is Greater Jihad which is overcoming evil in one's life so it is to avoid the temptation of lust, greed, etc. like the 10 commandants basically. Once Greater Jihad is achieved, you can go onto Lesser Jihad which is overcoming evil in the society (however this meaning is twisted by many Islamic Extremists and they believe it's go blow yourself up, etc.) and what I've been taught from my Athiest teacher in school about Lesser Jihad is : creating peace in the community like answering questions about Islam, helping your neighbor, helping the community, preaching about Islam (not in a oppressive manner) - Lesser Jihad can only be achieved if you have accomplished Greater Jihad. So, why should Islam renounce Jihad if the meanings are totally different from what you see on the news about an 'Islamic Extremist blowing himself up'?

Thirdly, one of my homework's set my RE teacher was to look at Shari'ah law examples and upon seeing some examples, I honestly was disgusted. Then, I remembered that these rules were not dictated by Allah but based on what it said about the Qur'an on some legal matters and how Prophet Muhammed judged cases. It is even narrated that Muhammed sometimes changed the laws to support Women as he felt it wasn't fair upon them that Men were superior. In addition, Allah doesn't mention explicitly in the Qur'an that any punishments should be taken place on Earth but Allah does despise apostasy and says there will be a severe punishment in the after-life. Also, you've got to understand that some Islamic scholars and MANY Muslims believe in religious freedom. Furthermore, I remember the story of when a man labelled the Prophet "Greedy and selfish because he was handing out war booty equally" and countless of other rude stuff which shouldn't have been said at that time to the Prophet as he was the foundation of Islam. A companion asked the Prophet "Should I cut his head off?" and the Prophet said "No leave him, for these are the people that will deviate from Islam" (something along those lines and something else). It turns out these were going to be the Khawarij (sp) and these people now are people like Osama Bin Laden, people you see in Palestine that encourage young kids to blow themselves up because of Jews killing their parents. Muhammed urged that they should be killed if you meet one and I think the whole world thinks the same too as these people do cause havoc and kill innocent people.

 

The word Jihad has multiple forms and is often easily/loosely/ill-defined when it is used in media. Linguistically, Jihad translates to to struggle. Like I've mentioned, there are many forms of Jihad. There's a greater Jihad and the lesser Jihad. The Jihad that involves war that is in doctrine is only to be initiated in self-defense. In fact, there are also rules to this.

1. You're allowed to kill in self-defense :

a. You've been attacked, you are allowed to defend yourself.
b. You know you are going to be attacked, you have knowledge and evidence of this, you are allowed to defend yourself.​

However, there are further rules to this. In the state of Jihad (the type that involves war):
You can not kill civilians and any non-soldiers.
You can not kill children.
You can not destroy vegetation, plants, wild life, homes, etc.
You can not kill animals. Unless these animals are attacking you. (no horses or herbivores for example, but if by any chance it's a lion, then yes, you are permitted.)
You also can not take prisoners of war, and you can not torture, rape, etc.

The topic of Jihad is quite large. The above is the only Jihad in doctrine that is associated with violence. There's another type of Jihad that is Jihad Al-Nafs, the more common type of Jihad. What this directly translates to is Jihad of the self or the struggle against oneself, the struggle against hardship.

This type of Jihad encompasses a great amount of different scenarios and situations, and it honestly depends on the person. For example, if a person is struggling with a moral dilemma in their lives, depression, anything personal, etc. then it would fall under the category of Jihad Al-Nafs.

There's also other types of Jihad, some that have more to do with your environment, like education. There's generally a strong emphasis on the duty of pursuing knowledge through out one's life in Islam. Prophets and scholars saying that the pursuit of knowledge does not stop at an age, and that even towards the end of your life, knowing the world and gaining knowledge is important. So, regarding this, struggling with and pursuing education is another example of a different type of Jihad.

That being said, the Muslims that announce Jihad while killing civilians, suicide bombings, etc. - the ones that generally appear in media, are widely condemned by the majority of Muslims, and a good amount of scholars declare that what they're doing is against the teachings of Islam.

----------

The topic of the death penalty of apostasy is a bit more complex. Frankly put, not every Muslim is on the same page about it. You'll find that some Muslims in certain regions of the world are for it, while in other regions would be completely against it (i.e. statistically speaking, majority of Muslims in Pakistan would be for it, while majority of Muslims in the west would be against it). There have been plenty of scholars that are against it (middle east and else where in the world), citing that there is no mention of an Earthly punishment for apostasy in the Quran (a popular view of the late Grand Imam of a well known Islamic university - Al-Azhar University located in the Middle East). Also, medieval and modern scholars have argued for freedom to convert to and from Islam with no penalty/punishment. Other arguments scholars have made against it is that the Quran clearly mentions free will and that there shall be no compulsion in religion, and that punishment for apostasy is against Islam.

fyi, I am against any form of punishment/penalty for a person converting to a different religion/not believing in a god, and would consider it inhumane.

 

I don't want to get involved in this. I'd just like to say that as in many other religions, there many different schools of thought, and many different individuals with in Islam. Suggesting that Islam doesn't deserve progress in the field of LGBT rights because some individuals and/or countries are stupid is ridiculous.

 

Islam in Saudi Arabia is not the same Islam in Indonesia, quite frankly. People need to lose that mindset of a universal, backward, "extremist" Islam. It's also interesting to note that the US is yet to renounce the death penalty...

 

Well, this got derailed fast.

I think it's awful how so many people seem to think Islam is synonymous with terrorism. (And I say this as an atheist raised in a Christian family.)

It would be like assuming all Christians are represented by the KKK and Westboro Baptist Church.

Extremist traditions of the exact same style can be seen in the history of Judaism and Christianity as well as Islam. 'Avenge me one of my two eyes,' Samson said, as he brought down a whole building full of people, including children who'd been brought there by their parents.

 

I think that one of the biggest reasons that religious practice and religious theory differ is that many people bring their personal views into the mix. They see religious texts through the lenses of personal opinion and then use those texts to justify that opinion. One of the biggest dangers of religion is that influential people can twist it into a tool to force their personal beliefs onto other people. Religion is fine when practiced properly, but all to often people use it as a tool to get what they want. The Crusades, Jonestown, 9/11 are the kind of terrible things that what happen when people twist religion to their own devices. A large percentage of Muslims disagree with homosexuality because that hatred became ingrained into the practiced philosophy of Islam. Long ago someone or a group of people with power in the Muslim community decided that the destruction of Sodom was to punish the homosexuals because they didn't like homosexuality. This belief spread and eventually became the norm.

 

all forms of Islam are exactly the same!! terrorism! i dont know what jihad means!!

 

Well, Ridiculous you can see from the above posts that you don't speak for the whole gay community.

Educate yourself before you make statements about all forms of Islam being associated with terrorism.