Inayat Bunglawala
Inayat Bunglawala is an Advisor on Policy and Research at ENGAGE, an initiative designed to encourage British Muslims to interact more effectively in politics and the media in the UK. He is also a spokesperson at the Muslim Council of Britain.
Some religious communities are not reciprocating the tolerance and respect they insist on from others when it comes to gay rights, particularly in Muslim and some Christian communities. That seemed to be the bleak message at the heart of To Be Straight With You, which was performed at the O’Reilly Theatre in Dublin last week following a sell-out three-week run at the National Theatre in London.
I had been invited to Dublin for a public discussion on issues surrounding religious freedom and sexuality alongside the production’s director, Lloyd Newson, human rights campaigner Peter Tatchell, Dr Katherine Zappone and Father Michael Collins.
In Muslim communities the issue of homosexuality is very rarely discussed in a candid manner and is all too often wished away as if it is an affliction that involves other groups, not them. Not far from the surface, however, are reports of gay Muslim men being pressurised into rushed marriages by parents desperate to avoid any social stigma. The woman’s family is never told the truth about her husband’s sexuality, of course, with the result that another soul has to endure unhappiness due to the initial failure to face up to the issue. It is a highly dishonest and unethical approach.
Islamic scholars and imams should ideally be performing a much-needed pastoral role by helping in these situations and providing guidance. At the very least they should insist that any intimidation or discrimination against gay Muslims is unacceptable.
Newson’s show makes mention of Nelson Mandela’s experiences in 1950s South Africa when the teachings of the Dutch Reformed Church were dominant. In order to get around the country and spread his message of black emancipation and freedom, Mandela used to disguise himself as a chauffeur, pretending to take with him a white passenger who happened to be a colleague in the anti-apartheid movement. That white colleague also happened to be gay, and during those many journeys they had the opportunity to discuss many issues. Mandela came to the conclusion that South Africa could not properly be described as a free and liberated country until all its communities, including the gay community, were freed from persecution.
Just over two years ago, I wrote an article for Cif commending the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) for publicly backing new sexual orientation regulations that had just come into effect as part of the Equality Act 2006. The Equality Act brought the goal of a fairer society closer by proscribing – for the first time – discrimination in the provision of goods and services on the grounds of religious belief or sexuality.
The 2006 act did not in any way compel believers to change any view they had about the practice of homosexuality being against the teachings of their religion. However, it did rightly insist that if someone wanted to provide goods and services to the public, then they should do so without discrimination on grounds of ethnic background, faith or sexual orientation.
The MCB, by supporting the act in its entirely, had taken a positive step forward and had inevitably attracted some criticism from within, which I noted at the time.
Would it not be another positive step if the MCB – as a broad-based umbrella organisation – were to include a gay Muslim support group as an affiliate? There does not appear to be anything in the MCB’s constitution that would seem to preclude such groups from joining and indeed the following clause from the declaration of intent section of the MCB constitution is particularly relevant:
“[The MCB] is a broad-based, representative organisation of Muslims in Britain, accommodating and reflecting the variety of social and cultural backgrounds and outlook of the community.”
At its best, Islamic civilisation was more than willing to learn from other surrounding countries and cultures and adopt the best aspects as its own. Actively working to ensure that people are able to live free of discrimination based on one’s ethnicity, gender, religion or sexual orientation is a worthy goal and should be viewed as an Islamic goal.
This article was first published at The Guardian.
Dear Kezu and others,
The issue of a gay Muslim who heeds Islamic teachings is an OXYMORON !
If one heeds Islamic teachings – then one cannot be gay to begin with.
But I what I would say is that a gay Muslim – is one whose lifestyle is condemned by Islam. A gay Muslim is certainly not a good Muslim.
Just as an alcoholic or gambler Muslim is not a good Muslim. And so on.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
who decides?
Dear Zefly,
In a Muslim country – homosexuality can bring a severe punishment. But Singapore is not a Muslim country – so you get all these cases.
Indeed in Malaysia they are going to cane that woman who drank beer !
In Singapore the enforcement of Islamic Law is only limited to Marriage Laws. But in other Muslim countries, Islamic Law intrudes into the personal domain.
Just look at Malaysia. What we have in Singapore is a very diluted form of Islam. But Singaporean Muslims need not apologise for this. Its not their fault.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
The issue of a gay Muslim heeding Islamic teaching need not be an oxymoron – it depends on who (or which Muslim group) is interpreting Islamic teaching.
There is this version of Islam: Liberal Islam favored by Progressive Muslims
An introduction can be found here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Liberal_movements_within_Islam
Fahim said:
“…. Islam is a religion espousing a set of believes and prescribing a way of life. Like any ideology, religion, or faith, no one is coersed into accepting it….
However like any contractual arrangement if parties willing bind themselves to an agreement they are supposed to adhere to that and there is consequence anyone breaches the contract. Similarly if someone makes a conscious decision to accept Islam, there are no waivers and exceptions. It is like entering into a binding contract. If someone has accepted Islam, he/she has submitted himself to the commandments of the religion.
….anyone is at the liberty to accept or refuse to accept Islam and its teachings. However once someone enters into Islam he/she is bound by the teachings and rules of the religion. ”
1. According to some Islamic teachers, one of the Islamic rule is that apostates from Islam should face the death penalty. So once entered, one is to be bound by this death penalty rule. The effect is that those Muslims in those places cannot choose to apostasy without suffering death. Dun you think that they should be given the freedom to leave Islam without having to be punished? True freedom of religion should not just be freedom to choose to ENTER Islam, but also the freedom to LEAVE Islam. Do u agree?
2. Also, the meaning of rules can be subjected to interpretation. Progressive Muslim groups, on various hermeneutical gournds, can sincerely interpret that those anti-homosexuality text are not applicable. To them, they did not break any “rules” if they engage in gay sex.
typo. corrected statement here:
True freedom of religion should not just be freedom to choose whether or not to ENTER Islam, but also the freedom to LEAVE Islam. Do u agree?
“The issue of a gay Muslim who heeds Islamic teachings is an OXYMORON ! ”
It need not be an oxymoron. It depends on which Muslim group is interpreting the teachings.
For example, one can conceive of the possibility of certain version of Liberal Islam (by Progressive Muslim groups) can say that certain religious text on homosexuality, on hermeneutical ground, is not applicable in today’s context.
Some brief info about Liberal Islam can be found at wikipedia.
Some general tenets of Liberal version of Islam (taken from wiki):
* The autonomy of the individual in interpreting the Qur’an and Hadith.
* A more critical and diverse examination of religious texts, as well as traditional Islamic precedents.
* Complete gender equality in all aspects, including ritual prayer and observance.
* A more open view on modern culture in relation to customs, dress, and common practices.
* The individual use of ijtihad (interpretation) and fitrah (natural sense of right and wrong) is advocated.
from w w w. patheos .com /Resources/Additional-Resources/Homosexuality-and-Same-Sex-Marriage-in-Islam. html
“Today, a group of liberal Muslims in the West is arguing that homosexuality is in fact allowed in the Shariah. They argue that the Quran’s story of Lot was a condemnation of non-consensual sex, not homosexuality. Furthermore, they argue that the reports condemning homosexuality attributed to Muhammad are not historically reliable. Rather, they were made up by a society that inherited a Judeo-Christian aversion to homosexuality.”
Dear People,
Islam Liberal has been declared DEVIATIONIST by the Indonesian and Malaysian authorities !
E\Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
97) Dr Syed Alwi on October 8th, 2009 4.58 pm
Dear People,
“This is my FINAL post on this thread. Its getting boring.”
————–
Really? As usual, if only they really mean what they say and say what they mean, the world will be better off.
Yeah, it’s getting boring, really getting really BORING!
You betcha! Zzzzzzzzz
107) Dr Syed Alwi on October 8th, 2009 8.43 pm
Islam Liberal has been declared DEVIATIONIST by the Indonesian and Malaysian authorities !
so?
pple cannot call themselves Muslim/Islam because you (or the group you belong to) patented/copyrighted the rights to call themselves so? I already mentioned that it all boils down to interpretation, and I am not surprised that Liberal Islam may accept homosexuality could dig up a different interpretation.
maybe you want to try to name a religious group that is actually homogeneous?
Dr Syed Alwi on October 8th, 2009 4.58 pm Dear People,
1. Re: “The Liberal Left have now taken the stand that anyone who observes Islamic practices and teachings are extremists!”
What utter nonsense. But then again, I don’t expect that there are many Singaporeans who actually know what they are talking about when they bandy about political terminology, like “Liberal Left”.
I’m a liberal, a word with origins in the Latin “libere” which means “free”; liberals work consistently to “free” the oppressed.
But the typically politically naive Singapoerean such as youreslf frequently (and opportunistically when the topic borders on sexual freedom) interprets “free” to mean “permissive”. That’s why you would make a supremely daft statement like this: “What they want is carte-blanche licence to have sex with anything that moves !”
Let me clarify what a true liberal stand on this particular topic might be: You are at complete freedom to practise your religion, but you don’t take away anyone else’s right to do the same, reject doing the same, or resolve any conflicts arising from the religion the way they want to. Because that’s what makes YOU a FASCIST. A religious fascist in this case.
And the last I checked it;’s fascists who are extremists. Not liberals.
And you can quit your typically fascist scaremongering slippery slope argument as well by ‘warning’ people of the dangers that liberals intend to inflict on them; it doesn’t hold water.
This has been my thrust:
1. The title of the article here is “Gay Muslims need support”. And what the majority of gay Muslims I know want most is to be able to continue being Muslims and gay, the latter because they have no choice about their sexual orientation.
2. I raised the issue of Quran 49:13 precisely because it contains another Islamic injunction and that is the command to Muslims to seek understanding of human diversity.
3. Unfortunately, any understanding of homosexuality isn’t going to come from the same texts that condemn it; it’s going to come from other authoritative sources.
Would it be so extremist of you to seek understanding?
Or is it more extremist to declare that gay Muslims do not belong to the Muslim community because they are not following Islamic teachings 100%? In all likelihood, YOU don’t follow Islamic teachings 100% either. Can others now seek your excommunication from the Muslim community on that basis?
Are you sure you don’t take the stand you do because it so much easier to pick on a very vulnerable group?
Anyone worth his scholastic Lot’s pillar of salt would know that even in the Judeo-Christian bible, Sodom and Gomorrah was NEVER about homosexuality but all about blatant promiscuity, the pleasures/evils of the flesh (includes drunkenness) and all unrestrained wanton behaviors associated with pagan rituals and worship (eg, sacrifices).
Interesting how people choose to believe what they want to believe and not search for real truths.
When any so called faith causes mankind to fight, kill, maim, discriminate, exclude, judge, condemn, punish, divide and deviate from the core of ; LOVE, Harmony, Forgiveness, Unity, Hope and Progress of civilization, it is clearly NOT of GOD! At least not of the ONE I know.
Everything else is pure BS-Pure and simple!
Dr Syed Alwi on October 8th, 2009 8.43 pm:
Re: “Islam Liberal has been declared DEVIATIONIST by the Indonesian and Malaysian authorities.”
Fascists always do that. Nothing new.
Knowledge Is Power /// When any so called faith causes mankind to fight, kill, maim, discriminate, exclude, judge, condemn, punish, divide and deviate from the core of ; LOVE, Harmony, Forgiveness, Unity, Hope and Progress of civilization, it is clearly NOT OF GOD! ///
Hi Knowledge Is Power
You have excellently put the whole truth in a nutshell
I salute you for this
Now, if only people like Fahim, Solo Bear and Dr Syed Alwi ( and those others who think like them ) will to understand what you have quoted above, i think the world will be so much a better and safer place to live in
The idea that religion causes mankind to fight wars is erroneous. In the last 100 years or so, we have seen WW1, WW2, Korean War, Viet War, Killing Fields of Cambodia, wars in the Baltic, Afghan-Russian War, current Afghan and Iraq wars etc, which are all caused by secular ideology. Religion has been the punching bag.
As for Gay Wars, they have succeeded in attacking Christians in Western countries. After tasting blood whacking the Christians, they are now trying to do it on Muslims.
Christianity and Islam have long been known to be against homosexuality. Somehow gays are able to concoct “Liberal Christianity and Islam” accepts homo. As if those who do not accept homosexuality are less than liberated and are backward.
Why these labels? To create animosity?
How about the concept of “Liberal gays” who accept that gays can return to normalcy and heterosexuality. Meaning of course gays that do not accept that are not liberated and are backward.
How does that sound now?
Dear People,
Why are you Non-Muslims trying to impose your opinions on Islam ? Islam Liberal is deviationist. Heretical. That has been agreed by Malaysian and Indonesian authorities. Amina Wadud, Ulil and company !
Islam and Muslims have never imposed on the Non-Muslims. We expect and demand reciprocity. This Islam Liberal is deviationist. You now want to force Muslims to accept this Islam Liberal ?
No – I am convinced that the Liberal Left has an anti-religion, pro-gay agenda !
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
Solo Bear,
How does secular ideology causes war? I failed to see the connection.
How about the concept of “Liberal gays” who accept that gays can return to normalcy and heterosexuality. Meaning of course gays that do not accept that are not liberated and are backward.//
What about the concept of ‘Liberal Gays’? Are they treated differently than other ppl or other gay group?
And if they can truly return to ‘normalcy’ and ‘heterosexuality’ they are no longer labeled as Gay, (no point debating liberal or radical).
The thought that ‘religions don’t start wars – since the wars started in the last 100 years had been mostly secular’ is a false dichotomy.
It is not ‘God’ or ‘No-god’ that causes conflicts and suffering, but the an ‘ideology’, (divinely inspired or otherwise) that takes the form of an unquestionable doctrine with a zero tolerance for other views.
In that sense, Communism and Facism, despite being ‘atheist’, share the same characteristics as the extreme forms of religious expressions.
Dear Zefly,
By your definition, millitant atheism is also a religion !
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
Does it exist?
Syed
//The issue of a gay Muslim who heeds Islamic teachings is an OXYMORON !
If one heeds Islamic teachings – then one cannot be gay to begin with.
But I what I would say is that a gay Muslim – is one whose lifestyle is condemned by Islam. A gay Muslim is certainly not a good Muslim.//
So just to clarify on your statement, it is Possible to be Gay and Muslim.
But that only mean they are not Good Muslim, but muslim nontheless?
So can we conclude gay muslim is not a myth base on your statement above?
Just as I had expected would happen at some point in this debate, Dr Syed Alwi on October 9th, 2009 10.05 am would pull this out of the air, no doubt to send participants on a guilt trip and silence debate.
Re: “Why are you Non-Muslims trying to impose your opinions on Islam?”
Is verse 49:13 part of the Quran? If it is, how can he accuse anyone of “imposing on Islam”. He dosen’t even make a pretense of not distinguishing beween “Muslims” – but only the fascist strain – from “Islam”.
Re: “Islam and Muslims have never imposed on the Non-Muslims. We expect and demand reciprocity.”
Read my lips Syed Alwi: questioning is not the same as imposing. Are you so weak that you cannot reject something that you don’t agree with?
Re: “No – I am convinced that the Liberal Left has an anti-religion, pro-gay agenda !”
You can think what you want; the proof is in the pudding.
Robox
Agreed with your sentiment. We have seen the same kind of arguement in other religion orientated treads.
It always boils down to Secular vs Religion, Gay agenda vs religion.
I still dont understand why this is so.
Is the perceived attack is due to questioning of religion using logic / reason from the non believer??
From Syed post 114
//No – I am convinced that the Liberal Left has an anti-religion, pro-gay agenda //
Liberal Left? (assumed its exist), anti religion?
(eradicating religion and excluding religion from politic is very different thing)
Pro-gay agenda?
How does pro-gay impose on you? If you dont like gay, dont be Gay. Simple.
95) Solo Bear on October 8th, 2009 3.14 pm
Your reply seem to fail moderation. Maybe you want to paraphrase/shorten your reply?
114) Solo Bear on October 9th, 2009 9.51 am
“The idea that religion causes mankind to fight ALL wars is erroneous” is different from “The idea that religion causes mankind to fight wars is erroneous”. Yours is the latter.
So you have point out out wars that were not started by religions (Afghan is not???) which does nothing to the disprove the statement that religions start war.
117) Zefly (aka Joshua Chiang) on October 9th, 2009 10.09 am
Personally, I defined religion to include a supernatural element (God, higher power, rebirth, etc). Something really unprovable.
If not, really anything can be religion. Then nothing is. =)
Dr Syed /// Islam and Muslims have never imposed on the non-muslims ///
What about those mass conversions, on the sword, in India in Moghul times. Thousands of non-muslims will slaughtered when they refused to convert to Islam.
How do you think India has the second highest density of muslims in the world.
Dr , i ve only given you one example (India)– there are countless more all over the world in history. How you can write something like “islam and muslims have never imposed on the non-muslims”—truly i’m flabbergasted
113) Solo Bear on October 9th, 2009 9.51 am
//The idea that religion causes mankind to fight wars is erroneous. In the last 100 years or so, we have seen WW1, WW2, Korean War, Viet War, Killing Fields of Cambodia, wars in the Baltic, Afghan-Russian War, current Afghan and Iraq wars etc, which are all caused by secular ideology. Religion has been the punching bag.//
So all the war mentioned above is cause by secular ideology? ? ? perplexed.
Other than religious war, there are other type of War that’s not cause by secular ideology.
Ie Civil War, Etnic Conflict, Colonial War, War of Independent (nationalist war), and so on which has cannot directly link in anyway to secular ideology.
Re: #102 #103
Based on my little knowledge of the religion I practice, I believe that everyone has the liberty to choose. Therefore whatever I know those who are born in Muslim families have the right to choose once they reach the age of adulthood. Now if the society does not give such a right it is the fault of society not the religion.
However like any contractual agreement the parties bind themselves to the terms of contract. One of the contractual terms is that once someone consciously enters into Islam he/she can not leave. I believe, it is done so that people will not make a casual choice without proper thinking. Do we know that the punishment for anyone who commits the offense of desertion in US and UK military is death! So why do we give preferential treatment to Islam on this matter?
http://encyclopedia.jrank.org/DEM_DIO/DESERTION.html
http://usmilitary.about.com/od/punitivearticles/a/mcm85.htm
112) Budamaxx1952 on October 9th, 2009 9.25 am
“Now, if only people like Fahim, Solo Bear and Dr Syed Alwi ( and those others who think like them ) will to understand what you have quoted above, i think the world will be so much a better and safer place to live in.”
————–
Thank you kindly. Just stating a basic truth. Sadly, it always elude the mentally challenged; It’s always said that bad things come in threes. LOL.
——————————————————————
97) Dr Syed Alwi on October 8th, 2009 4.58 pm
Dear People,
“This is my FINAL post on this thread. Its getting boring.”
—————
Yawn..zzzz…are we still at his finals? Tsk tsk, guessed he failed his PSLE again. As expected, there is NO credibility or truth to his rambling tit tats when he cannot even get the most fundamental claim right. Such bore..:P
PS: Anyone who NEEDS to broadcast a nick identity as a “dr ” of sorts in chat forums has SERIOUS ego deficiency & baggage issues. It’s a usual preemptive tactic to strike/talk down others. Double ZZZZ.
So Shut up already will ya zebra preents?….your khaki bait is really getting stale. Boomz!
I repost my reminder:
90) Knowledge Is Power on October 8th, 2009 11.38 am
DO NOT waste precious time arguing with or explaining to religious fundamentalists. They will drown you with denials, outmoded references and hole-ly books. They live on combat, that’s their motivation. That’s their jihad-win over infidels at ALL costs.
126) Fahim on October 9th, 2009 12.48 pm
In commercial contracts, terms are listed so that little needs interpretation. In fact, the things that need interpretation are usually carefully spelled out so as to prevent ambiguity.
Frankly, I do not think there are many books that are more ambiguous than holy texts. (if, by ‘terms of contract’, you mean everything in the respective holy texts.)
With know exactly what the terms of contract entails, have pple really ‘bind’ themselves? Don’t tell me religions are like companies… which really like ‘fine prints’?
Dear People,
Why don’t you debate about Islam on Islam-Online or on the many web-sites in Malaysian cyberspace ? Lets see what the rest of the Muslim world thinks about your views.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
lobo76,
actually, that is where it gets messy… because (at least for me) there is a distinction between spirituality (belief in the divine, transcendance) and what is called ‘religion’. A person can be deeply spiritual, even preference for one or more expressions of the divine in the various faiths, but not ‘belong’ to a religion.
And also, i do not claim other ideology as religions, but sharing the characteristics (a vision that the world would be ‘perfect’ if everyone follows the doctrines) of certain extreme interpretations of scriptures.
Using an analogy – a tiger is not a lion, but they share similar characteristics.
Dr Alwi,
Are you a Muslim at all? Why are you apparently trying to stir up hatred towards Islam?
Lobo76 (#127),
That is why there are many commentaries. In the case of Islam, if I remember correctly, the Quran is the Holy/Revealed text, while the Hadith is the “Book of Sayings”, or the handbook that helps you put the teachings of the Quran into practice; just like the Analects in Chinese tradition.
Christianity has the authorized commentaries, dating from the Didache in the 1st Century.
Kezu (#124),
Actually, even wars “caused” by Religious Ideology are actually Ethnic conflicts, that is religious faith teachings degraded to ethnic/tribal level. Confucius, Jesus, The Three Emperors, Moses, Krishna, Muhammad, Bahai’ullah and so on all teach Peace on Earth and Goodwill to Men, so they would not approve of religious war. In fact, one reason for the initial success of Islam was that Muhammad forbade his fellow Muslims from harming their prisoners-of-war, a far-cry from today’s terrorist bombers who hurt the innocents, indeed.
Dear Arix,
I am certainly NOT trying to stir hatred towards Islam. Why the twist when all I do is defend mainstream Islam ? It seems to me that some people simply cannot accept Muslim practices.
Why are you making wild accusations ? Are you apologetic about standard mainstream Islamic teachings ?
I think I have been fair. If these people want to know what Islam is all about – then they should go and debate their views on credible Muslim web-sites. Its open to all. Go visit such web-sites and present your views.
Why are you making such wild accusations – if you are Muslim to begin with ? Are ashamed of mainstream Muslim practices ?
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
Dear People – especially Arix,
Go visit Muslim web-sites like Islam Online (based in Egypt) or others in Malaysia, Indonesia etc and present your views. Find out what the rest of the Muslim world thinks. Don’t just pressure Singaporean Muslims into accepting values and practices which are deemed un-Islamic by other Muslims world-wide ! Take up my challenge. Its open to all.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
Thanks Arix.
I truly believe its not religion that causes war.
To say religion cause war, is like say the gun is a murderer.
Religion is so often abused and manipulated by Man to achieve their own personal aim. War in the name of religion is merely a by-product.
Religion is not in itself dangerous, its in the wrong hands it become deadly.
So i stand by my quote ‘I do not despise religion, but i despise the hypocrisy of Men and what they do in the name of religion.’
128) Dr Syed Alwi on October 9th, 2009 3.37 pm
//Why don’t you debate about Islam on Islam-Online or on the many web-sites in Malaysian cyberspace ? Lets see what the rest of the Muslim world thinks about your views.//
I personally dont mind, but will reason/logic be the common ground for this debate?
135) Dr Syed Alwi on October 9th, 2009 6.05 pm
…. mainstream … mainstream … mainstream?
There were 3 such words in your post. Personally, if you asked me what I am against, it would be ‘mainstream’. They really like to impose their will/belief/etc on others. That is what I am against.
137) Kezu on October 9th, 2009 6.09 pm
Religion is not in itself dangerous, its in the wrong hands it become deadly.
… I could use that to describe a gun.. that is, if I actually agreed with the first part of the sentence.
But I understand what you are trying to convey. Something along the lines of money is not the root of evil, but greed is.
137) Kezu on October 9th, 2009 6.09 pm
The fact that you are trying to justify that homosexuality is acceptable in Islam would require Islamic sources to be the basis of argument.
Even if reason and logic were to be used, it is common sense to tell you that the anus is not for sex.
Hence, Islam places every part of our body for the purpose that it has been created/exist for .
You do not eat with your feet.
Mohd Shamin
//Even if reason and logic were to be used, it is common sense to tell you that the anus is not for sex//
Do try to preach to the heteros, even in singapore as the repeal of section 337 has lift that ban to legalize anal sex between a man and woman.
//The fact that you are trying to justify that homosexuality is acceptable in Islam would require Islamic sources to be the basis of argument//
I am not that critical to pinpoint issues pertaining directly on Islam vs homosexual.
What a lot of ppl here has put forth on the arguement of Religion vs Homosexual.
(Islam being a religion falls under this catergory, no?)
The point i am trying to make is, religion and comon sense do not operate on the same sphere, hence the need for a secular state to maintain balance.
(secular in this context : all religion are free to exist with none above the other)
Islam forbids
1) marriage between 2 people of the same sex
2) sex outside of marriage
So if a Muslim is not married to another, sex is forbidden between them, whatever their sexual inclination is. If a heterosexual Muslim can abstain from pre marital sex because his religion forbids it, so too can a gay if he really wants to be an observant Muslim. His sexual inclination is therefore no longer an issue.
As a Muslim I cannot approve and tolerate what is clearly forbidden by the religion and will do my best to counsel a brother or sister who has transgressed. If he / she insists in his /her ways, I would have already done my duty and can only pray for him/her.
Hi Lobo76
Religion in its unadulterated/not misinterpreted form preaches love, harmony and compassion. Be it Christianity, Islam or Buddism etc.
Its human shortcoming that created all these problems that associated with religion.
Dr Syed Alwi on October 9th, 2009 6.05 pm to Arix:
Re: “I am certainly NOT trying to stir hatred towards Islam. Why the twist when all I do is defend mainstream Islam?”
This much I can tell you no matter how unfair it might seem.
You do 100 things right, but blunder big time just once, and that’s what people will remember about you.
I consider people like Fahim and cagiva-diablo to hold very moderate stands on the issue of homosexuality; they know where their personal boundaries are.
Unfortunately, what’s going to stick in people’s minds is *your* fascist stand on this issue. I will substantiate what I mean.
At some point during this discussion, you sent out a not-too-subtle threat primarily to gay Muslims (because Syariah laws apply only to Muslims though I know of at least one exception), that if they were in a Muslim majority country, they could be subject to some form of corporal punishment that could include death. You sounded almost regretful that the same cannot apply to gay Muslim Singaporeans.
Let me tell you that I have always considered such subtle threats to constitute an incitement of violence towards gays and lesbians, Muslim or otherwise. You have chosen to do it under the guises of ‘legitimacy’ and ‘respectability’ because it derives from religion. However, the history of violence against gays, lesbians and transexuals points far more to mob violence perpetrated by the ‘moral’ vigilante than by any authority, religious or otherwise. The ‘moral’ vigilante almost always take their cue from religion. That history is by no means over; this is one way that you may have inadvertantly stirred hatred towards Islam.
In Singapore, the religion-based anti-gay tirade has thus far been almost exclusively perpetrated by fundamentalist Christians. Every once in a while though, when they get frustrated because they have no reply to gay activists, they suddenly develop an inexplicable feeling of ‘brotherhood’ with Muslims and call upon Muslims to join in their war against gays based on their stereotype that Muslims can surely be depended on to incorporate violence against gays and lesbians in dealing with the challenge coming from gay activists. (I have already made two high-level complaints against them when that happened; I will not do that here unless you keep persisting along those lines – I take any incitement towards violence against gays and lesbians very seriously.)
That’s another way that you might have helped to stir hatred against Islam.
Now, you are issuing yet another challenge: Get onto Muslim websites in Egypt, Malaysia and Indonesia where you know that we will be grossly outnumbered – because you can only find strength in numbers and not conviction – by Muslims who are likely to share the same views as you. The expected emotional and psychological violence that non-Muslims can expect to face on those websites, and the intimidation that we will receive is probably what you intend for us. It’s the precursor to physical violence.
Always.
You may wish to rethink your claim that all you are doing is to ‘defend mainstream Islam’; you are doing more damage to it than you think.
lobo76 on October 9th, 2009 1.27 pm 126):
Re: “Don’t tell me religions are like companies… which really like ‘fine prints’?”
You put that very well.
Religion, and this time I will include spirituality as well, begins with the asumption that human beings are fallible, and thus they serve as a guide to helping people to move to a point of being less and less fallible; it’s a life long process and one that is unlikely to result in 100% perfect human beings. But it helps to some degree. (At this juncture, I wish to elucidate on my own position: Religious sources are not the only ones that can help humans develop; there are many non-religious sources that can do the same or even better job, and without contradicting the religious goals themselves.)
That’s what made me uncomfortable with Fahim’s likening of religion to a contract. It assumes infallibility, and holds you accountable to every mis-step, no matter how slight. And because this accountability is expected of you while you are on Earth, it would seem that the accountability is to man and not God as is frequently claimed.
Dear Robox,
Think what you like, Fact is that you are homosexual and you do not like what religion has to say about homosexuality. And because I can blast you in debate – you do not like me especially.
Thats all there is to it.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
Dear People,
My challenge for you to debate on credible Muslim web-sites in Egypt, Malaysia etc is NOT because there will be more Muslims there – BUT because you will find a CONFIRMATION of what Fahim and I have written so far.
Islam is NOT based on human reasoning. It is based on Divine Revelation Therefore my suggestion is really to show you that Fahim and my arguments – are correct as far as Islam is concerned.
We Muslims reject Homosexuality because the Quran and Hadith tells us so.
Neither do we accept an arbitrary personal interpretation of the Quran. There are rules to follow when interpreting the Quran. Hence we also reject Islam Liberal as being deviationist.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
Dr Syed Alwi on October 10th, 2009 8.46 am:
Re: “Fact is that you are homosexual and you do not like what religion has to say about homosexuality.”
Even more factual is, I don’t give a damn about what any religion has to say about homosexuality. I think religion is overrated, even in Singapore.
I suggest to everyone – you as well – who don’t share my views on religion but hold it in reverance instead, to also study the HISTORY of your religion whatever religion that may be, along with the religious texts themselves; you’d be better postioned to put religion in its right context.
Re: “And because I can blast you in debate – you do not like me especially.”
Blast me? Is that why you have been scrupulously avoiding answering my posts to you for the two or three days? It’s not you *especially* that I don’t like; I don’t like ALL fascists – I never spare Lee Kuan Yew my sharp words, for instance.
Dear Robox,
You are free to form your own opinions. If you do not like religion – then thats your business. But don’t tell us Muslims how to practice our religion. We Muslims know what Islam is all about and what Islam has to say about homosexuality.
You with your way of life – and leave us Muslims to our own way of life. To each his own.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
147) Dr Syed Alwi on October 10th, 2009 8.53 am
//Islam is NOT based on human reasoning. It is based on Divine Revelation Therefore my suggestion is really to show you that Fahim and my arguments – are correct as far as Islam is concerned.//
The question is why every time we bring up religion in any context, in relation to any issues or discussion, it always end with Divine Revelation, period?
Is the holy books such as Quran, Bible etc so infallible that one can literally apply it to any where and anytime?
//To each his own.//
Lets hope this is what we will all remember to practice.