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.
Consistency… huh…
Religions get converts (spread) and are ‘okay’.
Gay are not ‘okay’ and should just keep to themselves.
Pls remind me how this is being ‘consistent’?
49)Fahim
Now again I want to ask why a particular sexual predisposition such as homosexuality should be allowed while other consensual sexual relationships such as between siblings and close family members should remain prohibited
One thing at a time.
For siblings and close family members, I would think because there is a third party that can get hurt. i.e a child born of such union would be likely to suffer from genetic problems.
A consensual sexual relationship between the same gender has no such issue.
You say ‘such as’. What other types of relationships do you wish to conflate together again? Let’s do them one by one.
They have thousand justifications for carrying out those acts but they are unable to justify these acts they are clearly prohibited in Islam.
I think they CAN justify the acts in Islam, just not to your satisfaction. After all, most holy texts can be contradictory (over the WHOLE text, and not particular verses), depending on how one interprets it (and it IS open to interpretation) or which part of the text one refers to.
Lobo:
>>
Consistency… huh…
Religions get converts (spread) and are ‘okay’.
Gay are not ‘okay’ and should just keep to themselves.
Pls remind me how this is being ‘consistent’?
>>
Me:
When Christians and Muslims preach and when listeners don’t convert, that’s the end of it.
When gays ask you to support them and you don’t, they call you a bigot.
Yeah, need you be reminded about the (in)consistency?
>>
For siblings and close family members, I would think because there is a third party that can get hurt. i.e a child born of such union would be likely to suffer from genetic problems.
>>
Gay anal sex causes hurt too. High chance of HIV.
Condom you say? Then incest with condom helps, no?
So why gay yes, incest no? Again, where is the consistency?
Oh, in case you want to be a wise guy and say I want to promote incest, I am not. I object to BOTH incest and gay. At least, I am consistent.
What has this got to do with the point of ‘do not show off in public’? Preston is asking Homos to not ‘show off in public’, and Robox agrees on the condition that heteros does the same. Something along the lines of (Preston) homos should not hold hand in public, (Robox) heteros also cannot hold hand in public.
How do you link the above to your question?
>>
What has this got to do with the point of ‘do not show off in public’? Preston is asking Homos to not ‘show off in public’,
>>
Me:
I believe homos HAVE “shown off” in public. They call you bigots if you don’t support them. They boo, jeer and behave in uncouth fashion at AWARE’s EGM, attacking Josie and gang, when many members (and associate members) went there to hear both sides of the story.
Heteros have left homos alone. Why must you call us bigots if I don’t support the repeal of S377A? Don’t I have a right not to support?
Why must I listen to all your problems you have with Josie and Thio at the EGM? I went there to hear from old guard and new guard. Not about how you feel about Chrstian fundies.
So, if you want heteros to respect your space, respect space of others.
No… they try and try again.
Not all gays do that. And, there are probably Christians and Muslims who call you infidel.
So, yeah… it’s all about being consistent. Gays are trying and trying, and some blacksheeps call you names, same as religious conversions.
High chance of PASSING HIV. In a monogamous relationship, there is no such risk.
wow.. you try to predict my response to another response… lol
No, I didn’t say condom. But if I might say it.. so I’ll grant you that one.
No, I didn’t say “gay yes, and incest no” (when condom is used). Well, I don’t like it one bit, but I am going to go with ‘yes’ for both, if no harm arises from that.
Since you got the second one wrong, I don’t think I need to respond to the third prediction, do I?
And you say this because… ?
Unless, by ‘alone’ you mean isolated… if not, the taking over of AWARE does not seem to be an act of leaving homos ‘alone’.
Good question. I wonder myself why I am a ‘gay’ or a ‘gay-lover’ simply because I support the repeal of S377A. Don’t I have the right to support?
What happens when one side starts out with their side of the space not respected. Is asking for respect, not respecting the other’s space?
Dear fearandignorance,
There will always be some Muslims who transgress. This fellow, Bunglawalla – does NOT represent mainstream Muslim views. If you ask the average practicing Muslim – you will get a similar response as mine. Besides, maybe Bunglawalla is gay himself !
Why don’t you contact MUIS and ask the Muslim scholars and clerics ? Why do you rely upon the whims and fancy of people like Bunglawalla ? Who is he in the Muslim world anyway ?
Go ask MUIS for their views.
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
>>
And, there are probably Christians and Muslims who call you infidel.
>>
You think so? Why are you not sure? That’s because Christians and Muslims are more tolerant than gays, no?
FOR SURE, I have been called bigot by gays MANY TIMES for even something as simple as not agreeing with their viewpoint.
>>
High chance of PASSING HIV. In a monogamous relationship, there is no such risk.
>>
Are you trying to say that gays are monogamous? Please.
>>
No, I didn’t say “gay yes, and incest no” (when condom is used). Well, I don’t like it one bit, but I am going to go with ‘yes’ for both, if no harm arises from that.
>>
Yes to incest too? So you have confirmed the fear that many people have – going down the slippery slope! Ultimately, bestiality and paedo are on the cards. Only a matter of time, no?
>>
Unless, by ‘alone’ you mean isolated… if not, the taking over of AWARE does not seem to be an act of leaving homos ‘alone’.
>>
The AWARE takeover was initiated by one group and one group only – COOS. Gays then had to bring in Christianity and other heteros. Please, if you want people to leave you alone, you should leave others alone.
>>
I wonder myself why I am a ‘gay’ or a ‘gay-lover’ simply because I support the repeal of S377A. Don’t I have the right to support?
>>
What’s wrong with being called gay or gay-lover? Is there a negative connotation like bigot? Self-pawned?
Dr Syed,
ENGAGE, the organisation which Inayat is an advisor to, is a political organisation. It is not a religious organisation. Go check out their website.
It can hardly be said that Inayat’s words represent Muslim views of Islam, let alone Muslim views in UK.
Homosexuals have been tortured, killed, burnt alive, hung by the neck for thousands of years by those ‘holy’ followers of the Abrahamic faiths
The Christians might have stopped butchering these people today, but in Iraq and other muslim countries they are at it in full swing
Do these people who so loudly proclaim that their holy-books speak nothing but the absolute truth stop to think that they are actually participants in the persecution and murder of homosexuals all over the world
Solo Bear,
Are you blind as the article did mention that Inayat Bunglawala works for the Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) as its spokesman and the article mentioned MCB more than it did on ENGAGE?
fear and ignorance,
Why don’t you put some effort to find out about MCB instead of swallowing wholesale what the gay pride is trying to push?
Here is MCB’s “About Us” webpage.
===
http://www.mcb.org.uk/aboutmcb.php
Aims and Objectives
To promote cooperation, consensus and unity on Muslim affairs in the UK.
To encourage and strengthen all existing efforts being made for the benefit of the Muslim community.
To work for a more enlightened appreciation of Islam and Muslims in the wider society.
To establish a position for the Muslim community within British society that is fair and based on due rights.
To work for the eradication of disadvantages and forms of discrimination faced by Muslims.
To foster better community relations and work for the good of society as a whole
===
No mention of understanding Islamic scriptures? And this is supposedly an Islamic site? Isn’t the above yet another lobby group like ENGAGE, rather than a true religious organisation?
Compare that to Religious Council of Muslims in Singapore below.
===
http://www.muis.gov.sg/cms/aboutus/default.aspx
Mission: To broaden and deepen the Singaporean Muslim Community’s understanding and practice of Islam, while enhancing the well being of the nation.
Strategic Priority: To set the Islamic agenda, shape religious life and forge the Singaporean Muslim Identity
Values
Core Values Integrity Consultative Inclusive
Overview
The Majlis Ugama Islam Singapura (MUIS), also known as the Islamic Religious Council of Singapore, was established as a statutory body in 1968 when the Administration of Muslim Law Act (AMLA) came into effect. Under AMLA, MUIS is to advise the President of Singapore on all matters relating to Islam in Singapore.
The role of MUIS is to see that the many and varied interests of Singapore’s Muslim community are looked after. In this regard MUIS is responsible for the promotion of religious, social, educational, economic and cultural activities in accordance with the principles and traditions of Islam as enshrined in the Holy Quran and Sunnah.
===
How can you call MCB a religious group when it doesn’t even talk about Islam itself? The closest it got is “appreciation of Islam”.
Really? Without taking into consideration Islamic scriptures? How? By judging Islam through the eyes of Western media?
MCB is not a religious organisation. It is nothing more than a lobby group.
It’s always the same people that gather to talk about sex.
Why ?
Taken from MCB’s FAQ
What of criticisms that the MCB doesn’t speak for or represent all Muslims?
The MCB clearly can’t speak and represent all Muslims just as all organisations of a similar type cannot. The MCB does however, through the number and geographic spread of its affiliate organisations throughout the UK, speak for and represent a large cross section of the British Muslim community. Organisations that affiliate to the MCB grant it the legitimacy to represent their concerns and interests.
Dr Syed Alwi,
why ask MUIS when Muslim Council of Britain (MCB) is likely to be bigger and represents a bigger population of Muslims than MUIS! How and why is MUIS more authoritative on Islam affairs than MCB?
I believe that Islam as practiced is not a monilithic religion. There are different groups and sects of Islam.
A very consistent impression one gets is that all Islamic countries prohibit homosexualily. Iran, Saudi Arabia and Pakistan? execute those found guitly of being gay. Therefore, as Muslims have said, Islam and being gay are contradictory.
The current interpretation of Islam all over the world is getting very conservative — (canning for S’pore PR Muslim lady caught drinking beer in Malaysia!)
I just don’t see how gay Muslims can continue their lifestyle unless they keep it a secret or stop being a Muslim altogether.
Are there any islamic countries where self-confessed gay Muslims are tolerated?
sorry… not sure when I went wrong with the commands.. to be safe, i removed them.
Solobear: You think so? Why are you not sure?
I am not ‘sure’ because I do not like to be sure (absolute).
Solobear: That’s because Christians and Muslims are more tolerant than gays, no?
Is this a rhetorical question? If it is (i.e you concluded that C and M are indeed more tolerant) I would like to know why you think so? Even if you have no numbers to back it up.
Solobear: Are you trying to say that gays are monogamous? Please.
nope, I didn’t say that. I said: IF they are, anal sex does not CREATE HIV. Do you agree or not? period.
so the issue is not anal sex, but promiscuity. Do you agree or not?
Solobear: Yes to incest too? So you have confirmed the fear that many people have – going down the slippery slope! Ultimately, bestiality and paedo are on the cards. Only a matter of time, no?
How do beasts and children give ‘[i]consent[/i]‘? I do not mean the normal yes/no consent but the consent with the full knowledge of what they are getting into. I’ll wait for your answer before concluding that you see a ‘slippery slope’ is because your head is slanted.
Solobear: The AWARE takeover was initiated by one group and one group only – COOS. Gays then had to bring in Christianity and other heteros.
so COOS is NOT Christian? who are ‘other heteros’??
Solobear: Please, if you want people to leave you alone, you should leave others alone.
I noticed you didn’t reply my point on:
“What happens when one side starts out with their side of the space not respected. Is asking for respect, not respecting the other’s space?”
… I am waiting.
Solobear: What’s wrong with being called gay or gay-lover? Is there a negative connotation like bigot? Self-pawned?
Nothing wrong other than I am simply not one. Never tot about negative connotations… I tot you were proud to be a bigot. lolz
#36 Fahim
Thanks for taking the time to explain the teaching of Islam. It’s beyond doubt that Islam does not condone terrorism. It is also clear that Islam condemn both terrorism amd homosexuality. However you have not adequately explained why the Muslim community seems more eager to condemn a homosexual than a terrorist.
Yes, “there’s no gay Muslim”, the message is loud and clear. What about the message “there’s no terrorist Muslim”?
Hundreds turned up for Noordin Top’s funeral – with some shouting “God is Great” in his burial. His brother-in-law said: “He was a good Muslim”.
In contrast, homosexuals are persecuted, tortured and executed. A homosexual might have had sex with a few men. A terrorist had taken the lives of more men, women and children. Islam taught that both terrorism and homosexuality are equally condemnable. But it seems to me, the Muslim community is more interested to condemn a homosexual than a terrorist.
#52 Solo Bear
“When gays ask you to support them and you don’t, they call you a bigot.”
Did you ask the gays whether they support you or not before you decide to call them faggot?
Frankly, between bigot and faggot, I’d rather be called a bigot anytime.
Well…the thing about religion is that some people can be quite selective on the aspects they want to follow. I mean almost every religion (if not all) condemns various sins yet do people follow all of them (it would be impossible though)? But on certain issues, they can be rather vocal as long as they know that they will not commit that “crime”.
Please keep your comments to 500 words or less. Anything more will be disallowed from now on.
And as for not quoting from religious text, it is a rule we have had for all discussions on such matters, as any regular commenter knows. We do not want to end up with one side quoting from the texts and another side quoting from other parts of the text. In the end, it makes for ridiculous discussion.
If you have something to say, try and say it in your own words.
Thanks.
lobo
>>
(i.e you concluded that C and M are indeed more tolerant) I would like to know why you think so?
>>
Have you seen anything C and M have done that is close to the boisterous behaviour of gays like at Aware’s EGM?
>>
so the issue is not anal sex, but promiscuity. Do you agree or not?
>>
Yeah. So? I am against ALL promiscuity. Hetero or homo.
>>
How do beasts and children give ‘[i]consent[/i]‘? I do not mean the normal yes/no consent but the consent with the full knowledge of what they are getting into.
>>
“Consent” is a matter of definition. You mean a 13 yr old doesn’t know what she does? Also animal lovers will tell you there have a “close understanding.”
Again, not that I am promoting paedo or bestiality. I am against all that, including homo.
>>
so COOS is NOT Christian? who are ‘other heteros’??
>>
Ah, confirming you blanket ALL Christians because of COOS? Self pawn again? As for other heteros, parents were affected by Aware’s trash CSE.
Yeah, what’s wrong with being called gay or gay-lover, as compared to bigot? Are you saying there is negative connotation being gay?
Lop,
>>
Did you ask the gays whether they support you or not before you decide to call them faggot?
>>
Who called faggot? Just because a few homo-haters do that, you paint all those who don’t support you as bigots?
Andrew Loh:
>>
And as for not quoting from religious text, it is a rule we have had for all discussions on such matters, as any regular commenter knows. We do not want to end up with one side quoting from the texts and another side quoting from other parts of the text. In the end, it makes for ridiculous discussion.
>>
Me:
Which brings back the point, why implicate that Islam allows homo?
So you bring up religion and then ask the followers of the religion to refrain quoting their texts. You did that to Christianity, now you are trying it out on Islam. What next? Buddhism? Taoism?
Strange logic you have been engaging since it has been found out that TOC is a platform that gives unwavering support to the gay pride.
#71 Solo Bear
“Who called faggot? Just because a few homo-haters do that, you paint all those who don’t support you as bigots?”
Great reasoning there. How about for once you listen to yourself and not call anyone who doesn’t support you ‘gay’?
So you are not a homo-hater, does that make you a homo-lover?
Anyway, when someone calls you a bigot that means you are in power, at least must be in a much better position in order to be intolerant and oppress. Why do you react as if you are being called a faggot – insult to mean you are a social outcast that the everyone spits on?
Lop:
>>
Great reasoning there. How about for once you listen to yourself and not call anyone who doesn’t support you ‘gay’?
>>
You miss point. “Bigot” and “faggot” have got negative meanings. Are you trying to say “gay” has too? Self-pawn?
I have been called “Christian” many times. It has no negative meaning. All I say to them is that I am not Christian.
What is wrong with anyone having to repeat he is not gay, the way I have to repeat I am not Christian?
Unless of course, you feel that being called gay has negative impact. Be my guest, if you feel that way.
Oh btw, since you are candid about “bigot”, let me be candid that if someone calls you “faggot”, it means that you have the ability to take insults in your stride without fuss. Why do you see the negative that someone spits on you?
So while bigot is about oppression, faggot is about being able to take pressure.
#74 Solo Bear
I’m afraid you are the one who missed the point. The *point* is you don’t want someone to use one broad stroke to label you, then you shouldn’t do it to others too.
Funny you should ask whether gay has any negative meaning. Didn’t you just equate being gay with pedophilia, bestiality, AIDS etc. etc.? After you have spewed so much vitriol, you need to ask whether the word ‘gay’ has any negative meaning? Are you just pure innocent or being hypocritical?
So, now it’s starting to dawn on me why you took so much offence when someone called you a bigot. Because you didn’t want to be an oppressor, all you really wanted was to be one who could take the ‘pressure’. Therefore you would rather be a faggot than a bigot! (You are a strange one, I’d imagine a lot of people would rather be a bigot than a faggot!)
Reply to #54-polar bear.
My comment did not mention any thing about homosexuality or homo-
sexuals.Please do not put words in my mouth.If you want to have anal sex with your
partners whether with same sex or opposite sex,your spouse,it is none of anybody
business.If you want,you can have a sex orgy with same sex or opposite or mixed
sex.Bad for you,but who cares,as long you do it behind closed door of your home.Pierre Trudeau’s quote is for the whole country, not just for some special interest groups.Polar bear, you owe me an apology.
Reply to #54-polar bear.
Sorry polar bear.My reply is meant for #53-lobo76.This person owes me an
apology.
Dr Syed Alwi on October 7th, 2009 12.10 pm:
1. Re: “A Muslim who is gay – lives a lifestyle that is condemned by Islam. Period.”
I’m not thick. I’ve known that from time immemorial, and you can drop your goddamned patronizing tone towards me.
2. Re: “You may not like what Organized Religion has to say about homosexuality – but thats your business.”
I don’t give damn about ANY of the monotheiistic religions, because I *DON”T* consider any of them to be any authourity on my own life, and especially not an authority on homosexuality.
3. Re: “You cannot expect Muslims the world over – to “modify” what they consider to be the Word of God – just to accomodate your sexual preferences.”
I don’t, and please tell me where I even insinuated that.
And I suppose that to you, when yours or anyone else’s religious text is written in such a way as accomodate YOUR sexual preferences, it is not considered discriminatory and neither is it considered giving YOU special rights.
4. Re: “No matter how you view homosexuality – Islam condemns it. You simply cannot get the Muslim world to change what is in the Quran”
I asked a question to Fahmi about whether Muslims would *reconsider their disdain towards gays, starting with Muslim gays*, should there be scientific evidence – and they are all already pointing in that direction – that homosexuality is as naturally occurring (and therefore nomal) as heterosexuality.
Asking one to reconsider his attitudes is not tantamount to asking him to modify what he considers to be the ‘Word of God’.
5. Re: “If Muslim gays cannot accept this – well – they might want to consider being a free thinker or an atheist or an agnostic.”
Well, many of them already have.
But you should take a good look at yourself and ask yourself what right you have right to ask Muslims to leave the religion.
Do you own Islam?
Fahim on October 7th, 2009 2.03 pm
1. Re: “…I want to ask why a particular sexual predisposition such as homosexuality should be allowed while other consensual sexual relationships such as between siblings and close family members should remain prohibited.”
First, I compare homosexuality to heterosexuality, not incest; homosexuality is a sexual orientation like heterosexuality. And why should heterosexuality that does not, and in most cases NOT INTENDED TO, result in procreation not be similarly prohibited?
Say, just how common is incest anyway, that it keeps being brought up as a way to silence the debate on homosexuality and gay rights?
2. Re: “…what really makes me flip is the fact that some people start changing the very basics of personal ethics and morality being espoused by Islam to fit their needs and lifestyle and called it according to the teachings of Islam. They are free to do whatever they want or like but they can not start claiming that in the name of Islam.”
Can you cite examples of how gay Muslims have claimed that there is no injunction against homosexuality in Islam? They may have cited other verses – I don’t know this for sure – to condemn their ill treatment, but that’s an entirely different matter from the one you are claiming.
3. Re: “However if you are sincere in understanding what is actually being said about issues such as homosexuality my humble request will be read the original sources the most important of them being Quran.”
The only interest I have in this is a human rights activist and as someone who wishes to be an ally to Muslim LGBTs – yes, I’ve consulted my Muslim LGBT ffriends on this; I’m not interested in religion, and definitely not any one of them that does zilch for my self esteem.
Lop:
>>
The *point* is you don’t want someone to use one broad stroke to label you, then you shouldn’t do it to others too.
>>
Me:
Where have I made a fuss being called Christian? I just remind them I am not. But if you insist I am one, be my guest.
You on the other hand, appears to take offence if I call you gay. Confirming that gay has negative meaning?
>>
Didn’t you just equate being gay with pedophilia, bestiality, AIDS etc. etc.?
>>
Me:
But exactly why is pedophilia or bestiality negative? Again, I know pedo and bestiality are negative. I want to know why you see it as negative too.
As for AIDS, it is a fact that disease has a high correlation to gay activities. Are you denying it?
>>
After you have spewed so much vitriol, you need to ask whether the word ‘gay’ has any negative meaning? Are you just pure innocent or being hypocritical?
>>
Me:
I equate pedo and bestiality only whenever gays argue that homo is normal and not out of choice. I don’t use the pedo and/or bestiality argument as a blanket argument. If you take responsibility that homo is YOUR CHOICE, you won’t hear the pedo and/or bestiality argument from me.
The pedo argument is that the offenders can argue sexual orientation too. So come off that argument that gay is due to sexual orientation and I won’t use that sexual orientation either. Take responsibility for YOUR CHOICE.
Please get your facts right. It is you who paint all non-supporters of gay with one big stereotype giant brush, thinking that I use the pedo argument liberally, when the fact is that I use it only under one condition – ie when gays use the sexual orientation argument.
>>
So, now it’s starting to dawn on me why you took so much offence when someone called you a bigot.
>>
Me:
Firstly, let me remind you that I do not care what gays call me. I am fine with being called a bigot. My point is that if you want to call others names, then you have to take it if others call you names.
My point about being called bigot is not because I take offence. It is to show that gays are intolerant. I am called a bigot by gays the moment they sense I don’t support their cause. No conditions attached.
After calling me and others bigots, gays then go round howling that they face discrimination, when others call them names!
Dear Robox,
True I do not own Islam. Neither do the gays and so therefore please do not ask that Islam be modified to suit the gay agenda !
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
Dr Syed Alwi on October 8th, 2009 8.36 am:
Re: “…please do not ask that Islam be modified to suit the gay agenda !”
1. Who did there and where?
2. What is this gay agenda?
Fahim on October 7th, 2009 2.03 pm:
Re: “Can you let me know which offline version did you consult?”
It was when I was visiting Toronto and passed by this Islamic Information Centre. Their website is here:
http://www.islaminfo.com/index.php
On this page:
http://www.islaminfo.com/detail.php?ID=48
I’m also learning about this new verse – Quran 4:1 – for the first time. While it seems to repeat the information that I gave you first, it is also followed by a different version of Quran 49:13 immediately after that.
If you are contacting them, please ask them why they have a poster out in their display window entitled “Islam and Human Rights” which quotes Quran 49:13 differently from the above page, and exactly as I quoted to you. I can ask my friend to photograph their poster if it is still up.
1. Solobear: Have you seen anything C and M have done that is close to the boisterous behaviour of gays like at Aware’s EGM?
So there is no study, just that one (singular) event that you observed firsthand … an event where there may be heteros (against COOS or support the gays) who are just as boisterous, but somehow not relevant to you since you already made up your mind on what you saw….
2. Solobear:Yeah. So? I am against ALL promiscuity. Hetero or homo.
So, the issue IS promiscuity. You were against homo on the basis of anal sex being risky, which it is NOT. It is promiscuity that is risky, and that applies to both heteros and homos. So, another of your argument falls flat.
3. Solobear:: “Consent” is a matter of definition. You mean a 13 yr old doesn’t know what she does? Also animal lovers will tell you there have a “close understanding.”
The 13yr old may know what she is doing, but not necessarily the consequences and the risks that it entails. Else why the law have separate punishments for minors and adults?
4. Solobear:Ah, confirming you blanket ALL Christians because of COOS? Self pawn again? As for other heteros, parents were affected by Aware’s trash CSE.
No. But you just did. Just like that way you blanket all who were boisterous to be gays. it’s all you.
If ‘other heteros’ are those parents whose children were affected by Aware’s CSE, why did it take the gays to ‘bring them in’? how would it ‘help’ the gays to bring them in??
To quote you in (58): “Gays then had to bring in Christianity and other heteros”.
Is calling people ‘self pwn’ the only technique you have to win discussions? well, if so, using it repeatedly sort of dilutes the effect.
5. Solobear: Yeah, what’s wrong with being called gay or gay-lover, as compared to bigot? Are you saying there is negative connotation being gay?
ermm.. why are you repeating yourself, albeit with some paraphrasing…?
77) preston loon on October 8th, 2009 2.26 am
My comment did not mention any thing about homosexuality or homo-sexuals…This person owes me an apology.
You are right, I do own you an apology. I didn’t know you were just being ‘loony’ and wasn’t talking about homosexuality … in a thread on that very topic, AND despite Robox implying the same thing in (44 which is 2 posts later) by stating the opposite side (heteros) should keep to the same rule, in which case you seem to be okay with it.
Solobear,
I noticed you STILL haven’t replied on my point about:
“What happens when one side starts out with their side of the space not respected. Is asking for respect, not respecting the other’s space?”
3rd time asking btw…
Gays should not be discriminated, regardless of race.
Gays should not be discriminated, regardless of race or religion..
Nobody is addressing the fate of the woman married to a gay muslim.
Just as religions often pass judgment on behaviours of people in secular space and the general society (accusing the society of immorality or declining in moral and so on), non-religious people should have the freedom to offer their critique of religion and religious books, especially if these non-religious people finds anything immoral in those religious books. This is fair play. This is the Golden Rule.
In the past, there is this immoral religious practice has this rule for its followers: widow followers are to be burned to death when their husbands died. Of course we should not allow such things, not even in the name of freedom of religion. Freedom is subject to the condition of not causing any obvious harm or suffering. if a religious practice contains things that are causing obvious harm or suffering, we should oppose. So if a religion sanctions slavery, we should oppose.
If a religion has a rule to stone homosexuals to death when caught having sex in their private bedroom, we should oppose such an immoral rule too.
———
As for incest, as long as it is done between mutually consenting adults in private and no obvious harm or suffering is caused to the parties involved (e.g. by using condoms to prevent pregnancy or when it is done between persons of the same sex), then it is not immoral (being illegal is different from being immoral).
———
It is not impossible for a branch of Islam to have a different understanding of Islam from the mainstream, especially if some Muslims introduce the technique of “higher criticism” of religious text just as what mainstream Christians have been doing for hundreds of years on the bible. Hence just because a religious text, on the surface, says something, it does not mean that after applying hermeneutics the application is a straight-forward application. Sometimes by looking at the context etc, a religious community (whether mainstream or non-mainstream community, whether a denomination or a sect) can declare on hermeneutical and theological grounds that the text in question is not applicable in today’s context.
Btw, Liberal Islamic Movement and also the Ahmadiyya Islamic Organisation (yes, many Muslims do not recognise Ahmadiyya Islam but that is another debate) are examples of Islamic movements that can develop towards a different way with more emphasis on rationality.
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.
YAWN—zzz! Other than oil from the ground, name any (ok, I’ll make it easier, name one) significant contribution to mankind that even matters from this so called punitive “faith”. Suicide bombers don’t count-they fall under foreign talent..;P
@ Lop #64
I am glad that I was able to put across my point.
Well if you were to ask me what sort of reaction I have towards those Muslims who happen to have gay lifestyle and how would I react towards those who claim to be Muslims but advocate indiscriminate violence against everyone including innocent and unarmed civilians for whatever reason. Here will be my answer:
Towards those who call themselves Muslims and happen to practice gay lifestyle I will not show any hostility or support as it is the matter between them and their God and I have no business interfering in their private lives. The most I will do is to make them aware of my understanding of what Islam says about this lifestyle and pray for them.
But while I hold the moral high ground Quran instructs me to reflect on my deeds and intentions and off course like a any other human I am not perfect.
“Do you enjoin righteousness on humanity and forget to practice it yourselves?”(2:44)
However I will be eager to confront with force and if that is not possible then with my words those who advocate violence against unarmed and innocent civilians. It is primarily because those who perpetrate those acts in the name of my religion are waging war against my religion by changing the original message and more importantly as a Muslim I am duty bound to protect the innocent.
Let there arise out of you a band of people inviting to all that is good, enjoining what is right, and forbidding what is wrong: They are the ones to attain felicity. (3:104).
Now that I have made clear that based on my understanding that there is no place in Islam for those who resort to indiscriminate violence against unarmed and innocent civilians, what can we do with those who have limited understanding of their own religion and become emotional and turn violent due to some political or nationalistic reason and start supporting violence carried out in the name of Islam.
But I am equally at loss that why all of us, especially media give such a biased view of events and start depicting this fringe as the mainstream and start judging the original message from the glasses of the practitioners.
If I am a quack and claim to be a medical practitioner and if someone comes to consult me for his/her disease and by taking my prescription and he eats the medicine I prescribed. As a result of that instead of getting cured for his disease he suffers a major illness or death. So my question is: it is the fault of the medical science that the patient suffered such a fate or is it my fault that I misdiagnosed and prescribed the cure without having proper knowledge of the authentic books on medical science or is it the fault of the patient that he did not verify my credentials before consulting me for his disease. I believe that the same rule can be applied on those who advocate violence against innocent civilians and those who support them and off course it is not the fault of religion in whose name they carryout that violence. Off course those who carryout the violence and those who support such violence bear the consequence if not in this world, definitely in the hereafter.
I been following the comments for awhile and just to provide my input. Firstly, I would like to say that I am a Muslim and I am not gay. I believe discrimination of any kind based on gender, sexuality, race etc is totally unacceptable and unjustifiable no matter how you argue.
Homosexuals, whether you are born gay or choose to be gay is still highly debatable within the scientific community and I personally believe its highly likely a combination of both. I am aware in Islamic doctrine that homosexuality and sodomy for that matter is strictly prohibited. Which then begs the question, can a homosexual be a Muslim? Logically, the answer would be no but again who in Islam can say you are a Muslim or not? It is something personal, between you and God. If your heart is pure and sincere, I don’t see why not? I may not be very pious and am unable to quote any verses from the Quran and hadith, but what I do know that Islam teaches you to be mindful of others and respect all human beings regardless of your differences with them.
Islam was founded more than 1400 years ago in a society which is vastly different than today. Not everything in Islam is set in stone 1400 years ago. There is room for differentiation to reflect the changes in society, different culture or settings. Islam is not universal throughout the world, as I hope many of you have observed.
Thus, homosexual have every right to call themselves Muslim if they still believe in the teachings of Islam and the values it preaches. And we as Muslims, should always provide a helping hand to our Muslim brothers if they seek or require help. The only one who is able to judge is God and we are just mere humans.
I think it is fair to say a Muslim can claim he is gay. Just like a Christian can claim to be gay.
However, it is a different thing to say just because we have a gay Muslim or gay Christian, Islam or Christianity endorses gayness.
Gays should just accept that there are gay Muslims and Christians. They shouldn’t try to push that Islam and Christianity endorse gayness.
Lobo,
I have replied to you. It is “awaiting moderation”.
As always, huh?
cagiva_diablo – You get a thumbs up for your comments.
Thank you.
benedict
Solo Bear,
Correction to your comment on Christianity endorses homosexual ;
Christians hold varying stances on people who are romantically and sexually attracted to the same sex, and gay or homosexual sexual activity. Some Christian denominations do not view monogamous same sex relationships as sinful or immoral. These include the Episcopalian Church, the Evangelical Lutheran Church of America,[1][2] the United Church of Canada, the United Church of Christ, the Moravian Church, and the Friends General Conference (Quakers), and other Mainline Protestant churches.[3][4][5] In particular, the Metropolitan Community Church was founded specifically to serve the Christian LGBT community.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_and_Christianity
Dear People,
This is my final post on this thread. Its getting boring. Once and for all – allow me to say it again – Islam does NOT accept or condone or tolerate a gay lifestyle. And just because some people happen to follow and heed Islamic teachings, it does NOT make them extremists.
The Liberal Left have now taken the stand that anyone who observes Islamic practices and teachings are extremists ! This is nonsense propaganda that started with our very own MSM portraying Islam with a negative light. I recall that during the Fateha era – many Muslims including myself – raised this issue. Of course I do not deny that Muslim acts of terror has added fuel to the fire. But please don’t tell me that a practicing Muslim who prays, fasts etc is an extremist ! Indeed the phrase Muslim terrorist is already bad enough.
The real extremists are the Liberal Leftists themselves ! To them – any kind of religion is bad ! First Christianity. Now Islam. Tomorrow Buddhism & Hinduism. The Liberal Left does not want any kind of rules to be imposed on them !
What they want is carte-blanche licence to have sex with anything that moves !
Regards
Dr Syed Alwi
Syed Alwi,
Now now, dont get discourage. This is merely an exchange of ideas between different people.
//Islam does NOT accept or condone or tolerate a gay lifestyle. And just because some people happen to follow and heed Islamic teachings, it does NOT make them extremists.//
I dont think anyone can dispute on your statement. But the question remains ‘if gay people happen to follow and heed Islamic teachings, does it make them muslim?
The issue of liberal left, i dont believe there’s actually such faction that’s out to eradicate religions like what you say above.
The more liberal segment of the society operates on reason/logic while religon operates on faith. When both try to co-exist in the same sphere there’s bound to be disagreement.