Homosexuals

7 views
Skip to first unread message

Sulayman X

unread,
Apr 5, 1998, 4:00:00 AM4/5/98
to

Visit Queer Masjid for the truth about Muslim Homosexuals - that we
exist and demand basic human rights. Some of us are no longer willing to
be lap dogs for the straight man and his straight world.

http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/Heights/8977

Parvez

unread,
Apr 6, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/6/98
to

On 5 Apr 1998, Sulayman X wrote:

> Visit Queer Masjid for the truth about Muslim Homosexuals - that we

La Hawala Wala Kuwata Ill....

May Allah(swt) forgive from such nefarious thing.....

Moustafa Mounir Elqabbany

unread,
Apr 6, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/6/98
to

Sulayman X wrote:
>
> Visit Queer Masjid for the truth about Muslim Homosexuals - that we
> exist and demand basic human rights. Some of us are no longer willing to
> be lap dogs for the straight man and his straight world.

My opinion of this message is that it is just flamebait. I suggest
that Muslims simply ignore it. Some childish people need to find a
way of attracting attention. Please don't give in to them.

Salaam,
Moustafa


fhd...@erols.com

unread,
Apr 9, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/9/98
to

The prophet(s) told us to kill homosexuals


Craig Paul

unread,
Apr 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/10/98
to

In article <6gj3ib$qac$1...@waltz.rahul.net>, fhd...@erols.com writes:
> The prophet(s) told us to kill homosexuals

Citations from the Qur'an or the sahih ahadith, please?


dervish

unread,
Apr 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/10/98
to

Asalaamo Alaykum!

Bismillah:

Dear brother,

I am proud of your courage and honesty. Despite what certain
ahadith may say about homosexuality, there is NO place in Islam for
hate. The predictable hateful reaction I am sure, must be overwhelming,
(look above, you have one death threat already) yet despite this, you
are honest anyhow...that is commendable, and brave.
InshAllah, I would like to see a day when muslims respected each
other, minded their own business (like it says in hadith!), and were
more concerned with their own short-comings and piety than with harming
or suspecting their sisters and brothers. I won't hold my breath though.
For those who doubt that hatred comes from shaytan, just review
the recent events at the "Islamophobia" conference in London. One single
question brought predictable, violent response from the muslim
attendees...the topic of the conference was about why Islam is perceived
as violent in the west, and we gave them a spontaneous, violent incident
as evidence of their correctness. A conference that was supposed to
present Islam in a positive light instead showed that the suspicions
were true...many muslims are hateful, violent, quick to anger, and
intolerant. Hatred makes a mockery of Islam, and makes muslims appear as
stooges...so let's quick it!
May Allah(swt) guide us all to the love and light that is
al-Haqq, and may we be given the courage and strength to resist the
temptations of the shaytan.

your brother in Islam, and a poor beggar,
Abd al-Qadir Abdullah


D. Beatty

unread,
Apr 10, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/10/98
to

> The prophet(s) told us to kill homosexuals

The prophet(s) made a distinction between those who have homosexual
tendencies, called "homosexuals", and those who commit homosexual acts.
The prophet(s) did not condemn those with homosexual tendencies, but only
those who commit homosexual intercourse. In other words, there is a
distinction between those who give in to temptation and those who control
their urges, whatever they may be.


Nadir Masood

unread,
Apr 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/11/98
to

This whole thing is a sham. Some guy wants to spoil the name of Muslims by
saying there are such things as "Gay" muslims...there's no such thing. So,
just ignore it. Probably, as usual, a jewish conspiracy to stain the image
of anything beautiful.

salam
--
Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from error;
whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most
trustworthy hand-hold that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all
things.(The Holy Quran 2:256) ~~~Type "go islam" on NCF~~~


Jochen Katz

unread,
Apr 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/11/98
to

In article <6gle26$bcf$1...@waltz.rahul.net>,
"D. Beatty" <dia...@holly.ColoState.EDU> writes:

} > The prophet(s) told us to kill homosexuals

As somebody else already asked: What is the reference?

But, the same question applies here:

Is that wishful thinking or do you have a reference where Muhammad
does explicitely or even implicitely make such a difference when
talking about homosexuals?

To my knowledge people in earlier centuries did not talk about
tendencies they talked about acts mostly. Sure, ever act is
preceeded by the thought of the act, but I have the impression
your above language tries to read moder psychology back into
the hadith if there even is one.

Best regards,

Jochen Katz


Nadir Masood

unread,
Apr 11, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/11/98
to

Craig Paul (pa...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu) writes:

> In article <6gj3ib$qac$1...@waltz.rahul.net>, fhd...@erols.com writes:
>> The prophet(s) told us to kill homosexuals
>
> Citations from the Qur'an or the sahih ahadith, please?
>

In the Holy Quran, Surah 26..


160. The people of Lut rejected the apostles.
161. Behold their brother Lut said to them: "Will ye not fear (Allah)?
162. "I am to you an apostle worthy of all trust.
163. "So fear Allah and obey me.
164. "No reward do I ask of you for it: my reward is only from the Lord
of the Worlds.
165. "Of all the creatures in the world will ye approach males.
166. "And leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your mates?
Nay ye are a people transgressing (all limits)!"
167. They said: "If thou desist not O Lut! thou wilt assuredly be cast out!"
168. He said: "I do detest your doings."
169. "O my Lord! deliver me and my family from such things as they do!"
170. So We delivered him and his family all
171. Except an old woman who lingered behind.
172. But the rest We destroyed utterly.
173. We rained down on them a shower (of brimstone): and evil was the
shower on those who were admonished (but heeded not)!
174. Verily in this is a Sign: but most of them do not believe.
175. And verily thy Lord is He the Exalted in Might Most Merciful.

Surah 54
33. The People of Lut rejected (his) Warning.
34. We sent against them a violent tornado with showers of stones
(which destroyed them) except Lut's household: them We delivered by
early Dawn
35. As a Grace from Us: Thus do We reward those who give thanks.
36. And (Lut) did warn them of Our Punishment but they disputed about
the Warning.
37. And they even sought to snatch away his guests from him but We
blinded their eyes. (They heard:) "now taste ye My Wrath and My
Warning."
38. Early on the morrow an abiding Punishment seized them:
39. "So taste ye My Wrath and My Warning."
40. And We have indeed made the Qur'an easy to understand and
remember: then is there any that will receive admonition?

Surah 7

80. We also (sent) Lut: he said to his people: "Do ye commit lewdness
such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you?
81. "For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are
indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds."
82. And his people gave no answer but this: they said "drive them out
of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!"
83. But We saved him and his family except his wife: she was of those
who lagged behind.
84. And We rained down on them a shower (of brimstone): then see what
was the end of those who indulged in sin and crime!

Commentary on 7:80-84(Yusuf Ali)

80: c. 1049. Lut is the Lot of the English Bible. His story is
biblical, but freed from some shameful features which are a blot on the
biblical narrative, (e.g., see Gen. xix. 30-36). He was a nephew of
Abraham, and was sent as a Prophet and warner to the people of Sodom and
Gomorrah, cities utterly destroyed for their unspeakable sins. They cannot
be exactly located, but it may be supposed that they were somewhere in the
plain cast of the Dead Sea. The story of their destruction is told in the
19th chapter of Genesis. Two angels in the shape of handsome young men
came to Lot in the evening and became his guests by night. The inhabitants
of Sodom in their lust for unnatural crime invaded Lot's house but were
repulsed. In the morning, the angels warned Lot to escape with his family.
"Then the Lord rained upon Sodom and upon Gomorrah brimstone and fire from
the Lord out of heaven; and He overthrew those cities, and all the plain,
and all the inhabitants of the cities, and that which grew upon the
ground. But his wife looked back from behind him, and she became a pillar
of salt." (Gen. xix. 24-26). Note that Lot's people are the people to whom
he is sent on a mission. He was not one of their own brethren, as was
Salih or Shu'aib. But he looked upon his people as his brethren (I. 13),
as a man of God always does.

81: No commentary available.

82: c. 1050. An instance of the withering sarcasm that hardened
sinners use against the righteous. They wound with words, and follow up
the insult with deeds of injustice, thinking that they would bring the
righteous into disgrace. But Allah looks after His own, and in the end,
the wicked themselves are overthrown when the cup of their iniquity is full.

83: c. 1051. In the biblical narrative she looks back, a
physical act (see n. 1049): here she is a type of those who lag behind,
i.e, whose mental and moral attitude, in spite of their association with
the righteous, is to hark back to the glitter of wickedness and sin. The
righteous should have one sole objective, the Way of Allah. They should
not took behind, nor yet to the right or the left.

84: c. 1052. The shower is expressly stated in Q. xi. 82 to
have been of stones. In xv. 73-74, we are told that there was a terrible
blast or noise (saihat) in addition to the shower of stones. Taking these
passages into consideration along with Gen. xix. 24. (see n. 1049 above),
I think it is legitimate to translate: "a shower of brimstone."

-------------------------------------------------------------------------


--
****Let there be no compulsion in religion. Truth stands out clear from error;


whoever rejects evil and believes in Allah hath grasped the most
trustworthy hand-hold that never breaks. And Allah heareth and knoweth all

things.(The Holy Quran 2:256)*************************************************


postof...@poboxes.com

unread,
Apr 13, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/13/98
to

Sulayman X wrote:
>
> Visit Queer Masjid for the truth about Muslim Homosexuals - that we
> exist and demand basic human rights. Some of us are no longer willing to
> be lap dogs for the straight man and his straight world.
>
> http://www.geocities.com/WestHollywood/Heights/8977

Dear Mr. X,
The evidence has been presented to you, now you can take it or leave
it. If you leave clear evidence from the Qur'an to follow your own
desires, you are a kaffir and have no claim to Islam. If you repent and
correct yourself, may Allah forgive you. Please stop posting this
garbage and please stop attempting to justify what you know is wrong.

Sincerely,
Br. Suleyman Al-Mujahid


Jochen Katz

unread,
Apr 15, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/15/98
to

In article <6gpjfm$l6k$1...@waltz.rahul.net>,
dv...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Nadir Masood) brought us the
words from the

} Commentary on 7:80-84(Yusuf Ali)
}
} 80: c. 1049. Lut is the Lot of the English Bible. His story is
} biblical, but freed from some shameful features which are a blot on the
} biblical narrative, (e.g., see Gen. xix. 30-36).

Could it be that this commentary should be translated to mean
that the Qur'an gives a censored version of the Biblical report?

And if you want to know the uncensored truth, the uncorrupted
version, i.e. not "freed" from what was not to the taste of the
author of the Qur'an, you then have to read the original version
in Bible?

Jochen Katz

---
The grass withers and the flowers fall,
but the word of our God stands forever.
Prophet Isaiah 40:8

Mustafa

unread,
Apr 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/16/98
to

In the Name of Allah, the Beneficient, the Merciful.
May peace and blessings be on the Prophet Muhammad, the last Messenger.

Dear Jochen,

Sorry, but I couldn't resist...

On 15 Apr 1998, Jochen Katz wrote:

> } 80: c. 1049. Lut is the Lot of the English Bible. His story is
> } biblical, but freed from some shameful features which are a blot on the
> } biblical narrative, (e.g., see Gen. xix. 30-36).
>
> Could it be that this commentary should be translated to mean
> that the Qur'an gives a censored version of the Biblical report?

Nope. But if you seriously want try to to improve the commentary, maybe
the suggestion should be as follows: "... Qur'an gives a corrected version
of the current Biblical report?"

>
> And if you want to know the uncensored truth, the uncorrupted
> version, i.e. not "freed" from what was not to the taste of the
> author of the Qur'an, you then have to read the original version
> in Bible?

Since this question is conditional on the previous one, the answer is no
again. The more graphic narration in the Bible may be more appealing to
the stereotypical American adult reader, and this is a sad reflection on
the morality of such readers as well as the people that authored the
perverse details.

Warm regards,
Mustafa Husain


BTW: I'm saying sorry for writing to this ng. I know that this can be
answered much better by many of the active muslims writers... (the Ahmed
brothers come to mind :)

I ask Allah, the Merciful, for forgiveness for all my sins, committed
knowingly and unknowingly. All praise and thanks belong to Allah, the
Most High.

AbdulraHman Lomax

unread,
Apr 16, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/16/98
to

as-aslamu 'alaykum.

dv...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Nadir Masood) wrote:

>Craig Paul (pa...@kuhub.cc.ukans.edu) writes:
>> In article <6gj3ib$qac$1...@waltz.rahul.net>, fhd...@erols.com writes:
>>> The prophet(s) told us to kill homosexuals
>>
>> Citations from the Qur'an or the sahih ahadith, please?

Br. Masood gave some quotations in reply. None of them contained any
reference to a command to kill homosexuals.


AbdulraHman Lomax
mar...@vom.com
P.O. Box 423
Sonoma, CA 95476
USA

Parvez

unread,
Apr 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/17/98
to

Assalamu alaikum everyone,

Here is some feed back from a friend of mine.
*****************************************************************************

I used the book "Shariah the Islamic Law" by Abdur Rahman I. Doi (pp.
241-247) and also got some feedback from a friend of mine here.

There are three main texts regarding this issue:
1. Quran says the following: We also sent Lut: he said to his people: 'Do
you commit adultery as no people in creation (ever) committed before you?
For you practise your lusts on men in preference to women: you are indeed a
people transgressing beyond limits.'
2. A hadith by the prophet says: If a man commits an act of sex with a man,
they are both adulterers and if a woman commits such acts with a woman,
then both of them are adultresses.'
3. It is reported by Abu Hurairah that the Messenger of Allah (SAW) said:
If you find someone who is committing an act of the committment of Lut
(that is homosexuality), kill the one on top and the one below. In another
statement it says "kill the doer and with whom the act is committed."

Some scholars (Abu Hanifa) said the act of homosexuality is equivalent to
committing Zina based on (2). This hadith, however, is considered weak by a
number of scholars because one of its reporters, Muhammad Ibn Abdel-Rahman
is weak, Abu Hatam accused him of lying and Al-Bayhaqi said that he is not
well-known for credibility. So it is a Munkar Hadith.

The other opinion is to kill both parties based on (3). This hadith was
narrated by At-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, Abu-Dawood and Ahmad. Imam Ibn Hajar
said that all its reporters are credible. Sheikh Nasir Ad-Deen Al-Albani
declared it as a Hasan Hadith.

I was told that the Sahabah (raa) consented that whoever does such an act
is to be killed. However, they differed on the method of killing. It has
been narrated that Imam Ali (raa), for example, suggested burning, other
Sahabah suggested throwing down from a high building. Other suggested
killing by the sword.

Furthermore, the act of Lot's people is Haram by the decisive evidence from
the Qura'n (1).

This is a summary of my understanding of the position of Islam towards
homosexuality.

Wassalam,
Hesham.


--------------------------------------------------
HESHAM RAKHA, Ph.D.
Research Scientist

Virginia Tech. Center for Transportation Research
1700 Kraft Drive, Suite 2000 (0536)
Blacksburg VA 24061, USA

Phone: (540) 231-2261 - Fax: (540) 231-5214
--------------------------------------------------
****************************************************************************

AbdulraHman Lomax

unread,
Apr 17, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/17/98
to

Peace.

dv...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Nadir Masood) wrote:

>This whole thing is a sham. Some guy wants to spoil the name of Muslims by
>saying there are such things as "Gay" muslims...there's no such thing. So,
>just ignore it. Probably, as usual, a jewish conspiracy to stain the image
>of anything beautiful.

Br. Masood has just done more to stain the name of Islam than any
alleged "jewish conspiracy."

And one who thinks that there are no "gay" Muslims has his head firmly
wedged beneath the sand.

"Gay" means that a person is preferentially attracted to others of the
same sex. If we view this as an affliction, it is an affliction that
spares no particular religious group.

It is possible to argue that a Muslim who *acts* on homosexual
impulses is sinning; this is even, I would think, a consensus view,
but it is *not* a consensus that such a sinner has thereby left Islam
and can no longer be called a Muslim, just as one who fornicates in
some other way has not left Islam. Would we say that there are no
Muslim fornicators? (the majority view in Islam is that one does not
become a non-Muslim merely by committing a sinful act.)

I have corresponded with Muslims struggling with the issue of
homosexuality and Islam. They exist. Homosexuality, for them, is a
tremendous threat to their Islam; it divides them from the other
Muslims, for they know that they cannot admit it and remain part of
the community. So some hide their homosexuality and pretend. One whom
I know was very active in Muslim organizations, and actively and
vigorously condemned homosexuals, until he himself was presented with
opportunities to act upon his until-then denied homosexuality.

I have not heard from him for some time. I know that his plan was to
go back home, once his education was completed, and get married,
hoping that marriage would end his homosexuality. He was not at all
attracted to women. So, the question arises, should he disclose this
fact to the woman, before she agrees to marry him, and to the wali of
the woman, before he consents to the marriage?

My counsel to him was celibacy until and unless he finds an
appropriate marriage. This is exactly the same counsel that I would
give a heterosexual Muslim who was finding it difficult to avoid sin.
As others have pointed out, there is no sin involved simply in being
"homosexual," that is, in discovering that one is sexually attracted
to a person or persons of the same sex, just as there is no sin in
being "heterosexual" if one is not married. It is sinful, by
consensus, to act on these attractions without satisfying the
conditions of marriage.

The extreme reaction of some among us to homosexuality is harmful to
the community. The vast majority of homosexuals are not like the
people of Lot, who were flagrant with their sexuality as well as
aggressive about it. The result of the extreme homophobia of so many
Muslims is that those who are afflicted with homosexuality (and it is
an affliction to be both Muslim and homosexual) are unable to find
counsel within the community and thus go outside it for support, and
that outside support often encourages and approves of homosexual
behavior.

Now, something in us knows that this is wrong, and this knowledge
struggles to come forth; and thus we see the efforts of homosexuals to
break free of this oppressive atmosphere, thus the "Queer Masjid."

It is unlawful to accuse another Muslim of unlawful sexual activity
without strong proof. Therefore I would assume that a "Queer Masjid"
was a group of persons who gathered together for the purpose of prayer
and lawful society, with others who suffered from similar trials. If
it became nothing more than a way of meeting sexual partners, then it
would be similar to a straight masjid used for a similar purpose. We
make a serious mistake when we treat homosexual Muslims in a radically
different way than we treat heterosexual Muslims.

We are obligated to reject same-sex sexual behavior, whether is is
undertaken by "homosexuals" or "heterosexuals." However, when we
reject the people themselves, solely based on their sexual
orientation, or even on prior sin, we cut them off from the Muslim
community and we become responsible for their continued sinful
activity.

I remember one khutba given in a prison. The khatib knew very well
that many of the men in the congregation had "girlfriends." He knew
that many of them, when they were released from prison, would go to
these "girlfriends." He mentioned the "girlfriends" to whom they would
return, but said not one word of criticism about these men or what
they had done and would almost certainly do. Then he mentioned the
"homosexuals," and described them with words of the utmost hatred and
condemnation. I think he imagined that there were no homosexuals in
the audience.

What kind of Islam is this?

dervish

unread,
Apr 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/20/98
to

Asalaamo Alaykum!

Bismillah:

Dear Parvez,

While I dispute the hadd you mentioned, one additional point
must be made eminently clear. We cannot apply ANY hadd on any homosexual
without appropriate witnesses. A homosexual in this case is defined as
one who is witnessed engaging in a homosexual act...NOT one who simply
is potentially attracted to the same sex.
To harass, abuse, or otherwise confront someone whom we have not
witnessed in a homosexual act is a sin. If the accusation of sexual
misconduct accrues, then accuser must assemble witnesses, as in any
other such accusation...or face 80 lashes himself for false accusation.
Such accusers thereby lose their reliabilty as witnesses thereafter too,
and their testimony is not to be accepted.
May Allah(swt) guide us all to the Turth and mercy of His deen,
and forgive our transgressions and sin.

your brother in Islam, and a beggar of grace,
Abd al-Qadir Abdullah

SAMI2

unread,
Apr 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/20/98
to

In article <6h8d2a$d...@usenet.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,
AbdulraHman Lomax <mar...@vom.com> wrote:

>Br. Masood has just done more to stain the name of Islam than any
>alleged "jewish conspiracy."

This is a mere opinion.

>And one who thinks that there are no "gay" Muslims has his head firmly
>wedged beneath the sand.

Opening an issue has one danger. Namely, those who want to pervert it
for their vested reasons would have the opportunity to do so. But the
attitude of ostrich is not a good one either.

>"Gay" means that a person is preferentially attracted to others of the
>same sex. If we view this as an affliction, it is an affliction that
>spares no particular religious group.

There can be many reasons for being attracted to men. One may feel more
comfortable with men. Another reason could be some kind of innocence
about youth. I have been attracted to people in whom I have seen a certain
style of acting, elegance, or innocence. Hence, attraction does not have
to be necessarily sexual. I have have been attracted to older men who
I have found to be scholarly and have tried to find opportunities to sit
in their company to discuss things and benefit from their wisdom.

>It is possible to argue that a Muslim who *acts* on homosexual
>impulses is sinning; this is even, I would think, a consensus view,
>but it is *not* a consensus that such a sinner has thereby left Islam
>and can no longer be called a Muslim, just as one who fornicates in
>some other way has not left Islam. Would we say that there are no
>Muslim fornicators? (the majority view in Islam is that one does not
>become a non-Muslim merely by committing a sinful act.)

It cannot be that homosexuality is genetic. Otherwise God will not
condemn it. If it is a biological deviation, then it can be treated
as a disease. But that would lead to the societal corruption. There
is more nurture than nature. Above I have mentioned situations where
I have been attracted to be in the company of people and this is normal
as people are attracted to spend time due to various interests. OK.
You like a restaurant. You go in and find very nice and pleasing and
attractive hostesses. My be they elicit sexual thoughts. If the
fantisizing is taken to the extreme then it is possible that you may
form "pavlovian" attachment to the face of the restaurant, so that
the very seeing the restaurant while driving in front of it and seeing
it may elicit the sexual or amorous thoughts.

Hence, if you are attracted to some one due to non-sexual qualities
and your are in the over-harmoned years of life, you can form
pavlovian attachments.

>I have corresponded with Muslims struggling with the issue of
>homosexuality and Islam. They exist. Homosexuality, for them, is a
>tremendous threat to their Islam; it divides them from the other
>Muslims, for they know that they cannot admit it and remain part of
>the community.

So be it. Islam is not to be changed. Quran specifically mentions it
and condemns it. While we may be at work in trying to understand it
from scientifical and medical points of view, it is best that the
evil does not degenerate Islam. The policy of dont say and dont
ask is the right one. This is probably the policy in regards to
fornication, for I read in some sunni sources that if no one knows
then atleast the person has the opportunity to change.

But we cannot deviate from the policy of Islam, which is that it is not
the right thing.

>So some hide their homosexuality and pretend. One whom
>I know was very active in Muslim organizations, and actively and
>vigorously condemned homosexuals, until he himself was presented with
>opportunities to act upon his until-then denied homosexuality.
>
>I have not heard from him for some time. I know that his plan was to
>go back home, once his education was completed, and get married,
>hoping that marriage would end his homosexuality.

So if he believed that the marriage would end it, then it was basically
another outlet just as fornication is. And both are illegal in Islam.

>He was not at all
>attracted to women. So, the question arises, should he disclose this
>fact to the woman, before she agrees to marry him, and to the wali of
>the woman, before he consents to the marriage?

There were probably other psychological reasons for this lack of
attraction. I know someone, a brilliant person who got into some
kind of strange depression all of a sudden. For each of these
complicated problems, the proper cure must be pursued, rather
than some immoral route.

In the case of the depression of the above mentioned person, his desire
was to learn all the knowledge of the world in his field. Having failed
that or seeing it could not be done, he plunged into depression. There
was no one in this isolated society to help him either or diagnose
his problem.

>My counsel to him was celibacy until and unless he finds an
>appropriate marriage. This is exactly the same counsel that I would
>give a heterosexual Muslim who was finding it difficult to avoid sin.

Yes. What you are saying is basically refrain. That is the correct
advice. If your physical self has a problem, and the moral side
perceives it, then let the moral dominate and find a solution in the
interim. Is it not afterall what we all are in this world for? To be
tried by unique and non-cheatable examinations, that are still
normalisable by God?

>As others have pointed out, there is no sin involved simply in being
>"homosexual," that is, in discovering that one is sexually attracted
>to a person or persons of the same sex, just as there is no sin in
>being "heterosexual" if one is not married. It is sinful, by
>consensus, to act on these attractions without satisfying the
>conditions of marriage.

There is no sin in being mentally retarded, handicapped, blind, deaf and
so on. But killing someone, or commiting suicide because of any of these
problems is definitely a sin.

>The extreme reaction of some among us to homosexuality is harmful to
>the community. The vast majority of homosexuals are not like the
>people of Lot, who were flagrant with their sexuality as well as
>aggressive about it.

But there is sin in dressing in a certain way as in the US etc. For this
is a way of signalling and the policy of Islam is also not to say and not
to ask. One reason for punishments in Islam for sins that do not harm any
other person but one's ownself are the disintegeration of society through
a bad example. But if it is not known then it should not be revealed if
the person has overcome it, and the reason for this as was explained in
the sunni source that I read was that if no one knows then it is not
harming others by not seeing it unpunished.

>The result of the extreme homophobia of so many
>Muslims is that those who are afflicted with homosexuality (and it is
>an affliction to be both Muslim and homosexual) are unable to find
>counsel within the community and thus go outside it for support, and
>that outside support often encourages and approves of homosexual
>behavior.

I agree with you. The muslim community needs to have some people of
moral uprightness and visibility who can be approached by those who
have no family or close friends to help.

Well this is Islam of Mecca and not of Medina.
The people who existed in a problem before they became muslims needed
a time to change. slowly they are taught the criteria of right and
wrong. First their perception of wrong is heightened through showing
them a wrong that they will readily perceive.

Then they are shown a wrong that they will have to overcome. The
strength has to built up slowly. I assume that the Khateeb was thinking
like this. It is very difficulty to show that this is not hypocrisy,
but in such a difficult situation, I might do the same way. He was saying
to them in an indirect tone that sexuality must be moral, without
insulting them in front of each other, it seems to me.

Indian Ismailis converted to Islam gradually also, and I am sympathetic to
NOI for any rhetorical deviations from authentic Islam because it cannot
be given in a single unbearable dose.

Altaf Bhimji

unread,
Apr 20, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/20/98
to

sallaam ailaikum


AbdulraHman Lomax <mar...@vom.com> wrote:

: My counsel to him was celibacy until and unless he finds an


: appropriate marriage. This is exactly the same counsel that I would
: give a heterosexual Muslim who was finding it difficult to avoid sin.

: As others have pointed out, there is no sin involved simply in being


: "homosexual," that is, in discovering that one is sexually attracted
: to a person or persons of the same sex, just as there is no sin in
: being "heterosexual" if one is not married. It is sinful, by
: consensus, to act on these attractions without satisfying the
: conditions of marriage

So can homosexuals get married? Under current "consensous" they may not
get married. So, in effect homosexual may never have sex... Your counsel
was celibacy, until "appropriate marriage"... But, again, according to
current "consensous" there can be no "apporpriate marriage" for
homosexuals... From gays, and muslims who are gay that i've talked with,
they've said that it is not only sex that is the issue, it is also the
intimacy, and "romantic love"... in effect gays are not able to experience
this with the opposite sex... but *can* experience with the same gender...


: The extreme reaction of some among us to homosexuality is harmful to


: the community. The vast majority of homosexuals are not like the
: people of Lot, who were flagrant with their sexuality as well as

: aggressive about it. The result of the extreme homophobia of so many

I aggree with you above, and that is also how i read the verses in the
Quran...


: Now, something in us knows that this is wrong, and this knowledge


: struggles to come forth; and thus we see the efforts of homosexuals to
: break free of this oppressive atmosphere, thus the "Queer Masjid."


This is the first of this sort of someone openly stating their sexuality,
and religious Islamic faith... and while i find the name a little
offensive, i think it can be used to further dialogue and understand the
trials and issues presented here...

I, by the way, am a social worker, and as one, have done some brief
counseling for Muslims who are gay... unfortunately, the rejection from
the muslim community is so extreme, that they, understandably, won't have
anything to do with them... thus they have adopted a lifestyle that is
common amongst some gays in large cities, which is quite permiscuous, and
involves going to gay pick-up clubs etc. However, i think that these
persons could have been supported to at least be in a monogomous
relationship, and that did not involve sinning in other ways... -but such
support exists minimally... if there are such groups out there, such as
any non judgmental support groups for muslim families of gays, and muslims
who are gays. I would like to know of them, and add them to my list of
resources.

altaf


home page:http://www.wco.com/~altaf/altaf.html
Islamic and social justice articles, poetry, stories, and links
-----------------------------------------------------------------

El Gringo

unread,
Apr 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/21/98
to

On 17 Apr 1998 20:11:54 GMT, AbdulraHman Lomax <mar...@vom.com> wrote:
>"Gay" means that a person is preferentially attracted to others of the
>same sex. If we view this as an affliction, it is an affliction that
>spares no particular religious group.

Salam. Actually, you are giving the meaning found in some dictionaries. Now talking
about reality, ask anybody, or the majority of the people that consider themselves
as gay", they would tell you that they are gays because "they have attraction to
men and did sex with them". Someone who just has attraction to the same sex gender
and never did anything with them would just say "he has a sexual attraction to
them".

>It is possible to argue that a Muslim who *acts* on homosexual
>impulses is sinning; this is even, I would think, a consensus view,
>but it is *not* a consensus that such a sinner has thereby left Islam
>and can no longer be called a Muslim, just as one who fornicates in
>some other way has not left Islam. Would we say that there are no
>Muslim fornicators? (the majority view in Islam is that one does not
>become a non-Muslim merely by committing a sinful act.)

Sure, a person doing sex with the same gender is sinning. that does not make him
non-muslim UNLESS, and I say unless he/she considers that homosexuality is not
haram. It is exactly like fornicating, killing, ribaa, lying, stealing (with
different degrees of severity of course), if someone does it beleving that it is
not forbidden eventhough the quran states it, it puts himself in the position of
kafir. Let's formulate it another way, like ribaa, it is clearly stated in the
quran and sunna how haram it is. We know many mulsims do ribaa with the moderm
banks. That doesn't put them out of islam of course. But I know a lot who think
that the interpretation of ribaa in the quran doesn't apply in what they are doing.
Some say that because may be they have not enough knowledge, and that doesn't put
them as non-muslims (of course, only god knows who are innocented by their
ignorance if that is applied), and some other clearly understand the position of
ribaa in islam,
but refuse it because it goes against their material interest. In this case, it is
pretty bad, and most scholars say that these guys are kuffar. Of course, only god
knows what people really think, if they refuse of accept a haram or an obligation
by ignorance or by "conviction". It is not up to men to accuse who is kaffir and
who is not. This is the case with homosexuals. Some of them think homosexuality is
ok, not haram...even though, it is more clearly stated in the quran how bad it is
(more clearly than ribaa). Of course, the guy that does it with men still thinking
that it is haram, is sinning (and I strongly beleive that the importance of this
sin is bigger than this one of fornicating with the other sex). How many time did
we commit a sin and then damning ourself for this temptation (or more et less
importance) ? The difference between homosexuality and fornication, is that the
first one often leads the commiters to change their principles in order to satisfy
their acts with their minds. The later one leads to sometimes the same thing, but
often not. How many muslim people I know that fornicated, but never dared to think
that this is ok, still beleving that it is haram...Homosexuality often leads to the
contrary. Here is the difference. Why this difference exists, you know why, because
"usual" sins are easier to assume in society, but non-natural sins as
homosexuality, incests, bestuality, which are generally comdemned by the society in
their begining, and the mind itself is in tourment, that is one of the reason why
the commiter tries to find a shelter in other ideaology or principles....sometimes
denying obvious principles in islam, not just disobeing, but dennying, which is a
very different, since disobeing leads to be punnished for these acts for some time,
while dennying leads to what you know...

Now leaves us the question of the men that has sexual attractions to other men, but
never did it. Well, I think as long as he doesn't commit the act, it is mostly ok,
mostly, because in the judgment day, we will be judged for our acts, and for our
"thoughts". Of course, this guy has to take precautions, has to show in his acts
and efforts that he sincerely think that this thought of gayness is haram in islam,
and such efforts he has to do are like avoiding places where gays gathers,
marriying to a woman, or a woman marrying to a man, etc. There is a du3aa that
says "allah, hide our sins and our flaws in the judgment day as you hid them in our
life"...

>My counsel to him was celibacy until and unless he finds an
>appropriate marriage. This is exactly the same counsel that I would

celibacy ? why such a bad advice ? Is the urge for this guy to get rid of his
tendancies (at least, attenuate them) or like what you say, find a most
"appropriate" marriage ? Listen, who ever is doing something sincerely thinking
that it is in the sake of allah, then allah would take a good care of the
consequences. I mean that the marriage would be a better success then anything
attempted in the begining for finding an "approrpiate" marriage. "Innama al A"malou
bi al nyaat, we likouli 3abdin ma nawa".

>The extreme reaction of some among us to homosexuality is harmful to
>the community. The vast majority of homosexuals are not like the

I agree and disagree with what you say. I think that at the same time, the
community has to show its strong objection to homosexuality in order for the
"candidates or the tempteds" to give up and learn how to be attracted to women or
just restricts someone's temptations.
At the same time, they have to accord the same help, or even more to them in order
to convince them that it is haram if they are tempted in beleving that it is not,
or help them restrict this attraction...like Umar (ra) said "sevirity without
violence" and vice verca. And also, as the hadith says "la haya'a fi al din", no
shame in religion.

>It is unlawful to accuse another Muslim of unlawful sexual activity
>without strong proof. Therefore I would assume that a "Queer Masjid"

sure, The rules are the same as for the fornication. There must be 4 male
witnesses, or 2 males and 4 women to apply the punishment on an homosexual act
(for heterosexual fornication, the witnesses HAVE to see the penetraction, pretty
difficult). and that is the same for homosexuality, but somehow different, as
the judge has the right to punnish (like emprisonment, or privation, or forced
work) if he sees that a man is having physical contacts with gays (the same is
applyed for men-women couples if they are seen or known publically for they
frequentation, except that it must be stronger in matters of prevention for the
homos than for the heteros, why ? because, I don't know if you would disagree,
there is a difference in gravity that justifies this).

Anyway, after this totally long speech that I am unable to re-read myself, I'll
finnish with this (don't know if it is a hadith, I heard it in a preach) : A women
goes to the prophet jesus (as), and tells him if allah would forgive her sins
whatever they are, if she repents and regrets. The prophet says that is right. Then
she says, if allah would forgive a repented women that had sex with his own son and
that son died of that, then the prophet, angry, says to the women to go out before
a punnishment of allah would fall on them, then an angel comes to him and tells him
"how cannot you forgive a repented women, that allah had forgiven, when you forgave
to persons who did more evil things than that?", then the prophet says "is there
something more evil than that?", then the angel says "yes, a person who stops
doing the prayer without any excuse"...
Often, the gravity of things are very relative to god and us...


Wasalam. Riad

----------------------------------------------
To email, replace the "ANTI-SPAM.ORG" by "com"
----------------------------------------------

D. Beatty

unread,
Apr 21, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/21/98
to

> It cannot be that homosexuality is genetic. Otherwise God will not
> condemn it. If it is a biological deviation, then it can be treated
> as a disease. But that would lead to the societal corruption. There
> is more nurture than nature. Above I have mentioned situations where

Asalaam alaaykum brother,
I do not agree with your argument that homosexuality cannot be genetic
otherwise God would not condemn it. As an analogy, look at alcoholism.
Tendency to be an alcoholic is DEFINITELY genetic, and yet God still
condemns alcoholism. Some people are tempted more than others by alcohol
just as some are tempted more than others by homosexual tendencies.
Current research on homosexuality indicates that there most probably is a
genetic factor but that environment also has some influence. Other
studies indicate have shown that in rats homosexual behavior can be caused
by deprivation of key hormones at certain stages of pregnancy and many
of the researchers are looking into ways to determine if hormonal
imbalance during pregnancy might also be one of many causing factors in
humans.

We are all faced with different temptations that are sometimes influenced
by our genetic make-up. But having a genetic tendency toward a certain
behavior does not justify the behavior or make it okay.
wasalaam


--------------------
O those who are slaves of Allah, remember Allah, remember Allah, remember
Allah while you are well before you become ill, while you have the
opportunity before you become constrained; strive to be free of the fire
of Hell before the way of salvation becomes impossible for you. Give
yourself to the way of Allah with eyes clear of sleep and your stomach
empty. Walk in His path, give away your possession in His path, use your
body to the benefit of your spirit, being sparing. (Imam Ali (as))
--------------------
O God, I have not worshipped Thee out of fear of Thy
punishment or due to greed for Thy Paradise.
Rather, I found Thee to be worthy of worship, so I
worshipped Thee. (Imam Ali (as))
----------------------
The first thing which a slave will be
accounted for is Salat. Thus if Salat is
accepted by God then all his other acts too
will be accepted by God. However if Salat is
not accepted, his other acts too will not be
accepted. (Imam Jafar as Sadiq (as))
-----------------------------

Imran Razi

unread,
Apr 23, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/23/98
to

Other
> studies indicate have shown that in rats homosexual behavior can be caused
> by deprivation of key hormones at certain stages of pregnancy and many
> of the researchers are looking into ways to determine if hormonal
> imbalance during pregnancy might also be one of many causing factors in
> humans.


Assalaamu alaykum,

It should also be noted that hormone levels are proven to be (heavily)
influenced by environmental factors in these animal studies. There is a
much greater connection, in both directions, between genetics and
environment (in fact many researchers don't like using these terms) than
has been previously thought. The analogy to alcoholism is a good one;
both factors are at work.

Imran Razi

AbdulraHman Lomax

unread,
Apr 24, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/24/98
to

as-salamu 'alaykum.

Altaf Bhimji <al...@wco.com> wrote:

>So can homosexuals get married? Under current "consensous" they may not
>get married. So, in effect homosexual may never have sex...

Because of time limits, I'm going to stop right here. I'm going to be
a bit strict, because I think that we should be very careful in
discussing this issue. And there is no consensus that "homosexuals may
not bet married."

First of all, it is completely clear that there is no reason why a
homosexual may not marry in the normal way. In the example I was
mentioning, the man, self-defined as homosexual but desiring to return
to lawful behavior, was considering marriage. To a woman, yet to be
found. I merely pointed out to him that there might be some problem in
marrying a woman without disclosing his past and his, shall we say,
inclinations including his lack of attraction for women.

>Your counsel
>was celibacy, until "appropriate marriage"...

Which is exactly the same advice which is given to non-homosexuals.

>But, again, according to
>current "consensous" there can be no "apporpriate marriage" for
>homosexuals...

Restated and no more true with the second statement.

>From gays, and muslims who are gay that i've talked with,
>they've said that it is not only sex that is the issue, it is also the
>intimacy, and "romantic love"... in effect gays are not able to experience
>this with the opposite sex... but *can* experience with the same gender...

And there is nothing unlawful about this. But it is not true that
homosexuals cannot experience intimacy and even romantic love with
people of the opposite sex. In fact, male homosexuals are often quite
intimate with women, even more intimate than many or most straight
males. Homsexuality has to do with sex, not with intimacy, per se.

And it is not unlawful to be "intimate" with people of the same sex,
just as it is not unlawful to be intimate with one's own family
members. But it is unlawful to be *sexually active* with one's
children, for example.

Brother Bhimji agreed with me on a number of points and they are
important ones.

RAM9

unread,
Apr 24, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/24/98
to

In article <6hnl8n$o...@usenet.srv.cis.pitt.edu>,

"
studies indicate have shown that in rats homosexual behavior can be caused
by deprivation of key hormones at certain stages of pregnancy and many
of the researchers are looking into ways to determine if hormonal
imbalance during pregnancy might also be one of many causing factors in
humans.
"

Imran Razi <ra...@ucla.edu> wrote:
"
It should also be noted that hormone levels are proven to be (heavily)
influenced by environmental factors in these animal studies. There is a
much greater connection, in both directions, between genetics and
environment (in fact many researchers don't like using these terms) than
has been previously thought. The analogy to alcoholism is a good one;
both factors are at work.
"

What about the feedback from thought to the hormones.
Anger causes hyper acidity.
Lewd thoughts cause erection.

I sincerely believe that there is considerable and a very strong
effect from the thoughts to the biology. True that there is an
effect from an injection of the hormone to the thoughts. There is
also an effect from seeing naked females to the brain. But there
is also an effect from thought to the biology.

The first two effects from
the chemical -> thoughts
and from
the audio/visual/olfactory/touch (senses) -> thoughts

exist. In them there is some limited free will too. One can change or
leave the environment. One can choose not to eat certain things. One
can reduce one's intake of food if the outlet is not at the same level
of energy. One can do physical exercise. One can try to understand one's
rythem, and biological cycles.

There was a time when I had less free will, but with time it has
increased. Hence, I have learnt that it is best to believe in free will
and to have a certain measured contempt, or repulsion (to be more
accurate) from the arguments designed to justify or rationalise the
absence of freewill. One must not have contempt for the people who are
victims of it. Rather pity and helpful encouragement, with respect of them
as human beings and remembering one's own history of weakness is the right
approach.

>From this point of view, I believe that if there are a few causes of
homosexuality or any deviant sexuality, then there is an equally large
number of cures or options under our free will and knowledge available to
combat them.

Though I forget the exact contents, but I distinctly remember being
impressed by an article written by Abdurehman Lomax, telling us how he had
experienced greater control on himself during a certain period of his life
and analysied clearly the power of the input from visual and other senses
that we allow. In this society it is more difficult, but there are
solutions along the lines of starting one's own businesses to wrest
control of the forces that will allow us muslims to create a better world
for us irrespective of the geography, for ourselves.


AbdulraHman Lomax

unread,
Apr 25, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/25/98
to

Peace.

dervish <jes...@gte.net> wrote:

> While I dispute the hadd you mentioned, one additional point
>must be made eminently clear. We cannot apply ANY hadd on any homosexual
>without appropriate witnesses. A homosexual in this case is defined as
>one who is witnessed engaging in a homosexual act...NOT one who simply
>is potentially attracted to the same sex.

This must really be emphasized, and there is a further point. Who is
"we?" One does not gain the right to apply the prescribed punishments
merely because one is a Muslim. Except for the Kharijites and those
who resemble them -- that is, heretics -- the consensus gives
enforcement authority only to people enjoying sovereignty, to put a
western term on it. In short, the government.

In fact, one of the more outrageous aspects of Imam Khomeini's
infamous fatwa regarding Salman Rushdie is that it called upon "all
valiant Muslims" to enforce it agains "the author" and anyone involved
with the book Satanic Verses, without any restriction or
specification. In other words, unnamed persons were condemned to death
without any niceties of process, to be executed by anyone who
considered himself valiant. Only an Islamic scholar who was losing his
mental capacities would have issued such a fatwa.

AbdulraHman Lomax

unread,
Apr 25, 1998, 3:00:00 AM4/25/98
to

ri...@innocent.anti-spam.org (El Gringo) wrote:

>On 17 Apr 1998 20:11:54 GMT, AbdulraHman Lomax <mar...@vom.com> wrote:
>>"Gay" means that a person is preferentially attracted to others of the
>>same sex. If we view this as an affliction, it is an affliction that
>>spares no particular religious group.
>
>Salam. Actually, you are giving the meaning found in some dictionaries.

Yes. In other words, the way that people use the word. But El Gringo
seems to think that dictionaries do not reflect the reality of
language. By the way, I should have said "sexually attracted."

>Now talking
>about reality, ask anybody, or the majority of the people that consider themselves
>as gay", they would tell you that they are gays because "they have attraction to
>men and did sex with them". Someone who just has attraction to the same sex gender
>and never did anything with them would just say "he has a sexual attraction to
>them".

Nonsense. Someone like that in contemporary society might well say
that he was "gay." In fact, there are plenty of gay people who call
themselves gay who are not sexually active: I've known quite a few,
often those who are religious and their religion prohibits homosexual
activity, as most do, or those who have realized that their lives were
going downhill fast, so they learned to be abstinent.

>>It is possible to argue that a Muslim who *acts* on homosexual
>>impulses is sinning; this is even, I would think, a consensus view,
>>but it is *not* a consensus that such a sinner has thereby left Islam
>>and can no longer be called a Muslim, just as one who fornicates in
>>some other way has not left Islam. Would we say that there are no
>>Muslim fornicators? (the majority view in Islam is that one does not
>>become a non-Muslim merely by committing a sinful act.)
>
>Sure, a person doing sex with the same gender is sinning. that does not make him
>non-muslim UNLESS, and I say unless he/she considers that homosexuality is not
>haram.

Right. But, again, the word "homosexuality" has been used here. To be
specific, it is homosexual activity, in general, that is haram, not
"homosexuality," per se, for it is entirely possible for a homosexual
to be inactive sexually. But his or her homosexuality has not
vanished, it is merely not active.

That homosexuals can become heterosexuals is controversial; it appears
to me that both sides on this issue tend to exaggerate. While I know
of many practicing homosexuals who made the change back to straight
sexuality and marriage, others seem to find it very difficult. Gay
activists often promote the idea of rigidity in sexual preference,
because, probably, they think that if they can establish that a
homosexual has *no* choice, then it will be easier to establish gay
rights. But the matter is not necessarily that simple.

>It is exactly like fornicating, killing, ribaa, lying, stealing (with
>different degrees of severity of course), if someone does it beleving that it is
>not forbidden eventhough the quran states it, it puts himself in the position of
>kafir.

Right. However, technically, there is no prohibition of homosexuality
in the Qur'an, at least not an explicit one, and some scholars would
say that to be haram rather than makruh, the prohibition must be
explicit. There are also some difficulties with the hadith cited as
prohibitions of homosexuality. But certainly it is generally
considered haram, and it is also true that to make lawful what is
haram is to leave Islam, unless one does not know, which is why
opportunity to be educated and to repent is given before any hadd
would be applied.

But the gay Muslims I have communicated with do not deny that
homosexual activity is haram. Thus my original point: there *are* gay
Muslims.

> Let's formulate it another way, like ribaa, it is clearly stated in the
>quran and sunna how haram it is.

I don't think so. What is haram is what is haram, degree is not
generally stated.

>We know many mulsims do ribaa with the moderm
>banks. That doesn't put them out of islam of course. But I know a lot who think
>that the interpretation of ribaa in the quran doesn't apply in what they are doing.
>Some say that because may be they have not enough knowledge, and that doesn't put
>them as non-muslims (of course, only god knows who are innocented by their
>ignorance if that is applied), and some other clearly understand the position of
>ribaa in islam,
>but refuse it because it goes against their material interest. In this case, it is
>pretty bad, and most scholars say that these guys are kuffar.

Of course, there can be an argument of necessity. If the only
difference between a kafir and a Muslim is a difference of opinion as
to the severity of a situation allowing the excuse of necessity, the
whole structure of law gets pretty shaky.

I don't think that general statements can be made; rather it would be
up to a judge, having jurisdiction and competence, to judge a
particular case. Judges issue rulings in cases: *this* guy is kafir,
not "guys like this are kafir." Scholars sometimes give opinions about
classes of people, to provide general guidelines, but these are dicta,
essentially, mere opinion.

>Of course, only god
>knows what people really think, if they refuse of accept a haram or an obligation
>by ignorance or by "conviction". It is not up to men to accuse who is kaffir and
>who is not. This is the case with homosexuals. Some of them think homosexuality is
>ok, not haram...even though, it is more clearly stated in the quran how bad it is
>(more clearly than ribaa).

No. The text does not support that. But clearly El Gringo thinks it
does. Rather, the text supports, quite clearly, that a certain prophet
disapproved strongly of homosexual activity.

We could also derive the prohibition of homosexual activity from the
same verses used to derive the prohibition of masturbation; and also
there is another verse as well which I do not remember distinctly. But
these verses would not establish, for example, a death penalty, and
they do not warn of war with Allah and his Prophet, as do the verses
on riba'. Thus, how can it be said that homosexual activity is *more
haram* than, say, fornication or riba'?



>Of course, the guy that does it with men still thinking
>that it is haram, is sinning (and I strongly beleive that the importance of this
>sin is bigger than this one of fornicating with the other sex).

I disagree with this as a general statement, for several reasons. It
may be true in some cases and not in others. For an example where the
sin may be greater, I would take the example of a normally
heterosexual man who, in prison, rapes another man. This, in fact,
resembles the people of Lot far more than most of today's
"homosexuals."

>How many time did
>we commit a sin and then damning ourself for this temptation (or more et less
>importance) ? The difference between homosexuality and fornication, is that the
>first one often leads the commiters to change their principles in order to satisfy
>their acts with their minds. The later one leads to sometimes the same thing, but
>often not. How many muslim people I know that fornicated, but never dared to think
>that this is ok, still beleving that it is haram...Homosexuality often leads to the
>contrary.

Where it is so much more strongly condemned, this may be true. People
react against extremity, sensing injustice in it. I might ask why El
Gringo thinks this is the case, however. But my concern is really
Muslims who want to be Muslims *and* who are struggling with
homosexuality and the problems it raises. And there are plenty of
people out there who will tell them, go away, you aren't Muslims and
we don't want to have anything to do with you.

As a prison chaplain, I was asked by the inmates about transvestites,
could they come to the services. I answered, yes, they could come if
they did not dress in such a way as to create a disturbance; in other
words, if they wore the normal prison clothing, and also if they
conducted themselves appropriately. Basically, this is the same answer
that would be given about *anyone*. There were no questions about
whether Christians could come (yes, they could) or white people (hah!
yes, we can come) or murderers or drug dealers (and certainly quite a
few of these came) or rapists or thieves (and we did not take it upon
ourselves to lash or stone anyone or cut off any hands....)

Come to think of it, if we excluded people in prison on the basis of
what they had done, we'd have had only a few people, if any. The
Christians, of course, say that no one is free of sin. I'm not so
sure.... Maybe Jesus, AS, or the Prophet, SAS, could come.....

>Here is the difference. Why this difference exists, you know why, because
>"usual" sins are easier to assume in society, but non-natural sins as
>homosexuality, incests, bestuality, which are generally comdemned by the society in
>their begining, and the mind itself is in tourment, that is one of the reason why
>the commiter tries to find a shelter in other ideaology or principles....sometimes
>denying obvious principles in islam, not just disobeing, but dennying, which is a
>very different, since disobeing leads to be punnished for these acts for some time,
>while dennying leads to what you know...

If homosexuality is "unnatural," what about rape? Of course,
homosexuality exists in nature, so I begin to wonder what "unnatural"
means. Yes, the mind of Muslim homosexuals, at least those who are
active, is in unrest and difficulty. Of course, if there were any for
whom this was not true, I would probably not have heard from them....
Anyway, that these Muslims *were* trying to find a way to reconcile
with Islam is the counterargument to what El Gringo has asserted.

>Now leaves us the question of the men that has sexual attractions to other men, but
>never did it. Well, I think as long as he doesn't commit the act, it is mostly ok,
>mostly, because in the judgment day, we will be judged for our acts, and for our
>"thoughts".

We are judged by our intentions, not our "thoughts", nor, really, by
our acts -- except as our acts reflect our intentions. In fact, our
thoughts may be the promptings of Satan, and we are judged by how we
respond to them, not by the thoughts themselves. Did we follow the
thoughts and encourage them?

>Of course, this guy has to take precautions, has to show in his acts
>and efforts that he sincerely think that this thought of gayness is haram in islam,

As I have said, the "thought of gayness," whatever that is, is not
haram in Islam unless it is volitional; even then it is only a
straying to the edge of the lawful, a crumbling and unstable edge: not
a good place to stand. But this is not different than thoughts of
intercourse, for example, with a woman not one's wife.

>and such efforts he has to do are like avoiding places where gays gathers,
>marriying to a woman, or a woman marrying to a man, etc. There is a du3aa that
>says "allah, hide our sins and our flaws in the judgment day as you hid them in our
>life"...

As to marriage as a "solution," this is not necessarily good. Marriage
is, or ought to be, an intimate institution, one with openness and
honesty between the partners. And what might be seen as a defect
should not be concealed from a potential mate, nor from a wali. Thus,
if a man is not at all attracted to women, one of the elements of
marriage may be defective, and the prospective spouse should know
about it before becoming committed. If she (and I am writing as if the
homosexual is male; it is similar for women) decides to go ahead, then
my wish would be that God would bless them both.

Hiding a sin is one thing, hiding a flaw is another. Suppose someone
thinks I am a physician, but I have this flaw: I really don't know
medicine at all. Should I hide my flaw so that I can impress this
person or take a fee from him? If I think that I will be able to help
in spite of my lack of education, may I conceal my defect?

Not according to my book.

>>My counsel to him was celibacy until and unless he finds an
>>appropriate marriage. This is exactly the same counsel that I would
>
>celibacy ? why such a bad advice ?

It happens to be the shari'a. Honestly, this topic brings out the
worst in many of us. Yes, Islam requires celibacy for those who are
not married, until they are married. It also does not recommend
inappropriate marriages: that's what a wali is for, to consider the
appropriateness of a match, primarily with the woman's interests in
mind.

>Is the urge for this guy to get rid of his
>tendancies (at least, attenuate them) or like what you say, find a most
>"appropriate" marriage ?

I did not say "most" appropriate. I did not counsel perfection. But a
marriage where he was hiding his everyday thoughts, inclinations,
desires, impulses, etc., from his wife does not seem healthy or
appropriate to me, and the very likely result would be continued
homosexual activity, in shame and secret. Plus, now, there would be a
potential innocent victim, the wife.

If the wife knew about his problem and his struggles, she could
support him and encourage him; that's part of being a mate.

If I am correct, he is not likely to "get rid of his tendencies." He
had them from early childhood, which would be more than twenty years.
Yes, they would "attenuate" if he became celibate in a positive and
healthy way (which is not easy, but it is possible). But marriage,
unless it were "appropriate," as I said, would likely make matters
worse.

He did not like to hear this. All the while he was continuing to act
on his homosexual impulses -- and this can take one into some very
ugly places -- he had held out the hope that he would return to his
home country, marry, and it would all be in his past.

All I could say to him was "Maybe. But I don't think so, not just like
that." *If* his home society really provided no opportunities for
homosexual activity, then maybe it would work. However, I don't there
there is any place on earth where that is true. This kind of fantasy
is, in fact, common among addicts of all kinds, that somehow some
outside situation will result in a cure.

>Listen, who ever is doing something sincerely thinking
>that it is in the sake of allah, then allah would take a good care of the
>consequences. I mean that the marriage would be a better success then anything
>attempted in the begining for finding an "approrpiate" marriage. "Innama al A"malou
>bi al nyaat, we likouli 3abdin ma nawa".

My only point was the dishonesty was not a foundation for good action;
if the action was dishonest in itself, no supposed good intention
would excuse it. One cannot plan deception and excuse it as good
intention. Yes, if his intention is lawful marriage, and he conducts
himself uprightly, he will have his reward with Allah, no doubt about
it.

Now we return to my main point: if Muslims reject, out of hand,
homosexuals as non-Muslim, it would be impossible for him to marry a
Muslim woman unless he conceals his situation. Essentially, the
extreme homophobia which is all too common among Muslims is an
impediment to the reconciliation of homosexual Muslims with Islam, it
is saddun 'an sabiylillah.

I am not arguing against the hadd. But the hadd are mostly moot, in
most places in the world. Of those Muslims who commit fornication, how
many are flogged?

>>The extreme reaction of some among us to homosexuality is harmful to
>>the community. The vast majority of homosexuals are not like the
>
>I agree and disagree with what you say. I think that at the same time, the
>community has to show its strong objection to homosexuality in order for the
>"candidates or the tempteds" to give up and learn how to be attracted to women or
>just restricts someone's temptations.

We need not "object" to "homosexuality." Homosexuality, it appears, is
natural, just as is "heterosexuality." It is a fact of life, objecting
to it is like objecting to the appendix.

Heterosexual *behavior*, outside of marriage, is forbidden. It's that
simple. We do not "strongly object" to those who are inclined to
heterosexual behavior, who are attracted to women without first
getting a piece of paper or the equivalent; rather, we forbid or
inform that it is forbidden to *act* on these attractions without
satisfying the conditions of marriage. We should not treat homosexuals
differently.

By the way, homosexuality is often confused with effeminate behavior;
much of what is written on this by Muslims seems to assume that
homosexuality equals dressing as women or behaving in an effeminate
way. This is simply ignorance. Many homosexuals are not effeminate,
and many cross-dressers and otherwise "effeminate" men are actually
not homosexual at all.

>At the same time, they have to accord the same help, or even more to them in order
>to convince them that it is haram if they are tempted in beleving that it is not,
>or help them restrict this attraction...like Umar (ra) said "sevirity without
>violence" and vice verca. And also, as the hadith says "la haya'a fi al din", no
>shame in religion.

Yes. We can agree on this.

>>It is unlawful to accuse another Muslim of unlawful sexual activity
>>without strong proof. Therefore I would assume that a "Queer Masjid"
>
>sure, The rules are the same as for the fornication. There must be 4 male
>witnesses, or 2 males and 4 women to apply the punishment on an homosexual act
>(for heterosexual fornication, the witnesses HAVE to see the penetraction, pretty
>difficult). and that is the same for homosexuality, but somehow different, as
>the judge has the right to punnish (like emprisonment, or privation, or forced
>work) if he sees that a man is having physical contacts with gays (the same is
>applyed for men-women couples if they are seen or known publically for they
>frequentation, except that it must be stronger in matters of prevention for the
>homos than for the heteros, why ? because, I don't know if you would disagree,
>there is a difference in gravity that justifies this).

I disagree about difference in gravity; I think I have made that
clear. As to the "right" of a judge, that depends on context, and it
is mostly moot under present conditions. What would "physical contact
with gays mean"? If I know a gay man, does this mean that if I shake
his hand or embrace him, I can be punished?

>Anyway, after this totally long speech that I am unable to re-read myself, I'll
>finnish with this (don't know if it is a hadith, I heard it in a preach) : A women
>goes to the prophet jesus (as), and tells him if allah would forgive her sins
>whatever they are, if she repents and regrets. The prophet says that is right. Then
>she says, if allah would forgive a repented women that had sex with his own son and
>that son died of that, then the prophet, angry, says to the women to go out before
>a punnishment of allah would fall on them, then an angel comes to him and tells him
>"how cannot you forgive a repented women, that allah had forgiven, when you forgave
>to persons who did more evil things than that?", then the prophet says "is there
>something more evil than that?", then the angel says "yes, a person who stops
>doing the prayer without any excuse"...
>Often, the gravity of things are very relative to god and us...

I think that El Gringo has made my point with this hadith, whose
implications are agreeable to me even if its isnad is missing and it
might have other problems....

>
>Wasalam. Riad
>
>----------------------------------------------
>To email, replace the "ANTI-SPAM.ORG" by "com"
>----------------------------------------------
>
>

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages