Faith of Freedom

An invitation to all races, color, and system of thought, where Islam is the agenda: from politics to family life.
 
HomeFAQSearchRegisterMemberlistUsergroupsLog in

Share | 
 

 Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?

Go down 
Go to page : Previous  1, 2
AuthorMessage
Wombat



Posts : 20
Join date : 2008-01-04

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Wed Jan 09, 2008 7:32 pm

Peace Within wrote:
Salaams John!

I just wrote such a long response, but all of it just vanished...sigh. I need to study for my finals, so I may not respond for a while. Do talk to the other members. I will come and talk a little on the other threads and forums. However, now I do not feel up to it on this particular topic since it takes a lot of energy out of me. I do enjoy this a lot, but I think I need a little time away to keep myself focused on the world of academia! (Sigh...my Alma Matter...)

Take care John! Don't leave the forums! I will reply! Just not today!

Peace Within

I do understand - it's extremely annoying when that happens, and web pages are notorious for losing what you are trying to post. I know from bitter experience. That's why, when I'm writing on a forum like this, I always copy and paste the text to an external file and save it every few minutes as I'm typing.

I wish you the best with your studies.

John.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
druidboy



Posts : 8
Join date : 2008-01-02

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Fri Jan 11, 2008 8:17 am

uhh sry if i offended anyone...i'm not sure if the post after mine was directed toward my post, but if it was i'm sry. i just posted something based on the information that is currently of issue in california. oh it's not propositions...they are bills/laws under the scrutiny of schwazenneger who is leaning toward passing these as laws. petitioning is in progress to stop the law that will allow men or women who claim themselves as homosexuals to enter the opposite sex's restrooms or private areas. the first one is under pressure from religious groups...other then that...the laws likelihood of being passed is high. well just additional side note to add on to my previous post of how in some places homosexual is progressing and is not totally denied.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Peace Within

avatar

Posts : 168
Join date : 2007-12-31
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Sun Jan 13, 2008 5:14 pm

Salaams John

We've decided before we lock the debate forum and re-instate our new rules I felt we give you the decision on how you think this thread should end. How many more posts do you think we should post? I'll leave that up to you. You posted first, so I felt that maybe I should end last, maybe after 4 posts, or you can end last. It's your choice. Please let me know! I know the activity has stooped, that's only cause we all have our finals. Thanks John!

Peace Within
Back to top Go down
View user profile
ib91



Posts : 2
Join date : 2008-01-23

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Thu Jan 24, 2008 12:18 pm

We have nothing wrong against gays that have trouble with hormone problems. If a man has to much estrogen (we do have it) he will like other guys... we tolerate that cause we understand that the body does that. But when a person decides to be gay just to go against the norms of society...well that is not acceptable. They choose to rebel against the social principles and if you look truly inside them... they are not gay... they just say they are and cause mischief
Back to top Go down
View user profile
.



Posts : 30
Join date : 2008-01-02

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Thu Jan 24, 2008 12:33 pm

I agree with what Ib91 said...i read that some where...
I think the Saudi Government that has its laws based on Shariyah(Islamic Laws) allows people which hormone problems...can someone confirm this?
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Peace Within

avatar

Posts : 168
Join date : 2007-12-31
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:18 pm

Assalamulaikum John,

Yes! I got an A in AP Physics! Alhamdolilah! Finals went well, but I wish I put more effort into studying. AP Calculus and AP Literature didn't go as well. John I love your passion for morality and justice. It shows me how much you care about the human race and people's personal lives. I will start off by looking at your two examples. I took some time to run around my school and grab some polls. It took a while. Lets look at your first example:
Quote :

An empty train is racing out of control down the tracks towards another stationary train full of people. Clearly if the runaway train continues, many people are going to die. However, in between the two trains is a set of points which would take the runaway train onto a siding, upon which there is a train with a single railway worker. You have just seconds to decide whether to let the train continue on the main line, or go off onto the siding. In the first case, many people will die. In the second place, one person will die. What do you do? Do you change the points and kill one person, or leave them alone so that many die?

Almost everyone faced with this very difficult decision will say that you should direct the train onto the siding, killing the one man but saving many. It doesn't seem to matter where a person is from, what kind of society they grew up in - as long as the question is phrased in an appropriate way, to relate to their environment, they will choose to act and kill one person in order to save many.

John of all the polls I took, they gave a straight answer; they would save thousands of people by killing a man. To save a greater life (plural) than a smaller life (singular, in this case) is logical, and 'morally' correct. In this theoretical situation even I would save thousands of lives rather than watch them die just because I decided not change the railing. In Islam we are told John:

[The Glorious Qur'an, Chapter 5 The Table Spread, Surah Al-Maida, Verse 32]

"If any one saved a life, it would be as if he saved the life of the whole of mankind. Then although there came to them Our messengers with clear signs, yet, even after that, many of them continued to commit excesses in the land."

Being good as I said before is not a logical approach to life, people would rather live a luxurious care-free life without having to worry about the consequences. The Quran makes it clear, saving one life is as if one had saved the whole of humanity. One a Godly scale it makes sense. On a humanly scale - people die everyday due to atrocities. For example the on going war in Bosnia. As much as I understand. No gives a damn what happened in 1995. Remember the shootings? As if people really care if people are being killed before our very eyes. Lets look the other example you gave us:

Quote :
You have a whole room full of people who are going to die if they don't get an organ transplant. Each one needs a different organ. In walks a healthy man. Would it be right to kill that man, donate all his organs to the sick people and thus save numerous lives?

Almost everyone says no, it would not be right.

People on this side of the world did not agree with you. 97 percent of those who were given these examples felt that number 2 was reiterating the same general idea example 1 posed. Those who have taken Advanced Placement Biology at our school see that up to 50 people can have their lives enhanced or saved simply from one human being who gives up his life to benefit others. Of course realistically this does not happen, but can happen. People with the knowledge of how many people can be saved, the greater life, realize that this question is nothing but example one paraphrased. Morality once again John differs from region to region, culture to culture, continent to continent, hemisphere to hemisphere. You can call them dogmas, ideology, but when someone looks at your understand of morality they'll say the same. Of course, we wont on this forum. We all have different system of thought and all of them are welcome regardless of their nature. In this case, if there 200 on the verge of death and who needed an organs, people at our school saw no trouble in saving the greater life (plural) (this is in essence another hypothetical situation in comparion to yours). However, I started to state certain circumstances with the same variables you began your example with, only then did my fellow classmates agreed with you. It depends on the circumstance, the consequences, whether if it's justified, etc.

Next:

Quote :
So, scientists conclude that there are moral tendencies which are common to almost all humans. The only reasonable explanation is that they are innate, a product of our evolutionary origns. Our moral feelings have contributed to us being such an enormously successful species.

Agreed. Besides them being part of our 'evoluationary' origins - as our prophet said in a Hadith:

[Sahih Al-Bukhari Hadith 2.440 Narrated by Ibn Shihab]

Abu Huraira, narrated that the Prophet said, “Every child is born with a true faith (i.e. to worship none but Allah Alone) but his parents convert him to Judaism or to Christianity or to Magainism, as
an animal delivers a perfect baby animal. Do you find it mutilated?”

Then Abu Huraira recited the holy verses:

[color=white]By definition one who is a Muslim he gives to the poor, cherishes what he has, treats people kindly, does not hurt others. Morality, is indeed innate. I agree with you one hundred percent.

[The Glorious Quran, Chapter 30 The Romans, Ar-Rum, Verse 30]

So set thou thy face truly to the religion being upright; the nature in which Allah has made mankind: no change (there is) in the work (wrought) by Allah: that is the true Religion: but most among mankind know not. We have no doubt (Al Rayba-Fee), that good character, certain emotions, and values were instilled within our bodies. That's what makes us human, that's what sets us aside from animals. John have you read the Qur'an? I'm answering you just based on the Qur'an. I'm aware of an immense library in Oxford. You should try to grab a hold of a good copy, by one who is well versed in Arabic.

Next:
Quote :

Only in certain places. Overall, far more heterosexuals have AIDS than homosexuals. The first recorded case was in a heterosexual. Either way, this has nothing to do with the moral issue. Asbestos workers are preferentially prone to lung disease. Does that mean that working with asbestos is immoral? I don't think so. It just means they were unfortunate. So, I don't see that your point has any weight here.

No, wrong. David Carr, the first person to be first noted by the medical world who had been infected by the deadly strand was actually thought to be a homosexual. In the 1990s, doctors tested his tissue samples and discovered he was HIV positive. Later on some American scientists felt that the tissue samples taken from the year 1930 were contanimated leading to false results. This is highly speculative, while half the medical world still feels that he was the first recorded AIDS victim. He was part of the Navy in Manchester, who usually consisted of all men at the time (if you've read military history before World War II), besides clerks. It's incorrect to say or even imply he was a heterosexual. All we can say we don't know for sure. Where he worked and worked for the rest of his implies he could have been a homosexual. Lets look at some other early examples (Taken From Wikipedia):
1. A plasma sample taken in 1959 from an adult male living in Kinshasa, which is today part of the Democratic Republic of Congo.


2. HIV found in tissue samples from "Robert. R", a 15 year old African-American teenager who died in St. Louis in 1969: " He had admitted that he was sexually active, having sex with "a neighborhood girl", but did not specify whether he was heterosexual or homosexual (it is today thought that he was homosexual)...why?... three years after AIDS was officially discovered and had started spreading at dangerous levels in New York City and Los Angeles, Dr. Marlys Witte, one of the doctors who, like Elvin-Lewis, had looked after Robert and also assisted in the autopsy, thawed and tested
preserved samples of Robert's remains. In the remains were found antibodies to Herpes Simplex, cytomegalovirus, and Epstein-Barr Virus, three diseases common among homosexual men, especially those with AIDS.

3. HIV found in tissue samples from Arvid Now, a Norwegian sailor who died around 1976: "Noe began his career as a sailor in 1961, when he was 15 years old....Noe is believed to have contracted HIV in Cameroon probably in 1961, where he was known to have been sexually active with many women, including prostitutes.... Noe began showing symptoms of HIV/AIDS in 1966; his wife grew ill with similar symptoms in 1967 followed by their daughter in 1969.
Noe died of Kaposi's Sarcoma in 1976. His wife and 9-year-old daughter suffered the same fate as well; they both died in 1977.

I'm willing to post all the information on these people John. It doesn't fit when someone doesn't post all the information. Then again, I feel these are just highlights. There must have been people even before these were brought under the spotlight. I'll do more research, later on. It's silly isn't it John? People have to pay for their lusty intents? Mother, faither, and daughter? Perhaps even the son? That's why Islam prohibits imartial relationships. You never know what you're going to get yourself into.

Continuing:
Quote :

Back to the biological discussion: I should clarify that in your original post, what you seemed to be saying was this: Since homosexual couples do not (at least without help) produce offspring, this must be in some way unnatural, or against the natural order. I countered this by pointing out that many other species have non-breeding individuals as part of their natural order, so on that point alone your argument did not seem to be valid.


And my response (and counter example) to you is that, they help the Queen to reproduce on a LARGE scale. Homosexuals have no even in the least bit promoted reproduction on the large scale normal humans accomplish (heterosexuals). Also, homosexual humans are not infertile, they can breed. They choose not to. Animals do not have the choice or will to choose. Natural order, I see it as productivity and an increase in the gene pool - that's how even Richard Dawkins, the most eminent scholar in Biology, sees it. Homosexuals at most certainainly do not 'contribute' to the gene pool. They do not engage in sexual intercourse and produce offspring. Your argument runs downhill from here.

Then you said:

Quote :
However, there is no sign that this is happening - the proportion of homosexuals in the population has appeared to be stable - and we certainly don't have any problems with reduced population growth (rather the opposite, in fact). So, I don't think this point particularly helps your case either.


Wrong. I will use the United States as an example for this. Before the Roaring Twenties, the long lasting beliefs of the Puritans almost disappeared, and people started to dress 'scanty, people started to invest more money in drinking, and prostitutes became widely available. It's in our American History school books, though they say this in a more 'hush hush' way. Then women started to act for prohibition of alcohol, through the 18th amendment (or the 19th, I cannot remember). Things started to change. You barely had homosexuals at that time in the United States. Perhaps a few thousand or hundred. Homosexuality was strongly forbidden. They only became decriminalized after some time. America was among the earliest countries to decriminalize it. Today you have 25 million homosexuals in the United States. That's a big number out of: 301,139,947


301,139,947/25,000,000 = .083 = 8.3 percent of the total population.

To what I've done in research, John, this number is a growth in the number of homosexuals.
Quote :

Well that's not my logic at all. It's a matter of observation - a matter of fact - that many species do have non-breeding individuals. We're not just talking about individuals which try to mate and fail, but about whole classes which are sterile, or don't attempt to breed. That must be genetic. If it's genetic, then clearly it must be passed on in those individuals which *do* breed. There's simply no other way the phenomenon could continue in a species.


You're missing the point. These non-breeding organisms, have a purpose. Ants support the Queen. Wolves, support the Alpha leaders. As humans we live our own lives. Homosexuals contribute to taxes, and help building society, I will admit to that. Many of the homosexuals I've met are nice people, treat me well, and wish me the best. Homosexuals at large do notl pursue the same goals, as these non-breeding animals do. I haven't seen a single proof of evidence that suggests there exists a genetic component linked with homosexuality, which is why I don't agree with your case. Would you suprised if I told you one of my freinds was gay, but changed his ways, and does not 'feel attracted' to the same sex? Phenomenon such as these have to be proved John. Genetics, morality, human nature - it's nothing without evidence.


Last edited by on Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Peace Within

avatar

Posts : 168
Join date : 2007-12-31
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Thu Jan 24, 2008 2:27 pm

I see you continue to show me evidence:

Quote :

I think this is the problem I highlighted earlier. The unit of inheritance is the gene. Evolution therefore acts on genes. Individuals are not inherited, their genes are. There is no other way for the phenomenon of non-breeding to be stable in a species except by being inherited by those individuals which do breed. How do ants retain the genes for the production of worker ants, except by being passed down through the ants which do breed?


John, there is no such thing as a stable gene within a gene pool unless you are talking about the laboratory and static circumstances. In this case you'd be talking about the:


Hardy-Weinberg Principle

And what is on those genes are certain alleles which dictate your phenotype (physical) and genotype (your chemical makeup). There is nothing stable in any animal species. Especially in the human world. Read up on
Hardy-Weinberg Principle. The nature of human behavior does not apply to this principle, because we violate these terms:

Taken from: Hardy-Weinberg Principle



Random Mating.
The HWP states the population will have the given genotypic frequencies (called Hardy-Weinberg proportions) after a single generation of random mating within the population. When violations of this provision occur, the population will not have Hardy-Weinberg proportions. Three such violations are:


  • Inbreeding, which causes an increase in homozygosity for all genes.
  • Assortive
    mating, which causes an increase in homozygosity only for those genes involved in the trait that is assortatively mated (and genes in linkage disequilibrium with them).

  • Small population size, which causes a random change in genotypic frequencies, particularly if
    the population is very small. This is due to a sampling effect, and is called genetic drift.



There are many more, so do enlighten yourself on the link I have given you. As much as I know
there is no such thing as stability in population genetics. Evolution is based on the dynamic integrative changes in gene structure. So I will not accept part of the argument unless you make this clear to me. Maybe I am misunderstanding, but it's your job to clear up the misconceptions for us too! Smile


Quote :

Arguably the homosexuals because they pay more taxes and get less benefits... but that's really not the point. Let's say that humans are indeed the only species which have true homosexual individuals (I don't know whether this is true or not, but I'll assume it for the sake of argument). We might observe then, that the only species which has homosexuals is also by far the most successful species on the planet. Coincidence? Probably... but, it does rather make a nonsense of any
claim that homosexuality is damaging to our species.

I, nor will the Muslims on this forum will ever turn our backs on those who are different than us. We'll aid everyone regardless of what they think or who they are. That's what Islam is John. I'm sorry to hear that homosexuals do not get their benefits, but it no way has made our species stronger. It's the random mating that has assorted the stronger variety, and as the more random mating gets, the variety of humanbeings increases. Homosexuals do not contribute to variety.

Quote :

OK, so if everything is natural and nothing can thwart that, on what basis do you object to the natural occurrence of homosexuality in humans? Perhaps your answer will be that homosexuality is notnatural, in the sense that it is chosen rather than innate. If this is so, then please explain how you personally would stop yourself from being sexually attracted to the opposite sex and start being sexually attracted to the same sex instead. Quite honestly I don't see how anyone thinks they can do this. I am quite sure I couldn't. So, homosexuality is clearly something innate, not a choice.

That's more than enough for now :-)

I did not say everything that is happening is natural, but in the end God's natural order prevails. You can't call homosexuality a 'natural occurence' in humans, just like you can't call pedophills a 'natural occurence' in humans. You show me one shred of genetic evidence, and there'll be no more need for any more posts! Smile And if my freind decided homosexuality was ultimatley wrong, and left it, then I'm sure it's not innate. If you want I can invite him on this forum, but I don't feel he'll want to share his story online. But, he's my evidence for someone who struggled. You know why he found homosexuality unnatural? Because you couldn't produce, create - something of your own. And homosexuals will never will be able to create something solely that comes from them. I would be amazed if there was a homosexual in the world that gave birth to a fetus...Just spell bound! I would leave my religion all together, all at once, but Alhamdolilah, ...

Peace Within
Back to top Go down
View user profile
druidboy



Posts : 8
Join date : 2008-01-02

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:25 am

hey sup, about hardy weinberg principle, it's only for theory, estimation, and education. i took AP bio. tho i'm not a doctor or a biologist with a degree but when u learn hardy weingberg principle, u learn it is based on an IDEAL population, which does not exist in nature. wat is an ideal population?
1. the most important assumption: no mutation
2. large population
3. random mating
-NO SELECTION (artificial selection based animals for particular traits)
4. no migrations or emigration
5. have equally viable alleles (meaning equal chance to survive & reproduce)
hardy-weinberg principle is only for educational demonstration purposes. the hardy-weinberg is never meant to be applied to humans; we are hardly the ideal population. the different ethnicity in the world stands as a testament that hardy-weinberg principle does not work in nature. sadly i have to admit incest, inbreeding, and the lack of small human population does exist.

the hardy-weinberg principle was made to answer three questions, because these are the only reasons when it is actually applicable.
1. why variability is maintained within a population despite natural selection?
2. why recessive allele does not disappear?
3. why are gene frequencies constant throughout the generations?

students and biologist then further their understanding by practicing with calculations that will only work in ideal populations. also it means the calculations will only work based on Mendelian genetics: dominant and recessive allele and the two laws. but we now kno that genetic isn't that simple. there is a whole field of genetics roughly called "non-Mendelian" genetics, meaning it violates Mendel's two laws: law of independent assortment and law of segregation. examples of "non-Mendelian" genetics are like the common mutation, linked traits, sex, linked traits, transposons, crossovers, dysjunction etc. these all occur in nature and in humans. wat is all this based on? randomness. amazing how are body works eh? hope that clears it up on the hardy-weingberg principle that peace within brought up.

ok wat was i trying to prove. yes homosexuals cannot contribute to variability, but the other factors above can. is there a gene that marks a person out to be homosexual? maybe. we can't be for sure. but the likelihood of such a gene that exists, is far more possible than being impossible. but it is all open to interpretation.
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Peace Within

avatar

Posts : 168
Join date : 2007-12-31
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:49 am

druidboy wrote:
hey sup, about hardy weinberg principle, it's only for theory, estimation, and education. i took AP bio. tho i'm not a doctor or a biologist with a degree but when u learn hardy weingberg principle, u learn it is based on an IDEAL population, which does not exist in nature. wat is an ideal population?
1. the most important assumption: no mutation
2. large population
3. random mating
-NO SELECTION (artificial selection based animals for particular traits)
4. no migrations or emigration
5. have equally viable alleles (meaning equal chance to survive & reproduce)
hardy-weinberg principle is only for educational demonstration purposes. the hardy-weinberg is never meant to be applied to humans; we are hardly the ideal population. the different ethnicity in the world stands as a testament that hardy-weinberg principle does not work in nature. sadly i have to admit incest, inbreeding, and the lack of small human population does exist.

the hardy-weinberg principle was made to answer three questions, because these are the only reasons when it is actually applicable.
1. why variability is maintained within a population despite natural selection?
2. why recessive allele does not disappear?
3. why are gene frequencies constant throughout the generations?

students and biologist then further their understanding by practicing with calculations that will only work in ideal populations. also it means the calculations will only work based on Mendelian genetics: dominant and recessive allele and the two laws. but we now kno that genetic isn't that simple. there is a whole field of genetics roughly called "non-Mendelian" genetics, meaning it violates Mendel's two laws: law of independent assortment and law of segregation. examples of "non-Mendelian" genetics are like the common mutation, linked traits, sex, linked traits, transposons, crossovers, dysjunction etc. these all occur in nature and in humans. wat is all this based on? randomness. amazing how are body works eh? hope that clears it up on the hardy-weingberg principle that peace within brought up.

ok wat was i trying to prove. yes homosexuals cannot contribute to variability, but the other factors above can. is there a gene that marks a person out to be homosexual? maybe. we can't be for sure. but the likelihood of such a gene that exists, is far more possible than being impossible. but it is all open to interpretation.

Assalamulaikum Druidboy!

Here's the quote I was referring to:

Quote :

I think this is the problem I highlighted earlier. The unit of
inheritance is the gene. Evolution therefore acts on genes. Individuals
are not inherited, their genes are. There is no other way for the
phenomenon of non-breeding to be stable in a species except by being
inherited by those individuals which do breed. How do ants retain the
genes for the production of worker ants, except by being passed down
through the ants which do breed?

Wombat asserted that homosexuality is and non-breeding species are stable within species. There is no gene or allele stable within a given species. That was my point. Homosexuality is either on a decline or rise - and it is obviously on the rise.

My point, this 'phenonmenon' is not 'stable' since no species adheres to the Hardy-Weinberg principle. Druidboy, even if you don't have a doctor's degree, Advanced Placement Biology is so in depth, you can at least score 25 percent of the questions that they ask you on the MCAT in the Biology section. Advanced Placement Biology just like the IB 2 year Biology course is in depth and guarantees a full understanding in these areas. It's a misconception that 'many' students take these courses.

You've only strengthened my argument. No species, including the various billions of genes that exist, are not in equilibrium because:

1. There are mutations
2. All animal species have a large population (disregarding those on the endangered species list)
3. We see random mating quite a lot, especially in humans.
4. Emigration and Migration are at large in all animal kingdoms.
5. Nothing has an equal chance to survive.

As you said:

Quote :
We are hardly
the ideal population. the different ethnicity in the world stands as a
testament that hardy-weinberg principle does not work in nature. sadly
i have to admit incest, inbreeding, and the lack of small human
population does exist.

Furthermore the Hardy-Weinberg principle disregards homosexuals completely, because homosexuals cannot reproduce. There is no gene that outrights expresses the sexuality of a human being.

After the human genome was translated by the WHO, led by Francis Collins he wrote several papers on this. It was only a few years ago a man, a gay scientist, claimed there was a gay gene. Few months later he was laughed at by the most eminent scientists in the field of genetics. Once again as I've always stressed, one of my friends was a homosexual for some time, but then felt it was wrong for the simple reason that 'homosexuals cannot create something of their own'. If my friend was able to change his orientation, that means he somehow repressed that gene, which I doubt can be done only through emotions.

There is much more to this debate than genes druidboy. Is homosexuality on the rise? No doubt, it is. Homosexuality was punishable by death till the early 1900s, when people felt it was anyone's right to be 'liberal'. Earth's changed in only a few decades. Just imagine where this will lead us next.

Walikum Salaam,
Peace Within
Back to top Go down
View user profile
.



Posts : 30
Join date : 2008-01-02

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:53 am

Quote :
is there a gene that marks a person out to be homosexual? maybe. we can't be for sure. but the likelihood of such a gene that exists, is far more possible than being impossible. but it is all open to interpretation.

Ok guys have you read what Ib91 posted, homos become homos because they have excess hormones, which makes them like men.
The question of the debate was "Why does Islam ...homos?"--Right heres the answer:
People with hormone problems are the true homos, we are OK with that kind of people, there are some other kind of homos, which are normal, but the simply go against the norms of society because they want to disobey, they neither feel nor are attracted to the other person of their same sex----These other people are not even considered homos...We do not accept these kind of stupid people. But we let the true homos live...So do we show hostility to homos? Considering the real homos, we are ok with it...we show no hostility..
-=Brother Wombat...if you are still doubtful just because u refuse to accept the real facts, please provide evidence in which Islam showed hostility towards homos...


Last edited by on Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:42 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
.



Posts : 30
Join date : 2008-01-02

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Sat Jan 26, 2008 10:54 am

err...no offense meant.


Last edited by on Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:45 am; edited 1 time in total
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Peace Within

avatar

Posts : 168
Join date : 2007-12-31
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Sat Jan 26, 2008 11:09 am

Abdallah,

My case is logical. Islam is a logical, yet spiritual belief. If religion does not coincide with science, how can religion be a source of relief for anyone? Then again this is just opinion, but keep in mind. The Quran is logic and precise in meaning, Alhamdolilah.

And about the Hormone issue; it is a study, it not a fact. There have been studies about people being able to interact with the supernatural. You see the "Active X" controls on our computers everyday, correct? It's a byproduct of a software engineer who felt that he could communicate with the supernatural using machines. Instead he just created the next generation of computer software to make it easier to use the computer. Yet it was a study. Does that mean we can communicate with the supernatural?

It's not a fact. Ibs, just posted a study, not fact. Once again I wish people would clarify their arguments before they post. This isn't a 'believe it or not!" forum.

And yes, there are some people who have a very difficult time being a homosexual. Islam does accept those who have problems, but at the same time believes that they should approach for help - which is exactly what my friend did Smile, Mashallah.

Real Muslims do not show any hostility towards homosexuals. Just as real Christians and Jews do not show hostility to these people either. That's the answer to this question. However, Abdallah do notice that this became a debate, hence which is why put this thread in the debate section after moving it.

Peace Within
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Peace Within

avatar

Posts : 168
Join date : 2007-12-31
Age : 29

PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   Sun Jan 27, 2008 10:29 am

I've decided to close this thread, due to the latent inactivity. I've asked several members to participate but do not seem to be readily on the forums.

Peace Within
Back to top Go down
View user profile
Sponsored content




PostSubject: Re: Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?   

Back to top Go down
 
Why does Islam have such huge hostility towards homosexuals?
Back to top 
Page 2 of 2Go to page : Previous  1, 2
 Similar topics
-
» MILLION - MAN PROTEST OVER ANTI-ISLAM FILM
» RADICAL ISLAM SPARKS CONTROVERSY DOWN UNDER
» 15 arrested in European sweep against Ansar al Islam offshoot, police say
» Mighty Big Asteroid Heading Our Way !!
» bomb explodes in central oslo

Permissions in this forum:You cannot reply to topics in this forum
Faith of Freedom :: Islam, Christianity, Hinduism, & Etc. :: The Differences :: The Debate Forum-
Jump to: