From my experiences with non-Muslims, most of them usually have one or two main reasons why the aren't Muslim. Surprisingly, these reasons can be misconceptions sometimes.
So my question is, what are the reason(s) that you have not accepted Islam?
You are not misunderstanding... I find it offensive to see men or women kissing and or other acts in public... they can do what they want in their private time I don't wish to see-- I don't endorse it and I don't find it socially or morally acceptable...
peace!
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
Acts of pedophilia and incest in public I can understand being offensive. XD
But two concenting(non-related XD) adults have every right to express thier love for one another wherever they so choose, within the law of where they're doing it.(I.E, not, you know... Getting it on on a park bench in the middle of London. lol)
Double standards aren't cool, kids. If hetero people can smooch in public, two guys or two girls should be able to, too.
I don't advocate a public display of affection no matter from whom... but I will not be ok with homosexuality just because it is an in thing or is politically correct at the moment... it was an act of sexual deviance up to 1974 in the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders )... with heavy lobbying it no longer is... but any good psychiatrist will tell you that is an act of sexual deviance no different than the others of which you gasp...
peace!
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
I refuse to belong to ANY religion that has grown through violent conquest and forced conversion. Now this is not meant as a criticism of Islam alone. It has been the way for millennia.
-----read the holy book , pl. Is there any verse that says to convert/revert people by force ? Don't judge a religion by its some bad followers .
If a thief steals ur car/money/bag/ precious things from u , u may hate him but will u stop using car / things ?
There is a proverb that says get mad at thief who stole ur plate & start eating rice on the floor/earth.......yak horrible translation .....meaning is u can't be that angry to others & do something that harms u. So , read the holy scripture for ur own sake
Christ will never be proud to reject to be a slave to God .....holy Quran, chapter Women , 4: 172
I don't advocate a public display of affection no matter from whom... but I will not be ok with homosexuality just because it is an in thing or is politically correct at the moment... it was an act of sexual deviance up to 1974 in the DSM (Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders )... with heavy lobbying it no longer is... but any good psychiatrist will tell you that is an act of sexual deviance no different than the others of which you gasp...
peace!
I question your judgement of a "good psychiatrist."
Perhaps you mean a Muslim psychiatrist? lol.
Ah, well. If it's "sexual deviance", then hurray for sexual deviance!
I usually state what I mean clearly... and I don't jump into suppositions, reactions and defensiveness...
A good psychiatrist is one who is excellent at his craft and doesn't yield to pressure and heavy lobbying....
No one is persecuting you for your life style... but no one is applauding it either... your judgement doesn't lie with what people or society allow or disallow....
in certain aspects there is a definitive line of right and wrong -- which is not subject to change to fit the tides...
peace!
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
I usually state what I mean clearly... and I don't jump into suppositions, reactions and defensiveness...
Touche, although I'm sure you can understand my defensiveness.
A good psychiatrist is one who is excellent at his craft and doesn't yield to pressure and heavy lobbying....
I agree. However, what do you mean by "excellant at his craft"? The majority of psychiatrist these days acknowledge that homosexuality is not a disease, mental disorder, etc, because scientific study has proven that it is not. It is merely a matter of preferance, whether it be voluntary preferance or not.
No one is persecuting you for your life style... but no one is applauding it either... your judgement doesn't lie with what people or society allow or disallow....
I'm going to have to disagree there. When you state that "you are not ok with homosexuality", that's discrimination. Is not deeming a person's lifestyle as "sexual deviance" a form of persecution?
in certain aspects there is a definitive line of right and wrong -- which is not subject to change to fit the tides...
Back before it was legalized, people said the same of inter-racial marriages. They said that such unions "bred only evil". I'm sure you don't agree with that, just as I am confident that thirty years from now when homosexual marriage is mosly legalized, people will look back at the fuss over homosexual marriage and think "Wow, how primitive that whole conflict was."
Again, this ties into the "morality" issue. Our upbringings and environments have caused our opinions on the matter to differ. Your point of "deinitive right and wrong" is like Grace Seeker's point of "moral absolutes", and I agree with both of you, to a certain extent.
Of course, some religious people would disagree with me when I say that one of those absolutes should be that religion has no play in the law of any nation, and should not be able to dictate what is legal and what is not.
What a nation deems collectively as "right" and "wrong" should be decided by the courts, according to human rights laws and regardless of a nation's religious sway and prejudices. This is the beauty of a secular society.
I can't read all that.. though I can respect you taking the time...
go to (Uptodate.com) and find me the medical research that deems homosexuality normal...or why it would be any more normal than necrophilia, or Frotterism or exhibitionism? they are all in a sense deviation from the norm... some people seek treatment.. some continue to "get off" that way... if all the necrophiliacs got together and advocated and lobbied as heavily as the homosexuals I am sure they too would make it out of DSM-IV... and it would be left to the human rights advocates etc... but still it would be an act of sexual deviance to many ... it feels like the world has gone on reverse...
so pls don't equate an interracial marriage to homosexuality... we are talking apples and oranges... My prejudices aren't swayed by religion.. I know many who have no religious affiliations whatsoever who find the act abhorrent ...
peace!
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
Homosexuality is not normal, but it is a natural occurring condition.
It is no more abnormal than being left handed. In fact homosexuality occurs more frequently than being left handed.
I have known a number of homosexuals, none of them made that choice, it was just something that happened to them.
be that as it may... many feel driven to do things that are clearly wrong... Kleptomania is classified as Recurrent failure to resist impulses to steal objects that are not needed for personal use or for their monetary value. also can be found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition... does it make it ok to steal? these people feel these very strong urges, they "can't help it"... I have no doubt that it fulfils some need in them... some seek treatment... some don't in the case of some kelptos they remain so until they get caught and put into prison...
should some humanitarians decide that this small group of people are normal within their own rights and should go on and steal? should they lobby heavily and take themselves out of DSM-IV? ... to me, the role of religion in general is to enable people to refrain from the urges of the lower self... to teach self discipline, to elevate man/woman kind to something refined above these urges-- and sometimes unfortunately people prefer to go with what feels natural to them over, and some go on to fight against it.
Do I feel sudden bursts of hate for such folks? No I can't say that I do-- however, I believe what they are doing is wrong!.. if they choose to continue on doing it... they should do it on their own private time... I will not be accepting of it -- anymore than I'll be of a guy who likes to rub against women on a bus... anymore than Carl Tanzler who developed an obsession with his dead patient and dug up her corpse kept adding wax to her face as she decayed beside him in bed! To me they are all acts of sexual deviations falling on different places of the spectrum...
peace and good night
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
be that as it may... many feel driven to do things that are clearly wrong... Kleptomania is classified as Recurrent failure to resist impulses to steal objects that are not needed for personal use or for their monetary value. also can be found in the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, Fourth Edition... does it make it ok to steal?
Theft is destructive behaviour and is infringing on the rights of another. Homosexuality isn't. For something to be a disorder rather than a quirk or an oddity I think it has to be destructive. Homosexuality simply isn't. It hurts nobody.
Do I feel sudden bursts of hate for such folks? No I can't say that I do-- however, I believe what they are doing is wrong!.. if they choose to continue on doing it... they should do it on their own private time... I will not be accepting of it
Theft is destructive behaviour and is infringing on the rights of another. Homosexuality isn't. For something to be a disorder rather than a quirk or an oddity I think it has to be destructive. Homosexuality simply isn't. It hurts nobody.
Somethings don't have to be hurtful in a very obvious way to be destructive...
format_quote Originally Posted by Pygoscelis
I feel exactly the same way about religion.
No one is forcing you to feel otherwise... but I must ask.. why are you here?
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
Theft is destructive behaviour and is infringing on the rights of another. Homosexuality isn't. For something to be a disorder rather than a quirk or an oddity I think it has to be destructive. Homosexuality simply isn't. It hurts nobody.
I feel exactly the same way about religion.
And that gets us back on topic
If you feel that way about "religion" then why are you on this forum?
I really think Pygoscelis love us just hiding it lol
Back before it was legalized, people said the same of inter-racial marriages. They said that such unions "bred only evil". I'm sure you don't agree with that, just as I am confident that thirty years from now when homosexual marriage is mosly legalized, people will look back at the fuss over homosexual marriage and think "Wow, how primitive that whole conflict was."
Again, this ties into the "morality" issue. Our upbringings and environments have caused our opinions on the matter to differ. Your point of "deinitive right and wrong" is like Grace Seeker's point of "moral absolutes", and I agree with both of you, to a certain extent.
Of course, some religious people would disagree with me when I say that one of those absolutes should be that religion has no play in the law of any nation, and should not be able to dictate what is legal and what is not.
What a nation deems collectively as "right" and "wrong" should be decided by the courts, according to human rights laws and regardless of a nation's religious sway and prejudices. This is the beauty of a secular society.
In the USA a tomato is "legally" a vegetable, because the Department of Agriculture has written that into the legal code of the land.
But laws on paper don't change biology. The tomato is still a fruit, and any good botanist knows that.
What people thought 30 years ago or will think 30 years from now, doesn't change it from fruit to vegetable either. Make your own application if you can.
(And now I have us off topic again.:sorry: )
Last edited by Grace Seeker; 03-30-2007 at 03:05 PM.
1-I think the punishment should fit the crime-- if they are caught in a lewd act in public the punishment should be as mandated by religious law... the same way traitors of the united states have death penalty imposed to what other people think is a rather trivial offense!
2-Depends what you mean by marrying a child... the age of consent has been and should be at the start of menarche...and is actually still to modern day-- the choice lies ultimately with she who is to be betrothed...http://womhist.binghamton.edu/teacher/aoc.htm here is an article about the age of consent just in the last two centuries in the civilized U.S-- ,"Age of consent" referred to the legal age at which a girl could consent to sexual relations. Men who engaged in sexual relations with girls who had not reached the age of consent could be criminally prosecuted. American reformers were shocked to discover that the laws of most states set the age of consent at the age of ten or twelve, and in one state, Delaware, the age of consent was only seven---an ever changing thing it seems as recent as 1845 to 1920... amusing.....
I fail to see how marriage and incest equate, but then I havn't seen much of an argument worth while from you since you have come on board...
peace!
It seems like you are saying that marriage justifies everything. So you seem to think that if you marry a child and have sex with her, it's OK but if you have sex with a child without getting married, it's not OK. Married or not, having sex with a child is not OK at all. Marriage is simply a social agreement. What's wrong if people can live happily even without getting married?
Incest is having sexual relationship with closely related person. If you marry someone closely related person, aren't you going to have sexual relationship with them? Then how is it any different than incest?
Whatever homosexuals do is their life. To me, people kissing in public is offensive period, homosexual or heterosexual. So does that mean I have right to prosecute them?
It seems like you are saying that marriage justifies everything. ?
I can't speak for everyone's marriage!
format_quote Originally Posted by cali dude
So you seem to think that if you marry a child and have sex with her, it's OK but if you have sex with a child without getting married, it's not OK. Married or not, having sex with a child is not OK at all.
"thinking" for other people seems to be a favorite of yours!.. have you been watching too many of Holmes' episodes and it is all elementary to you? I don't think it is ok to marry a child.. I think it is ok to marry someone based on the age of consent (in many cultures at the start of menarche) and we have demonstrated that just last century in Delaware the age of consent was 7.. less than what it actually was 15 centuries ago!.. campaigns to raise the age of consent is a very modern concept-- schooling and life expectancy has changed tremendously over the centuries.. yet still in modern day Africa and many other parts of the developing world people's life expectancy is 44 years of age... Do you suggest that they wait until they are 32 and financially ready to be wed? Lastly, do you read the links provided, or are you that challenged?
format_quote Originally Posted by cali dude
I notice you are big on
Marriage is simply a social agreement. What's wrong if people can live happily even without getting married?
You should direct this question at one of your divine Gurus--
format_quote Originally Posted by cali dude
Incest is having sexual relationship with closely related person. If you marry someone closely related person, aren't you going to have sexual relationship with them? Then how is it any different than incest??
incest is interrelations sexual relationship between brothers and sisters, fathers and daughters, uncles and nieces... Many parts of the world up to and including Idaho people are allowed to marry their cousins... they are not a first blood relative!... It isn't something I'd personally recommend, however it doesn't fit the definition of incest... if it were it would be illegal in many states modern civilized day... and it isn't!
format_quote Originally Posted by cali dude
Whatever homosexuals do is their life. To me, people kissing in public is offensive period, homosexual or heterosexual. So does that mean I have right to prosecute them?
I don't really care what is acceptable or isn't acceptable to you. I have read enough of your thread to see how twisted and fickle! Your posts are always acquiescing to the tide, to me that isn't religion it is hypocrisy
Now are you persecuting them? or do you just enjoy a good rhetorical questions?
--This is the last I wish to extend myself to you or this topic in general!
Have a grand ole' day
peace!
Last edited by جوري; 03-30-2007 at 04:07 PM.
Text without context is pretext If your opponent is of choleric temperament, seek to irritate him
This forum is mixed and we also have very young members. The questions and answers and the like are no longer appropriate. In addition some people are using this as an outlet to slander Islam and Prophet Muhammad. This is not acceptable and I see no way to end it except by banning people or closing the thread. At the moment I will settle for closing the thread.
Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
When you create an account, we remember exactly what you've read, so you always come right back where you left off. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and share your thoughts. Sign Up
Array
Question For The Non-muslims (OP)
Hide
Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.
Posting Permissions
Bookmarks