Gay Couples are to be Allowed to Marry in Churches.

[Pygoscelis]

Do they even have a building in which to hold the marriage? They always seemed to me like their sole purpose was to travel around and do protests, not do worship or the other things you sane religious people do.

 

[جوري]

Do they even have a building in which to hold the marriage? They always seemed to me like their sole purpose was to travel around and do protests, not do worship or the other things you sane religious people do.

traveling around is better than sitting and offering atheists to the gods which is what the rest of the sane religious people do!
either way not a place to join the gay dudes or dudettes in unholy matrimony. Perhaps dawkins and company can hold their own temples for that, will prove quite lucrative I am sure!

 

[Nizam1]

I wonder how many men would have it done in adulthood, with their full consent. I don't think many would. Do new converts to Judaism have to do it? It is supposed to represent their covenant with God. What a very peculiar thing for God to want. He made us perfect in his image, except he erred on the naughty bits and wants us to cut them up for him.

I was, as were my sons, very recently in fact. I will fully admit that is probably a rarity though.

I don't disagree about what you say regarding consent. It's touchy. My wife and I had to make that choice for two of our sons because they were too young to decide for themselves, and it wasn't easy to make that decision. You can't always be certain what you are doing is right, but you must do what you believe to be right. I do believe we made the right choice, but only my sons will decide that in future.

Regarding gay couples, I would not discriminate against them or treat them as any less a person/couple because of who they are. Firstly, it's none of my business. Secondly, I'm privileged to live in a country where all different peoples can live together and yet be equally free. I am free to be who I am, and someone else is free to be who they are. Perhaps most importantly, I think muslims should remember that there are plenty people who would discriminate against us, and treat us as bad as dog muck, so I find it totally bemusing and unacceptable that muslims should do so to any other. How can we expect to be treated properly and with respect if we don't treat others the same way?

 

[Ramadhan]

Regarding gay couples, I would not discriminate against them or treat them as any less a person/couple because of who they are. Firstly, it's none of my business. Secondly, I'm privileged to live in a country where all different peoples can live together and yet be equally free. I am free to be who I am, and someone else is free to be who they are. Perhaps most importantly, I think muslims should remember that there are plenty people who would discriminate against us, and treat us as bad as dog muck, so I find it totally bemusing and unacceptable that muslims should do so to any other. How can we expect to be treated properly and with respect if we don't treat others the same way?

Muslims discriminate practicing homosexuals as much as we discriminate practicing adulterers. How do we know one practicing homosexual (or adulterer) from heterosexual (or chaste person)? We cannot, that is, unless they advertise to the whole world what they do in bed (or in the streets for that matter).

Islam does not teach to discriminate people on the basis of who they are, but on the basis of what they do.
Let me give you an example:
some people suffer from kleptomania, that is , they have strong and constant urges to steal. They claim they cannot help it, some of them claim it is in their genes, and theft is also found in the natural world. But they have the option to control their urge not to steal or follow it and steal.

Islam does not discriminate kleptomanics from others, that is unless the kleptomanics steal and publish their thefts for the whole world to see and know.

There are worldly punishments as set in the sharia for some sins but there are also strict conditions before worldly punishments can take place. There are "hikmah" why Allah SWT disallow some acts that we don't know fully the answers until the day of the judgement.
This is the same as male circumcision.
How did prophet SAW know that male circumcision have health benefits so large that current medical associations everywhere recommend it? How did the prophet SAW know that circumcised men in Africa have less than half chance infected by HIV through intercourse than those who are uncircumcised?
There are countless hikmah in our religion that our science, technology and reason cannot grasp yet, but are beneficial for us in this world and hereafter.

 

[Trumble]

Islam does not teach to discriminate people on the basis of who they are, but on the basis of what they do.
Let me give you an example:
some people suffer from kleptomania, that is , they have strong and constant urges to steal. They claim they cannot help it, some of them claim it is in their genes, and theft is also found in the natural world. But they have the option to control their urge not to steal or follow it and steal.

Lousy example. Who has ever claimed kleptomania is genetic?! It's an (obsessive-compulsive) mental disorder and sufferers frequently do NOT have the option to 'control their urge'.

Islam does not discriminate kleptomanics from others, that is unless the kleptomanics steal and publish their thefts for the whole world to see and know.

Islamic 'scientific' knowledge obviously doesn't extend to psychology!

How did prophet SAW know that male circumcision have health benefits so large that current medical associations everywhere recommend it? How did the prophet SAW know that circumcised men in Africa have less than half chance infected by HIV through intercourse than those who are uncircumcised?

Obviously he didn't know (or need to know) either. Circumcision was, of course, practicised in several cultures for centuries if not millennia before he was born.

 

[Ramadhan]

Lousy example. Who has ever claimed kleptomania is genetic?! It's an (obsessive-compulsive) mental disorder and sufferers frequently do NOT have the option to 'control their urge'.

Exactly.
Just like gays who claimed that their homosexuality is genetic, which is a lot of bull.
And many kleptomania have sucessfully controlled their urges.
It is still a choice.

Islamic 'scientific' knowledge obviously doesn't extend to psychology!

Only after sexual revolution and gay lobby that homosexuality was taken out from the list of mental disorders by American Psychiatric Association in the 1973. Modern "science" change all the time, eh.
There is still no proof that homosexuality is genetic, but the "scientists" have ruled out that it is a mental disorder for political correctness. So much for being "scientific".

Obviously he didn't know (or need to know) either. Circumcision was, of course, practicised in several cultures for centuries if not millennia before he was born.

I know that circumcision have been practiced since prophet Ibrahim (as) who preceded Muhammad (SAW) by several thousands years, but not only prophet (saw) allowed to continue, but He (saw) made it fard 'ain (personal obligation).

It's amazing how prophet (saw) only picked traditions and customs that benefit humans and took out those that harm us, eh?

 

[Trumble]

Exactly.
Just like gays who claimed that their homosexuality is genetic, which is a lot of bull.
And many kleptomania have sucessfully controlled their urges.
It is still a choice.

Some have, many cannot, and for them there is no 'choice'. You simply do not seem to understand the nature of psychiatric disorders, so there seems little point in taking that further, other than to say kleptomania is NOT 'just like' being gay.

Only after sexual revolution and gay lobby that homosexuality was taken out from the list of mental disorders by American Psychiatric Association in the 1973. Modern "science" change all the time, eh.

Other than a few pioneers (in other aspects of sexuality as well) it needed at least the beginnings of the 'sexual revolution' for any significant research to occur (no careers in it, no academic respect in it and above all no funding for it). Fortunately, the conservative (a.k.a mindless bigot) element had been sufficiently shunted into deserved irrelevance by 1973 in America. What do you claim is 'changing all the time'?

There is still no proof that homosexuality is genetic, but the "scientists" have ruled out that it is a mental disorder for political correctness. So much for being "scientific".

Fortunately, only the bigot would limit consideration to those possibilities. Scientists do not. The truth is, whether genetic or not, we are all somewhere on the heterosexual - homosexual continuum. Homosexuality therefore can't be a 'disorder' as by definition a 'disorder' can not be something that applies to everybody. Note that that does not disqualify the possibility of psychiatric manipulation (or 'treatment' as the bigots would claim), but the immorality of 'treating' a non existent disorder just to fit in the what does or not 'offend' the homophobes is obvious to anyone except them. The story of Alan Turing was in the news again, recently.. you might read up on his life sometime and learn just what sort of catastophe some people's views on 'morality' can inflict on others.

I know that circumcision have been practiced since prophet Ibrahim (as) who preceded Muhammad (SAW) by several thousands years, but not only prophet (saw) allowed to continue, but He (saw) made it fard 'ain (personal obligation).

It was an obligation in every culture that did it. Some, incidently, had no historical contact with the middle east.

It's amazing how prophet (saw) only picked traditions and customs that benefit humans and took out those that harm us, eh?

What's so amazing about picking the good stuff and rejecting the bad stuff; that's just common sense? What would you expect him to have done?! :?

 

[Ansariyah]

Well i personally do know some very religious gay people. I know it might seem verry contradicting to most people, but just because one is gay they still might have their belifs in their religion. And i certainly do not have a problem with that.

That doesnt make any sense to be honest. Considering the simple fact that all religions forbid Homosexuality I dont see how they truly can adhere to any religion.

I'm also not buying the claim some gay people make that 'they are born this way n cant help it'.

 

[Pygoscelis]

I'm also not buying the claim some gay people make that 'they are born this way n cant help it'.

Did you choose to be heterosexual? Can you help it? If we decided that you must be attracted to women only, and not men, that you must be a lesbian because heterosexuality is "a sin", could you do it?

 

[glo]

I am returning a little reluctantly to this thread, because I came across an article by the Christian Enquiry Agency. Rather than offering the view of a particular denomination, it tries to offer a broader picture of the Christian view on homosexuality - which should incorporate the view of most Christians across the world.

As years go by, more and more is understood about the scientific and social causes of homosexuality. Christians, however, are divided about what the implications of this are for homosexual men and women who want to be followers of Jesus.


Christians who think that the way God has created the natural world should be uppermost in shaping our moral views have come to the conclusion that gay relationships which are faithful, loving and monogamous are blessed by God. However, to hold that opinion means overturning an almost unbroken history of opposition to homosexuality in the Bible and Christian thinking. The majority of the world’s Christians hold the view that all sexual activity outside the context of marriage falls short of God’s ideal.


Opinions about whether or not having sex with someone of the same gender is sinful are so entrenched that this threatens the unity of Christians more deeply than any other issue in recent years. However, all agree that sex which is abusive, promiscuous or violates children is repulsive. And all agree that violence or hatred against gays and lesbians is abhorrent, because all human beings are loved equally by God.


Christians who have a ‘liberal’ understanding of God urge the world to recognise the worth of lifelong same-sex partnerships by encouraging vows of commitment and accepting that being homosexual should not prevent a person from becoming a Christian leader. Christians who have a ‘conservative’ understanding of God maintain that celibacy is the best path through life for those who are inclined naturally toward homosexuality, and that the church community should provide a loving context to support people who have made that choice.

http://www.christianity.org.uk/index.php/what-do-christians-think-about-homosexuality.php

 

[Pygoscelis]

And all agree that violence or hatred against gays and lesbians is abhorrent, because all human beings are loved equally by God.

This is obviously not true. See the pic that Woodrow posted.

 

[glo]

This is obviously not true. See the pic that Woodrow posted.

Sadly, you are right, Pygo.

That's why I added my little clause:

It tries to offer a broader picture of the Christian view on homosexuality - which should incorporate the view of most Christians across the world.
http://www.christianity.org.uk/index.php/what-do-christians-think-about-homosexuality.php

Hopefully, the article still speaks for the majority of Christians in the world. I know it speaks for the Christians I know personally, without exception. But 2 billion people is an awfully big number to speak on behalf of ...

The fact is, I can only speak for myself.
I can speak out against the kind of people which are represented by Westboro Baptist Church, but I don't know how I can change them. imsad

 

[جوري]

Lousy example. Who has ever claimed kleptomania is genetic?! It's an (obsessive-compulsive) mental disorder and sufferers frequently do NOT have the option to 'control their urge'.

if you're suggesting that homosexuality is genetic, then I'll be waiting to see you present us with which gene makes people homosexuals!

Islamic 'scientific' knowledge obviously doesn't extend to psychology!

Psychology is the modern substitute for religion for the atheist who wants quasi intelligent responses to things functional in nature!.. most truly organic psychiatric disorders can be classified under neurology. Psychology is a very visceral branch of medicine that pales to the thinking man's religion when dealing with mental illness!

Obviously he didn't know (or need to know) either. Circumcision was, of course, practicised in several cultures for centuries if not millennia before he was born.

it isn't a cultural practice rather a religious one that started with Abraham (you should read up on that) it was also kept up with Abrahamic religion except for the monolithic one (Christianity) The practice is purely for religious reasons!

all the best

 

[جوري]

Some have, many cannot, and for them there is no 'choice'. You simply do not seem to understand the nature of psychiatric disorders, so there seems little point in taking that further, other than to say kleptomania is NOT 'just like' being gay.

neither do you understand the nature of psychiatric illness. If the classification isn't under the same subheading doesn't denote that it is radically new psychological illness.. Many illnesses that aren't in the same category are still treated with them same meds. Simply because those who stratified them as having one part component of another, not only don't understand in totality the organic nature of said disease, but don't know how the medications available are helpful.. They've Meds that deal with Sodium channels or act on Gaba or noerpi or sertonin.. such hormones aren't exclusive to the brain, sertonin for instant can be found in the gut or lungs or carcinoid tumors.. wherever enterochromaffin cells migrate there you have it. Hence when you open the drug pamphlet you'll read alot of
''Mechanism of action not clearly understood'' or ''Thought to work on the such and such which in clinical trials showed' of course when the NIH holds independent clinical trials the same outcomes aren't produced!
So please don't there and speak of the intricate science that goes into classifying an incestuous relationship or anything akin to deviance as an illegal abomination but welcome homosexuality, because all it makes you is an under-educated hypocrite.

Other than a few pioneers (in other aspects of sexuality as well) it needed at least the beginnings of the 'sexual revolution' for any significant research to occur (no careers in it, no academic respect in it and above all no funding for it). Fortunately, the conservative (a.k.a mindless bigot) element had been sufficiently shunted into deserved irrelevance by 1973 in America. What do you claim is 'changing all the time'?

As stated medical committees sit down all the time and redefine the terms. Not alot of science goes into it.. That is done with any field in medicine.. in Pathology they convene and tweak what makes a stage I vs. Stage 2B Vs. 3A.. happens all the time.. Happens with hepatology what makes a tumor operable if two are in the same lobe vs. two in separate lobes etc. Just to stratify who gets chemo, who gets radio, who gets both, who gets resection. It doesn't change the etiology however!
Science stays independent of your emotionality and catch all phrases with which you like to paint everyone who doesn't share the same view.

Things are taken in or out of the DSM not for particularly scientific reasons. Just a percentage

That is true and hence many things like incest and necrophilia might eventually find their way out of it. The law and science are separate issues. A doctor can understand that you get your pleasure in the morgue but the law doesn't recognize that as normal!

Fortunately, only the bigot would limit consideration to those possibilities. Scientists do not. The truth is, whether genetic or not, we are all somewhere on the heterosexual - homosexual continuum. Homosexuality therefore can't be a 'disorder' as by definition a 'disorder' can not be something that applies to everybody. Note that that does not disqualify the possibility of psychiatric manipulation (or 'treatment' as the bigots would claim), but the immorality of 'treating' a non existent disorder just to fit in the what does or not 'offend' the homophobes is obvious to anyone except them. The story of Alan Turing was in the news again, recently.. you might read up on his life sometime and learn just what sort of catastophe some people's views on 'morality' can inflict on others.

Homosexuality is a deviation from the norm as far as science is concerned, now they call it a 'normal variant' many people don't agree with that! But as stated mental conditions aren't always admissible in court, if you're going to charge every homosexual you'll have many people in jail. If you charge necrophiliacs you might get a few so much goes into play with that, which has no basis in science.
it won't change the facts of the matter though.
1- There is no genetic or biological component to it -- rather a psychological one.. we're taught of homosexuality in psychiatry not genetics!
2- It is always going to be unaccepted in the eyes of religion, so if you desire to subscribe to religion you'll have to acquiesce to it, not get a priest, rabbi, imam to absolve you and force houses of worships into also accepting this as a 'Normal variant'. No one has the power to sit with God and redefine the terms because the DSM-IV now differs from DSM-II.
What is right is right what is wrong is wrong as far as religion is concerned. If you desire that lifestyle outside of religion then you're welcome to, no one will stop you. Simply stop imposing the new definitions on others. And stop using the catch all phrases of 'Bigotry' and 'homophobia' they simply don't fit.. by your definitions every homosexual is also a bigot and a heterophobe!




all the best

 

[Nizam1]

Exactly.
Just like gays who claimed that their homosexuality is genetic, which is a lot of bull.
And many kleptomania have sucessfully controlled their urges.
It is still a choice.




Only after sexual revolution and gay lobby that homosexuality was taken out from the list of mental disorders by American Psychiatric Association in the 1973. Modern "science" change all the time, eh.
There is still no proof that homosexuality is genetic, but the "scientists" have ruled out that it is a mental disorder for political correctness. So much for being "scientific".




I know that circumcision have been practiced since prophet Ibrahim (as) who preceded Muhammad (SAW) by several thousands years, but not only prophet (saw) allowed to continue, but He (saw) made it fard 'ain (personal obligation).

It's amazing how prophet (saw) only picked traditions and customs that benefit humans and took out those that harm us, eh?

There is plenty evidence of a genetic basis.

You are an example of those who use unacceptable hatred towards others.

 

[Pygoscelis]

can speak out against the kind of people which are represented by Westboro Baptist Church, but I don't know how I can change them.

You've got a much better shot at it than a godless heathen like myself so I appreciate and commend your efforts, and even your denouncing them here does make a difference.

 

[Pygoscelis]

[by your definitions every homosexual is also a bigot and a heterophobe!

Are homosexuals attempting to outlaw heterosexual marriage? Do they declare heterosexuality a mental disorder and heterosexual sex a sin? They'd be bigots if they did.

 

[جوري]

Are homosexuals attempting to outlaw heterosexual marriage? Do they declare heterosexuality a mental disorder and heterosexual sex a sin? They'd be bigots if they did.

Declaring something an act of sexual deviance doesn't denote that one is a bigot, perhaps you should look up the definitions of the terms you misuse in the dictionary?
Homosexuals can have their civil marriages if they so desire. However a marriage in the eyes of religion is a union between man and woman, that also doesn't denote bigotry! If you book an appointment with a gynecologist and he refuses because you're a man doesn't mean that he is a bigot.

all the best

 

[glo]

You've got a much better shot at it than a godless heathen like myself so I appreciate and commend your efforts, and even your denouncing them here does make a difference.

Thank you, Pygo. It somehow seems that more is needed ...

I would be happy and proud to stand side by side with a 'godless heathen' as well as other brothers and sisters in Christ and in humanity against the stance of Westboro Baptist Church!

(Incidentally, and since I believe in an all-present God, I don't think anybody is 'godless' - some just don't know how brimming with God's guidance and Spirit they are ... )

 

[glo]

Not do worship or the other things you sane religious people do.

Ahh, Pygo, that's a true compliment!