Mullahs getting less homophobic?

[S.A.M.]

At the International Consultation on Islam and HIV/AIDS, organised by the charity, Islamic Relief Worldwide (IRW), in Johannesburg, South Africa, last week, Suhail Abu al Sameed was overcome by the statements of Islamic scholars who denounced the evils of homosexuality.

His response? He stood up and outed himself before the Muslim community leaders, academics, doctors, relief workers and HIV-positive activists.

“As a gay Muslim, I feel unsafe, unloved and unrespected in this space,” he said.

“Were I to become HIV-positive, the first thing I would lose is my Muslim community. I couldn’t come to you guys for support.”

And the ulema's response?

“Afterwards, veiled women, bearded men, the most religious types, came to me and apologised if they had said something offensive, if they had made me feel unloved or unsafe.”

Conference spokesperson and IRW head of policy Willem van Eekelen read their collective statement, saying that although Islam does not accept homosexuality, Islamic leaders would try to help create an environment in which gay people could approach social workers and find help against AIDS without feeling unsafe.

To see theologians from Egyptian and Syrian universities, and imams – Muslim community leaders – from India, Sudan and Pakistan defy official Islamic homophobia is “definitively a first,” said sheikh Abul Kalam Azad, chairman of the Masjid (mosque) Council for Community Advancement, in Bangladesh.

“This first time ever that a high-level religious forum has talked, acknowledged and accepted gays,” said AbualSameed.

http://www.ukgaynews.org.uk/Archive/07/Dec/0302.htm

 

[S.A.M.]

umm no one likes good news?

 

[MacGyver1968]

That is good news...good for him. I just hope when he returns to his country he doesn't "disappear".

 

[S.A.M.]

If he gets the ulema to make things easier for all gays, it will be more than good news.

 

[spidergoat]

Does their "help" involve a noose?

 

[S.A.M.]

Does their "help" involve a noose?

They may use wires and dogs too, everyone is so advanced these days.:shrug:

 

[spidergoat]

Don't forget the Native Americans and slavery!

 

[S.A.M.]

They were all gay?

 

[spidergoat]

It's bad stuff we did so you can do bad stuff too. That's the way it works, right?

 

[DeepThought]

The Qur'an explicitly prohibits male-male sexual relations.

How can this be justified?

 

[S.A.M.]

The Qur'an explicitly prohibits male-male sexual relations.

How can this be justified?

Are we back to the Lot verses again?

 

[ashura]

Are we back to the Lot verses again?

Is that a "No, the Quran doesn't explicitly prohibit male-male relationships?"

Not that I'm trying to imply that you attempted to sidestep the question. Rather, I really am ignorant of the issue and would like to hear a direct answer to the question from a Muslim such as yourself.

 

[S.A.M.]

Is that a "No, the Quran doesn't explicitly prohibit male-male relationships?"

Not that I'm trying to imply that you attempted to sidestep the question. Rather, I really am ignorant of the issue and would like to hear a direct answer to the question from a Muslim such as yourself.

You can ask Medicine Woman about the Lot verses, if you like.

Personally from what I have read it appears to me that the towns (Sodom and Gomorrah) were destroyed because they were inhospitable to the angels (there is an interesting parallel to previous mythology here Greek I think). Angels are not men, they cannot be homosexuals. Married men who rape angels are not homosexuals. And yet, this is a verse about homosexuality? Hospitality is a very important concept in the Middle East (even today, except in some parts of KSA and even they are better than the West). I've discussed it elsewhere ad nauseum.

Here is one such discussion I had with Kadark (he did not agree with me, of course) (see post#58 onwards)

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=68267&page=3

Like Islamic creationism today, there is way too much influence of Christian dogma in sharia.

 

[GeoffP]

This could be a positive development. I look forward to hearing more about it. The next step is gender equality, then religious. I have high hopes for that school in Kurdistan.

 

[GeoffP]

Like Islamic creationism today, there is way too much influence of Christian dogma in sharia.

I spoke too soon, almost. You're blaming Christianity for sharia? Well, why not? Everything outside itself, seemingly.

 

[S.A.M.]

Why I also feel certain I am right is because my views are supported by classical Jewish views, in general I find Jewish orthodox religion to be closer to Islam than Christianity.

"Classical Jewish texts do not stress the homosexual aspect of the attitude of the inhabitants of Sodom as much as their cruelty and lack of hospitality to the "stranger." (See Jewish Encyclopedia on the importance of hospitality.) Though homosexual acts were included among the 613 Mitzvah or Commandments as an abomination, a single homosexual act being punishable by death, the people of Sodom were seen as guilty of many other no less significant sins. Rabbinic writings affirm that the Sodomites also committed economic crimes, blasphemy and bloodshed[1]. One of the worst was to give money or even gold ingots to beggars, but to inscribe their names on them, and then subsequently refuse to sell them food. The unfortunate stranger would end up starving and after his death, the people who gave him the money would reclaim it.

A rabbinic tradition, described in the Mishnah, postulates that the sin of Sodom was related to property: Sodomites believed that "what is mine is mine, and what is yours is yours" (Abot), which is interpreted as a lack of compassion. Another rabbinic tradition is that these two wealthy cities treated visitors in a sadistic fashion. One major crime done to strangers was almost identical to that of Procrustes in Greek mythology. This would be the story of the "bed" that guests to Sodom were forced to sleep in: if they were too short they were stretched to fit it, and if they were too tall, they were cut up.

In another incident, Eliezer, Abraham's servant, went to visit Lot in Sodom and got in a dispute with a Sodomite over a beggar, and was hit in the forehead with a stone, making him bleed. The Sodomite demanded Eliezer pay him for the service of bloodletting, and a Sodomite judge sided with the Sodomite. Eliezer then struck the judge in the forehead with a stone and asked the judge to pay the Sodomite.

The Talmud and the book of Jasher also recount two incidents of a young girl (one involved a daughter of Lot, named Paltith) who gave some bread to a poor man who had entered the city. When the townspeople discovered their acts of kindness, they burned Paltith and smeared the other girl's body with honey and hung her from the city wall until she was eaten by bees. (Sanhedrin 109a) It is this gruesome event (and her scream, in particular), the Talmud concludes, that are alluded to in the verse that heralds the city’s destruction: "So Hashem said, 'Because the outcry of Sodom and Gomorrah has become great, and because their sin has been very grave, I will descend and see...'" (Genesis 18:20-21)."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sodom_and_Gomorrah

In addition, apart from the Lot verses, which are I believe misinterpreted, or misunderstood, the Quran says nothing about homosexuality, which is odd, since it declares outright all things that are haram (and even those, except for shirk, are relaxed under certain conditions)

 

[spidergoat]

"what is mine is mine, and what is yours is yours"

...who gave some bread to a poor man who had entered the city.

So, the Sodomites weren't gay, they were Republicans!

 

[S.A.M.]

So, the Sodomites weren't gay, they were Republicans!

Then the zalzala was the War on Terror!

(maybe they were gay republicans?)

 

[ashura]

Here is one such discussion I had with Kadark (he did not agree with me, of course) (see post#58 onwards)

http://www.sciforums.com/showthread.php?t=68267&page=3

Thanks for the link, your discussion with Kadark was very enlightening. I agree that it would be foolish to discard the possibility of cultural bias when it comes to various translations of the Quran. Your argument concerning "42:49 "To Allah belongs the dominion over the heavens and the earth. It creates what It wills. It prepares for whom It wills females, and It prepares for whom It wills males. 50 Or It marries together the males and the females, and It makes those whom It wills to be ineffectual. Indeed It is the Knowing, the Powerful" was especially convincing.

 

[S.A.M.]

Thanks for the link, your discussion with Kadark was very enlightening. I agree that it would be foolish to discard the possibility of cultural bias when it comes to various translations of the Quran. Your argument concerning "42:49 "To Allah belongs the dominion over the heavens and the earth. It creates what It wills. It prepares for whom It wills females, and It prepares for whom It wills males. 50 Or It marries together the males and the females, and It makes those whom It wills to be ineffectual. Indeed It is the Knowing, the Powerful" was especially convincing.

I'm always wary of tweaks in the translation, which is why I think reading the source as it is actually written is very important.

One more important concept which must not be overlooked is that the idea of hetero and homo sexuality is a western idea. There is no single sex concept in the ME (or even shall we say, in the East?) For a man to "adore" another man or even a boy (barring penetrative sex) was not considered wrong. Hence the term sodomites and pederasts as applied to the Arabs (they are always wrong, regardless of whatever their position ) by Western historians.