The specific reasons behind why Muslims don't actually accept homosexuality can be elaborated on following on from the prevous article Islam's opinion about Homosexuality.
We as Muslim are told to uphold three major aspects in our lives through our faith: Our personal spirituality, our domestic obligations within a family unit, and our society. Too often people associate religion as a practice behind closed doors, and forget that the society we live in plays a crucial role in our lifestyle. Therefore the structure of society is also important when talking about religious obligations.
Even when speaking from a non-religious perspective, one could present the same argument from the concept of natural selection which is the cause of life on earth as we know it whereby only the strongest and most suited in nature's eyes would survive the test of time. Having said that, the very same modern day enthusiasts forget that the equation of same-sex relationships puts a halt on the natural progression of mankind.
That in itself wouldn't be so much of a problem if one argues that it wouldn't be a "threat" to society, however in this day and age, we are seeing more and more statements made by self-appointed philosophers that claim that we all have homosexual tendencies that can be measured as a percentage of “how gay" we all are, claiming that ultimately we are all homosexual in one way or another and only the tendencies we choose to act upon are what differentiates us.
It is this distortion of reality that threatens the harmony of society. One who chooses his or her own sexual preference is one thing, but trying to convince society that we are all potentially gay is a corruption of this harmony.
Some gays and lesbians today also claim they had no choice in the matter, yet there is no evidence to base this argument on the physical attractions people have as infants or even as fetuses their mother's womb.
Reiterating the obligations we have towards maintaining a stable growth of humanity, many people naturally tend to think inwardly and selfishly of their own lusts and desires. The same can be said about a married man who cannot help but follow his urges to repetitively commit adultery, boldly claiming that "a man has his needs". Though that may have some truth in it, it is important to note that there is a significant distinction that separates us from the primates that base their lives purely on instinct rather than disciplined intellect. Humanity as a higher being survives based on its intellect. Our survival is bound by upholding the obligation towards fellow members of the human race which incorporates our responsibilities on a domestic and societal level.
Unless of course one thinks we should all live like animals?
We all agree to this concept; otherwise a man would not be condemned for having lusts and desires towards incest. If a grown man wants to have sexual relations with his grown daughter, although they are both in mutual consent and they both could claim that they “truly, madly, deeply love one another”, society sees this as a threat to our extended race even though it is only a corruption of the domestic structure of a family unit. The same can also be said about a mother and her son.
For the sake of argument, why then is homosexuality any different? Seeing that incest in nature's eyes actually has some form of acceptance (i.e. they could bare offspring), human society still sees the extent of the perverse nature of incest as a threat to our survival.
Lusts and desires are a dangerous concept if not disciplined responsibly. Some have gone to the extreme of mutilating their own body for the pursuit of this lust in order to change their very gender, and ultimately their own identity, only to look back and realise the grave mistake in amputating their own genital organ in pursuit of an insatiable appetite. Many have been surveyed about their deep regret in denying their birth right, and this can only lead to disaster.
What people must not forget is that the concept of homosexuality is not a "new age" phenomenon. It has been around for many centuries where there are references to the behaviour dating back to Biblical times.
So while many claim that religion fails to "adapt" to change, it has not gone without dealing with this scenario before and has been witness to entire cities that fell purely because of lusts and desires that lacked order and discipline.
More importantly, and a point that people tend to forget is that this should not encourage a violent disapproval of such behaviours (otherwise we would be in complete contradiction towards the validity of what we believe in as Muslims), but rather a tolerance of it in order for people to at least understand our perspective on it.
Although many may disagree with this opinion in Western society, that is also the beauty of humanity; the fact that there is such a diverse range of intellectual perspectives on these kinds of issues can only be healthy in challenging our core believes, or even cementing them…
We as Muslim are told to uphold three major aspects in our lives through our faith: Our personal spirituality, our domestic obligations within a family unit, and our society. Too often people associate religion as a practice behind closed doors, and forget that the society we live in plays a crucial role in our lifestyle. Therefore the structure of society is also important when talking about religious obligations.
Even when speaking from a non-religious perspective, one could present the same argument from the concept of natural selection which is the cause of life on earth as we know it whereby only the strongest and most suited in nature's eyes would survive the test of time. Having said that, the very same modern day enthusiasts forget that the equation of same-sex relationships puts a halt on the natural progression of mankind.
That in itself wouldn't be so much of a problem if one argues that it wouldn't be a "threat" to society, however in this day and age, we are seeing more and more statements made by self-appointed philosophers that claim that we all have homosexual tendencies that can be measured as a percentage of “how gay" we all are, claiming that ultimately we are all homosexual in one way or another and only the tendencies we choose to act upon are what differentiates us.
It is this distortion of reality that threatens the harmony of society. One who chooses his or her own sexual preference is one thing, but trying to convince society that we are all potentially gay is a corruption of this harmony.
Some gays and lesbians today also claim they had no choice in the matter, yet there is no evidence to base this argument on the physical attractions people have as infants or even as fetuses their mother's womb.
Reiterating the obligations we have towards maintaining a stable growth of humanity, many people naturally tend to think inwardly and selfishly of their own lusts and desires. The same can be said about a married man who cannot help but follow his urges to repetitively commit adultery, boldly claiming that "a man has his needs". Though that may have some truth in it, it is important to note that there is a significant distinction that separates us from the primates that base their lives purely on instinct rather than disciplined intellect. Humanity as a higher being survives based on its intellect. Our survival is bound by upholding the obligation towards fellow members of the human race which incorporates our responsibilities on a domestic and societal level.
Unless of course one thinks we should all live like animals?
We all agree to this concept; otherwise a man would not be condemned for having lusts and desires towards incest. If a grown man wants to have sexual relations with his grown daughter, although they are both in mutual consent and they both could claim that they “truly, madly, deeply love one another”, society sees this as a threat to our extended race even though it is only a corruption of the domestic structure of a family unit. The same can also be said about a mother and her son.
For the sake of argument, why then is homosexuality any different? Seeing that incest in nature's eyes actually has some form of acceptance (i.e. they could bare offspring), human society still sees the extent of the perverse nature of incest as a threat to our survival.
Lusts and desires are a dangerous concept if not disciplined responsibly. Some have gone to the extreme of mutilating their own body for the pursuit of this lust in order to change their very gender, and ultimately their own identity, only to look back and realise the grave mistake in amputating their own genital organ in pursuit of an insatiable appetite. Many have been surveyed about their deep regret in denying their birth right, and this can only lead to disaster.
What people must not forget is that the concept of homosexuality is not a "new age" phenomenon. It has been around for many centuries where there are references to the behaviour dating back to Biblical times.
So while many claim that religion fails to "adapt" to change, it has not gone without dealing with this scenario before and has been witness to entire cities that fell purely because of lusts and desires that lacked order and discipline.
More importantly, and a point that people tend to forget is that this should not encourage a violent disapproval of such behaviours (otherwise we would be in complete contradiction towards the validity of what we believe in as Muslims), but rather a tolerance of it in order for people to at least understand our perspective on it.
Although many may disagree with this opinion in Western society, that is also the beauty of humanity; the fact that there is such a diverse range of intellectual perspectives on these kinds of issues can only be healthy in challenging our core believes, or even cementing them…
Why doesn't the GLBT Lobby disclose everything to the public about same sex relationships. Why not disclose the high rates of domestic violence between SS couples?(google the second closet) Why not disclose that same sex couples have a very low rate of monogamy, in Holland after 5 years of marriage up to 90% of married SS couples have been with other people, and that after 16yrs only 9% are still together. Also that marriage fidelity can mean something different to SS couples than heterosexual couples. What about health issues the high rates of anal cancer, intestinal tract parasites and viruses that are virtually unheard of in heterosexuals. That the life expectancy of active gay men is about 20 yrs lower at about 65yrs. Nobody wants to openly discuss the tuff issues Incase it damages the public attitude in support of SS marriage. These all go towards disclosing to the public the true status of issues concerning a portion of the homosexual community. Let's also discuss that in Holland and Canda they have reduced the legal age of sex to 14yrs and are trying to get it pushed lower to 12, it is the homosexual lobby forcing these changes. If homosexuals believe it is their right to marry then they must be willing to address these issues in a public arena so that when everyday people support gay marriage they have all relevant info to make an informed decision when they say yes! These issues are real!
ReplyDelete