Agnostic75
Well-Known Member
Are there any heterosexual, moderate Muslims in the world who have publically stated that homosexuality is not immoral, and is not against the will of God, and support legal rights for homosexuals?
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Moderate Muslims' beliefs about homosexuality
- Thread starter Agnostic75
- Start date
Trey of Diamonds
Well-Known Member
And plenty who believe so but can not say publically because of where they live.
Green Kepi
Active Member
The term “moderate Muslim” was created in the West. In the Muslim world there is nothing called moderate or radical Muslims or moderate or radical mosques. You are either a Muslim or not. Its more of a way of life, not what an individual personally believes...that does not count....
Agnostic75
Well-Known Member
Odion said:
Oh sure, but apparently finding them is not very easy.
I sustect that supporters of gay rights can expect very little help from moderate Muslims regarding the passage of gay rights laws.
How can any practice be right or wrong merely because a religious book says so?
Last edited:
Agnostic75
Well-Known Member
Trey of Diamonds said:
Where in the world are Muslims free to publically, and safely support homosexuality?
Breathe
Hostis humani generis
Naturally. Many of those who hold no issues with homosexuality do not feel comfortable in discussing their opinions for fear of reprisals, being called a homosexual, and so on.
It's hard to find support groups for homosexuals in many religious groups; Sikhs and Hindus also, even when their religion does not prohibit homosexuality. In addition to religion, you also have cultural issues which can affect it.
Most likely.
How would I know?
Also, a few groups so something constructive can come from this discussion:
GBLT Muslim groups
Welcome to Imaan
Sexuality, Gender & Islam- Introduction
GBLT Christian groups
Affirmation: Gay & Lesbian Mormons - Muslim
The Gay Christian Network
Gay Christian 101 - Affirming God's good news and Bible truth for all GLBTs.
GBLT Dharmic groups
LGBT Sikhs - Sikh
The Gay and Lesbian Vaishnava Association, Inc: Hinduism, Hare Krishna, Homosexuality - Vaishnava Hindu
Gay Buddhist Fellowship Buddhist
Sure, they just understand "rights" in a way probably different from the way others understand it. Theres many that arent against homosexuality as a reality that needs to be discussed, but against homosexual practices.
However, no credible scholar ever accepted homosexual acts as legitimate. Theres more than 1.7 billion under the general banner of Islam and im sure youll find someone, somewhere that accepts homosexuality (therefore you'd probably call him "moderate"), however its certainly wont be a scholar or anyone credible.
Ive heard of some "gay mosques" established in Canada, but I dont think any learned Muslim would take them seriously or see them as Muslim even, if they accept homosexual acts as something permissible (which I assume, but dont know)
However, no credible scholar ever accepted homosexual acts as legitimate. Theres more than 1.7 billion under the general banner of Islam and im sure youll find someone, somewhere that accepts homosexuality (therefore you'd probably call him "moderate"), however its certainly wont be a scholar or anyone credible.
Ive heard of some "gay mosques" established in Canada, but I dont think any learned Muslim would take them seriously or see them as Muslim even, if they accept homosexual acts as something permissible (which I assume, but dont know)
Gaura Priya
IRL
Canada, perhaps? We do have an LGBT Islamic group in Canada, called Salaam. It's much bigger in Toronto, respectively of course. And many individual Muslims are indifferent, tolerant, and intolerant of homosexuals, both Muslim and/or non-Muslim.
I am sure there are those of whom you called "moderate Muslims" and who don't view homosexual behavior and practices as immoral and even defend/promote them, but I believe it is limited to certain circles...and they usually call themselves "progressive Muslims". And I call them defeated people.
Last edited:
tumbleweed41
Resident Liberal Hippie
Would this be a "No true Scotsman fallacy"?
The belief that one who calls himself Muslim and a follower of Islam, but supports the rights of homosexuals to not only be homosexual, but to practice it also, is not a "real Muslim"?
tarekabdo12
Active Member
I actually find it totally immoral and revolting. I also consider it destructive to the whole construction of God. In addition, I consider myself a moderate Muslim. I don't understand why you initially consider the homosexual behavior something good and doesn't deserve reproach. Actually, homosexual behavior is destructive to the psychological behavior of humans and I have discussed this before. So, the question is→ why in order to be a good Muslim I must approve homosexual behavior? Why do you consider them angels and those who doesn't accept their behavior a devil?
If you think about a moderate Muslim, you should consider his manners, they way he treats others and they way he acts in life and not to restrict his behavior in approving homosex.
tarekabdo12
Active Member
I also can't consider what Gay mosques are. Even if they are gay they can pray at any mosque and that doesn't dismiss them from the Islamic behavior.It's a sin but I don't think or know that it pulls him off Islam. Furthermore, the word moderate is in your concept only but those who say so actually disregard their religion in such part. In addition, not only Muslims disapprove homosexuality but also many people whether following a religion or not.
The question Tarek, should his definition of the "moderate Muslim" matter to the Muslim?
I don't think it matters. Because he classifies people according to his values and standards and definitely some of them are un-Islamic. He might want to call those who are closer to his un-Islamic views "moderate" and the believer might view this differently since he/she has his own values as well.
Indeed, this is a good point.
Last edited:
Again, id like to stress that "rights" is a concept that can be perceived differently. (As you indirectly pointed out by mentioning you mean its practice).
It would be a fallacy if it were baseless, and a mere claim, which it isnt. I just didnt want to get into all the details and posts all the texts on this. This is certainly what texts say very clearly, and also clearly the consensus of Muslim scholars/jurists throughout history, as not a single one said its permissible, rather saying otherwise, and that believing its allowed, takes a person beyond the folds of Islam, also, by the consensus of scholars.
Granted, the consensus isnt the only basis of the ruling in and of itself. It is connected to texts that are very clear on the issue, as theres no "central authority" (like say the Catholic Church) in Islam. If it werent connected to scripture, Quran and Sunnah, then we'd have a different issue at hand and the arguments would be different.
In summary, the practice of homosexual acts, although a great sin, does NOT take a person outside the folds of Islam. Believing that its permissible, however, does. Without getting into lengthy details and texts, the basis of this is that its practically rejecting the clear rulings of the Quran and Sunnah on this.
The only exception to this rule is when someone is simply ignorant, like one from a Muslim family but never really learned much about Islam.
So is practicing homosexuality permissible? No. Does practicing it take a person outside the folds of Islam? No. (The position of extremist Khawarij is that it does). Does believing its permissible (or any other action clearly forbidden in Quran and Sunnah) take a person outside the folds of Islam? Yes, as numerous religious texts indicate.
I believe there is a difference between committing a sin while acknowledging that it's a sin, and on the other hand, defending the sinful behavior, moreover being proud of it.
Well said brother.
Exactly.
Agnostic75
Well-Known Member
tarekabdo12 said:
First of all, why is any behavior wrong simply because the writer(s) of a religious book says that it is wrong?
Second, from a scientific perspective, what evidence do you have that homosexual behavior is generally harmful to homosexuals, and to society?
If free will exists, sexual behavior is a choice, but sexual orientation (sexual urges) is not a choice. If a God exists, I doubt that he would want all people who have a homosexual sexual sexual identity to be celebate for life.
Why do you suppose that God forces millions of animals and birds to practice homosexual behavior? As an example, almost all bonobo monkeys are bi-sexual.
Please do not claim that all animal animal homosexuality is a desire for dominance, not sexual pleasure since there is not a general scientific consensus for that speculation. There is little doubt that many animals and birds enjoy engaging in homosexuality, and bi-sexuality.
I am not suggesting that homosexuality is acceptable just because many animals practice it, but the fact that many animals do practice it show that it is a part of nature, not something that is practciced only by some humans.
If a God exists, and wants people to follow written rules, why has writing only existed for a small percentage of the time that humans have existed? Written rules would be a very poor means for a God to use as a primary source of communicating with humans due to problems such as interpreation and translation. Many wars have been fought among many religions.
Last edited:
Also, theres another side to the issue of "right to practice homosexuality". What is meant by rights? If it is religious legitimacy, then no one says this. However, the legal "right" to sin behind closed doors, is this a right? or not? This is a very different issue, that is pretty much legal and not religious (although the Islamic religion does have laws, so they arent really that seperate, its just that the issue becomes an issue of laws of privacy, and not legitimacy of sins).
Referring to a story of Umar raa with someone who was drinking alcohol in the privacy of his home, it is acknowledged that people have the right to privacy (and therefore legally allowing them to sin in private, given certain circumstances). This however, doesnt mean that the the sin in and of itself, is legitimate and acceptable in the religion.
Referring to a story of Umar raa with someone who was drinking alcohol in the privacy of his home, it is acknowledged that people have the right to privacy (and therefore legally allowing them to sin in private, given certain circumstances). This however, doesnt mean that the the sin in and of itself, is legitimate and acceptable in the religion.