Jump to content
Islamic Forum

Recommended Posts

Well what is the purpose of marriage?

 

One life long partnership, love, and affection (can a homosexual couple experience this? IN short yes)

 

The second part of marriage is procreation. This a homosexual couple can not do it is not physicaly possible.

 

Homosexuality goes against natural law. It is a perverse act as it goes against God's design. But since you don't believe in God that part does not matter to you.

 

So in short no they do not have the right to "get married".

 

The second part of marriage is procreation? This means males and females incapable of producing offspring cannot get married. Unless, of course, you want to be hypocritical.

As for the part about God, that is really irrelevant. If you think it is a perverse act...don't do it! That doesn't give you the right to force other people to agree with you. What if I hate lettuce? What will you think of me if I try to get lettuce banned?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Legally in most states. See my post above #4. Take for example in the state that I live Minnesota gay marriage is not legal. So therefor "gays" do not have a right to get married. Then there is the morrality of it from my end of it from my end, and it goes against naturaly law.

 

Sorry, I don't actually know which side you are on. As for it going against natural law, you know what else goes against "natural law" in the same way? Computers.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Me I am a Roman Catholic. I think the RCC is quite clear on its teachings of homosexual marriage and behavior. Love the sinner/hate the sin.

 

Why view it as a sin? How does it harm anything at all? It seems more like something that homophobic straight people from thousands of years ago really didn't like and decided to try to make people feel guilty for how they were born.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was a little busy. I'll try to catch up with all my posts.

 

Understanable but welcome back.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The second part of marriage is procreation? This means males and females incapable of producing offspring cannot get married. Unless, of course, you want to be hypocritical.

As for the part about God, that is really irrelevant. If you think it is a perverse act...don't do it! That doesn't give you the right to force other people to agree with you. What if I hate lettuce? What will you think of me if I try to get lettuce banned?

 

Wong you are in the first part of this statment. Marriage was ordained by God. But secondly how are they supposed to know if they are infertle untill they try and conceive and are unsuccessful. There is a difference between God not allowing children and going against God's natural law and being in a relationship that would not be allowed by God and naturaly could not produce a child.

 

Now you second part. You may consider it irrelevant but I do not. Obviously it is a perverse act and I will not condone it or partisipate in it. They have no right to force there belief on me either. Since the beginning of recorded history as far as I know marriage is between a man and a woman. In American history homosexual marriage has never been recognised. Till this recent push.

 

So if we accept homosexual marriage whats next bestiality? It is a slipery slope one starts to travel.

 

 

As dot asked earlyier to you promote homosexual marriage?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sorry, I don't actually know which side you are on. As for it going against natural law, you know what else goes against "natural law" in the same way? Computers.

 

I stand with the Roman Catholic Church on this matter. Ya know what? Computers have nothing to do with natural law. Know why? God did not crate them. Man created computers. Time to burn the straw man.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

PUNISHMENT FOR HOMOSEXUALITY

 

 

Praise be to Allaah.

Firstly:

 

The crime of homosexuality is one of the greatest of crimes, the worst of sins and the most abhorrent of deeds, and Allaah punished those who did it in a way that He did not punish other nations. It is indicative of violation of the fitrah, total misguidance, weak intellect and lack of religious commitment, and it is a sign of doom and deprivation of the mercy of Allaah. We ask Allaah to keep us safe and sound.

 

...

 

Great. One of the GREATEST crimes is what people are doing in bed. That is REALLY important. Sure.

 

The Sahaabah were unanimously agreed on the execution of homosexuals, but they differed as to how they were to be executed. Some of them were of the view that they should be burned with fire, which was the view of ‘Ali (may Allaah be pleased with him) and also of Abu Bakr (may Allaah be pleased with him), as we shall see below. And some of them thought that they should be thrown down from a high place then have stones thrown at them. This was the view of Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him).

....

 

Wow. Yep totally fair and justified. Even though you have yet to give a single reasonable objection to gay marriage, which is what the question was asking, the whole killing thing is totally fair. Just kill the lettuce eaters too, because I don't like lettuce. And my God, the Flying Spaghetti Monster, told me that eating lettuce is a sin. Thus anyone on this planet, regardless of whether or not they agree with me, must be KILLED if they DARE eat lettuce. I will not tolerate this abhorrent act!! Therefore I will kill the lettuce eaters!

 

Because the evil consequences of homosexuality are among the worst of evil consequences, so its punishment is one of the most severe of punishments in this world and in the Hereafter.

 

Because the evil consequences of lettuce eating are among the worst of evil consequences, so its punishment is one of the most severe of punishments in this world and in the Hereafter. Never mind the fact that I didn't actually state these consequences, they are obviously implied.

 

Those who favoured the first view... said that there is no sin that brings worse consequences than homosexuality, and they are second only to the evil consequences of kufr, and they may be worse than the consequences of murder...

 

Yep totally worse than murder. So is eating lettuce. I'd much rather have a million murderers than a million lettuce eaters.

 

They said: Allaah did not test anyone with this major sin before the people of Loot, and He punished them with a punishment that He did not send upon any other nation; He combined all kinds of punishment for them, such as destruction, turning their houses upside down, causing them to be swallowed up by the earth, sending stones down upon them from the sky, taking away their sight, punishing them and making their punishment ongoing, and wreaking vengeance upon them such as was not wrought upon any other nation. That was because of the greatness of the evil consequences of this crime which the earth can hardly bear if it is committed upon it, and the angels flee to the farthest reaches of heaven and earth if they witness it, lest the punishment be sent upon those who do it and they be stricken along with them. The earth cries out to its Lord, may He be blessed and exalted, and the mountains almost shift from their places.

 

Ah! I see. Once, a group of non-Spaghettians were eating lettuce. So the Flying Spaghetti Monster killed them. Therefore eating lettuce is bad.

 

Killing the one to whom it is done is better for him than committing this act with him, because if a man commits sodomy with another man, in effect he kills him in such a way that there is no hope of life after that, unlike murder where the victim is wronged and is a martyr. They said: the evidence for that (i.e., that the evil consequences of homosexuality are worse than those of murder) is the fact that in the case of murder, Allaah gives the next of kin the choice: if he wishes he may have him executed and if he wishes he may let him off, but He enjoined executing the homosexual as a hadd punishment, as the companions of the Messenger of Allaah were unanimously agreed, and as is clearly indicated by the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and there is no evidence to the contrary; rather this is what his companions and the Rightly-Guided Caliphs (may Allaah be pleased with them all) did.

 

That's exactly how I feel about eating lettuce. Let me read on; this is getting intensely philosophical.

 

will see the difference between them. When Allaah mentioned zina, He described it as a “great sin” (faahishah – indefinite) among other great sins, but when He mentioned homosexuality, He called it “the worst sin” (al-faahishah – definite). This suggests that it contains all the essence of evil and sin.

 

Yeh the FSM referred to lettuce as the root of all evil. So don't eat it. Even if you don't believe in the FSM or don't believe in the right flying monster and so don't believe that your flying monster actually said this. Don't eat lettuce! Or else the FSM tells me I have to kill you.

 

And Allaah knows best.

 

And The FSM knows best. Even if you don't believe in him.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why view it as a sin? How does it harm anything at all? It seems more like something that homophobic straight people from thousands of years ago really didn't like and decided to try to make people feel guilty for how they were born.

 

nope It is a sin. God said so. And they were not born that way. It is purly a choise. I don't need them to feel guilty. I will love them the same regardless of their atraction. It does not mean that I will condone there actions though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, I do disagree. It is not victimless. When children are attempted to be raised in this type of enviroment there are far more ramifications that are neggative. And yes there are bad heterosexual parents also. It goes against natural law and norms set forth by God.

 

Oh. So what would happen if a dad and his brother raised a child, if, say, the mother had died? Would you try to take away their right to raise a child?

 

I am not asking for the morality police to check bedrooms that obviously is obserd. What happens in conssenting adults bedrooms is between them and God.

Perfect! Maybe more people should think like that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The question, as I see it, should be: do they have the right to live. Unfortunately Islam doesn't allow the killing of homosexuals. Lucky them.

However, Islam says that they should be beaten by sandals/shoes and humiliated in public everywhere they go, until they stop their filth and quit homosexuality for good.

 

P.S. the topic title is funny. Gay rights? they should have none, with one exception: the right to be crushed like a fly.

 

I can't wrap my head around the idea that there are people like you on this planet. Some part of me hopes you are just a troll.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
name='atheism101' timestamp='1330054380' post='1255069']

Oh. So what would happen if a dad and his brother raised a child, if, say, the mother had died? Would you try to take away their right to raise a child?

Well that depends are they boffing each other? If they are maybe they should be looked into for mental abuse of a minor. We all know how the govt.. in the U.S. loves to poke there nose into private lives.

 

 

 

Perfect! Maybe more people should think like that.

 

Well I aint going to go in to investigate. How bout u?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also I would like to offer this tract on homosexuality. ...

 

Lots to read. The article, as expected, does not actually give any support for the claims. For example, it tries pseudoscience to show that people choose to be homosexual. There is no way you can show that the alcoholism analogy holds in any way. Sure, that's what the author WANTS to be true, but when millions of gays say they did not choose to be gay, and homosexual behavior is evident even in other species, and science has good answers to questions regarding why people are gay, it is enough.

It is clear that people will continue to try pseudoscience to convince people (themselves, mostly) that being gay is a choice. For example, a random guy on youtube made a video about how homosexuality is just the result of lack of fatherly love. I'm sorry to say that's not how science works - you don't get to just throw around claims without evidence.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Realy no secular reasons. How about some of the highest std transfer raits. Drug addicts are higher.

What??

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well that depends are they boffing each other? If they are maybe they should be looked into for mental abuse of a minor. We all know how the govt.. in the U.S. loves to poke there nose into private lives.

 

...How on Earth is that mental abuse of a minor? Unless they do it in front of the kids, this is stupid. It really doesn't matter what they are doing in bed...how would that affect their right to raise a child?

 

Well I aint going to go in to investigate. How bout u?

 

That wasn't sarcasm. i was serious. I think people should think more like you in that God can handle the sinners if you really think it is a sin.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

nope It is a sin. God said so. And they were not born that way. It is purly a choise. I don't need them to feel guilty. I will love them the same regardless of their atraction. It does not mean that I will condone there actions though.

Eating lettuce is a sin. The Flying Spaghetti Monster said so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What??

 

Go back and read what post #23 is in response to. The quote is above it. Sould be self explanitory.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I stand with the Roman Catholic Church on this matter. Ya know what? Computers have nothing to do with natural law. Know why? God did not crate them. Man created computers. Time to burn the straw man.

 

The fact that man made computers is irrelevant. Let me try this strategy in a slightly different way, if it bothers you that computers are man-made. Can you explain the homosexuality in other species? Go stone the animals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
name='atheism101' timestamp='1330055283' post='1255074']

...How on Earth is that mental abuse of a minor? Unless they do it in front of the kids, this is stupid. It really doesn't matter what they are doing in bed...how would that affect their right to raise a child?

 

Then it would be no more abuse of a minor to make/have them attend a religious service. I recall reading a article about a mother who was hauld over the rugs by social services for having her child attend a wed. night Bible service and they tried to classify it as abuse. That is stupid.

 

 

 

That wasn't sarcasm. i was serious. I think people should think more like you in that God can handle the sinners if you really think it is a sin.

I realize that. But I do like to lighten things up even in a seriouse discussion. Life can not be all serious and no fun with sarcasim. Yes God can handle it. But then that brings us back to what right to they have to infringe on what religious institutions have established? And they claim to have that establishment from God.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Eating lettuce is a sin. The Flying Spaghetti Monster said so.

 

Thats ok I ate the flying spaghetti monster along with the garlic bread. :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Wong you are in the first part of this statment. Marriage was ordained by God. But secondly how are they supposed to know if they are infertle untill they try and conceive and are unsuccessful. There is a difference between God not allowing children and going against God's natural law and being in a relationship that would not be allowed by God and naturaly could not produce a child.

 

Now you second part. You may consider it irrelevant but I do not. Obviously it is a perverse act and I will not condone it or partisipate in it. They have no right to force there belief on me either. Since the beginning of recorded history as far as I know marriage is between a man and a woman. In American history homosexual marriage has never been recognised. Till this recent push.

 

So if we accept homosexual marriage whats next bestiality? It is a slipery slope one starts to travel.

 

 

As dot asked earlyier to you promote homosexual marriage?

 

Oh okay, so we are playing with minor details here. Let me give you a scenario: a couple gets married, and they learn that the woman is infertile. They get a divorce. Is the woman allowed to get married again?

 

No one is forcing you to agree that homosexuality is not some grave sin. Be a homophobe all you want. If facial hair bothers me, are other people allowed to grow it? Yes. Are they forcing me to like facial hair? No.

 

You know what else was never changed till a recent push? Slavery. Good argument.

 

Do I promote homosexual marriage? What do you mean? Do I promote homosexual couples to get together? Of course not. I'm not some marriage organizer. I simply promote the idea that they have the right to get married.

 

And what, you think banning homosexual marriage does anything you think it does? There are already homosexual couples. All they want is the right to be legally recognized and get the same financial benefits other families are allowed to get.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The fact that man made computers is irrelevant. Let me try this strategy in a slightly different way, if it bothers you that computers are man-made. Can you explain the homosexuality in other species? Go stone the animals.

 

No it is all the relevance. Other animals are not on the same morrality level as humans. When you come at it from a Christian perspective humans were created in the immage of God. Not lions, tigers, bears, frogs ect.... these animals are not on the same morality level as humans.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Go back and read what post #23 is in response to. The quote is above it. Sould be self explanitory.

 

No, I know what you are talking about; the "what" is, what? how could you say that homosexuality is related to these things?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats ok I ate the flying spaghetti monster along with the garlic bread. :D

 

Take it less as a joke and more as a point that I am making.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Then it would be no more abuse of a minor to make/have them attend a religious service. I recall reading a article about a mother who was hauld over the rugs by social services for having her child attend a wed. night Bible service and they tried to classify it as abuse. That is stupid.

That's a red herring. I really don't see what this has to do with anything. Say I granted you that the above event was not abuse; then you simply conceded the point. (Of course I can see where people are coming from when they say it is abuse, but of course this is not for this thread. Perhaps it fits with other threads like my indoctrination thread.)

 

I realize that. But I do like to lighten things up even in a seriouse discussion. Life can not be all serious and no fun with sarcasim. Yes God can handle it. But then that brings us back to what right to they have to infringe on what religious institutions have established? And they claim to have that establishment from God.

I don't quite understand what you mean to say here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
name='atheism101' timestamp='1330055825' post='1255080']

 

Oh okay, so we are playing with minor details here. Let me give you a scenario: a couple gets married, and they learn that the woman is infertile. They get a divorce. Is the woman allowed to get married again?

 

Ok well now that depends on situations. Per the state yes they do. Now if they were married in the Catholic Church first the marriage would have to be annuled. Annulments are not just given. A marriage has to be proven one or bolth of the parties was not fully capable of making the decision to be married. Having children would not fall into that catigory. So they could be divorced and have it recognised by the state but the Church may consider them still married if the Annulment is not granted. So it is not as simple as one makes it out to be.

 

 

No one is forcing you to agree that homosexuality is not some grave sin. Be a homophobe all you want. If facial hair bothers me, are other people allowed to grow it? Yes. Are they forcing me to like facial hair? No.

 

Ya know what I am getting a little tired of being called a homophobe. I am not. I have family and friends who are homosexual. Not like you would of known that you were being presumptuiouse. I love them unconditionaly. I am not a homophobe. Infact many of them hold to a life of chastity in agrement with Church teachings (there are also chaste heterosexuals). This does not mean they don't have friends and companions but they act in the lines of chastity.

 

 

You know what else was never changed till a recent push? Slavery. Good argument.

 

Not the same thing. Apples and oranges.

 

 

Do I promote homosexual marriage? What do you mean? Do I promote homosexual couples to get together? Of course not. I'm not some marriage organizer. I simply promote the idea that they have the right to get married.

 

You know darn well I was not asking if you promote them like a fight manager. So you do think they should "have the right" to get married. Thank you for the clarification.

 

And what, you think banning homosexual marriage does anything you think it does? There are already homosexual couples. All they want is the right to be legally recognized and get the same financial benefits other families are allowed to get.

 

Ya know what. I can't stop a civil union. But do not under any circumstance expect me or the Church to recognise it. Do not think you have a right to walk into the Church and expect the Priest to marry you. Do not think you should have the right to walk into the Catholic adoption charity and expect them to openly adopt to you they have the same guide lines as the Church. They have no right to expect the Church to Change its moral teachings for them or to grant them rights that go against the moral tenants of the faith. It is that simple. This that I listed above is part of what they want and it is unacceptable.

 

Mark my words if it becomes accepted and forced to be recognized by the federal govt.. it will be the end of America as we know it. All the great societies through out history have fallen. They have all fallen when they lost their sence of morality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now


×