Do Liberals have to choose between Muslims and Gays?

Go down

Do Liberals have to choose between Muslims and Gays? Empty Do Liberals have to choose between Muslims and Gays?

Post by phildidge on Wed Apr 03, 2019 2:48 pm

Last week I received some criticism for daring to discuss the reasons why many might fear Islam. Some felt it was an overreaction to link the Sharia-sanctioned judicial murder of gay people in almost a dozen Muslim-majority countries, most lately Brunei, with the Section 28-style demands of protesting Muslim parents in Birmingham (which is now spreading to other cities).

Was it “fair” to link the motives of those who impose cruel Sharia-law punishments on lesbian and gay people in Islamic countries with the actions of the Birmingham parents who are merely “religiously conservative”?  Well, I’m not sure I was saying anything as bluntly as that, though given the polls I referred to one has to wonder what sort of society these parents might wish to create if they had the numbers, or were unconstrained by the consequences of not obeying secular law in a Western country. It stands to reason that laws are made by people – they are not imposed on us like the weather, or the laws of physics. It is people with beliefs and opinions – and demands – who create societies, which give rise to the structures which create the laws. People are responsible for those laws.

But before I could grapple with the metaphysical questions, news came in which short-circuited the need for deeper theoretical analysis. An article in The Observer identified one of the leaders playing a “key role” in the Muslim-led homophobic campaign to stop LGBT-inclusive lessons as a Dr Kate Godfrey-Faussett – a psychologist, no less – who heads up an organisation called StopRSE, which has been investigated by the National Secular Society.

The StopRSE organisation promoted the DEATH PENALTY for homosexuality.
From The Observer article:
In a letter dated 18 February, seen by the Observer, the society warned the council that the Stop RSE campaign had “promoted material which says the punishment for homosexuality is death. Our research has found that downloadable resources which were available on Stop RSE’s website as recently as last week [since withdrawn] included a book which endorses lashing and killing gay people.”

Can you imagine any other group getting away with this?
It is almost certain that if members of a far right group were found to have distributed literature arguing that Muslims should be killed, they’d be jailed under terrorism and racial hatred legislation, but this woman and her group aren’t. Why?
Here is an extract from a book shared as a resource by the anti-LGBT inclusion campaigners. It is called “Marriage and Morals in Islam“. This is being distributed in the UK, not Brunei.
So we see that as far as the Qur’an is concerned, homosexuality is an “indecency,” and that Allah had destroyed a whole nation because of this indecent sexual behavior.

In the Islamic legal system, homosexuality is a punishable crime against the laws of God. In the case of homosexuality between two males, the active partner is to be lashed a hundred times if he is unmarried and killed if he is married; whereas the passive partner is to be killed regardless of his marital status. In the case of two females (i.e., lesbianism), the sinners are to be lashed a hundred times if they are unmarried and stoned to death if they are married. (See the chapter on “hudud” in Sharaya and Shark Lum’a also al-Khu’i, Takmilah, p. 42-44.

Why is Islam so severe in matters of fornication, homosexuality and lesbianism? If the Islamic system had not allowed the gratification of the sexual urge by lawful means (without even associating guilt with it), then it would be right to say that Islam is very severe. But since it has allowed the fulfillment of sexual instincts by lawful means, it is not prepared to tolerate any perverted behavior.

The homosexuals are considered as the high risk group for Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS). This shows that nature has not accepted it as a normal sexual behavior among mankind. The homosexuals are told that in order to have safe sex, they must use condoms. If homosexuality without condoms is not safe sex, then how can it be natural? Isn’t the statement that “it is natural but not safe” a contradiction in itself?

The moral bankruptcy of the West is clearly evident in the present trend where some Christian churches are willing to consider modifying the Biblical moral values to accommodate the whims of those who want to justify their immoral behavior!
You will notice that is specifically condemns “The West” and mainstream Christian churches for their departure from “Biblical moral values” and accommodating lesbians and gays instead of killing them. You will notice that this is not just quoting dead scripture for scholarly purposes, but situating it as relevant in a modern social and political context.

More to read on the link


Posts : 8467
Join date : 2018-11-16

View user profile

Back to top Go down

Back to top

- Similar topics

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum