Re: Islam and homosexuality...
Then let's not pretend that the Quran provides the answer to the genetic predispostion of sexual orientation.
If you can prove that I was pretending as such then you have a point to make otherwise do not stamp me with other peoples assumptions or your own. You brought up the point and I countered it, so keep the blame where it belongs not on me.
The story about Lot demonstrated God's anger with the wicked city and its sinful inhabitants. Their sins included polytheism, public orgies, aggressiveness in their public places of assembly, blocking free passage of the roads, killing and robbing of travellers, and dishonesty in the market place. Traditional Islamic scholars are the ones who have* interpreted* the destruction of Lot to show God's abhorrence with homosexuality (as opposed to the correct interpretation - wickedness)
Br. Teggy already provided the references before I could so its a moot point trying to argue that Quran does not prohibit it and that it was practiced by the people of Lut and that there is no condemnation of this act of theirs in the Quran. Its explicit in terms of Quranic prohibitions so it doesn't matter whether Luts people did it or someone else does it. In Islam is a sinful act. Period. Twisting and turning the argument will not help here by throwing in interpretations of traditionalist scholars or whatsoever. This is not about you agreeing to it but that its forbidden in Islam. Islam is not based on your opinions. And yes Quran abhors all the other things you mentioned.
Most studies show genetics, while not the sole determining factor, are a huge influence in sexual orientation. AS for the* interpretation* of Islamic Law - perhaps when Islam goes through its Reformation, all of these previously unchangeable laws will change to reflect the times.
There is no denying that genetics alone does define a mans functions or how a man behaves. Infact if anything upbringing and environment have the most influence over how people act or think. The interpretation of Islamic law has nothing to do with genetic studies. Reformation is not the basis for making the immoral a moral.
There is a difference to saying we can't do anything about it and that it exists.
No where was it said that it doesn't exist and no where was it claimed that nothing could be done about it.
Accepting your religion as it was interpreted by others is also a choice. Combining man made words with God's words to determine your dogmatic practices is also a choice. Considering the destruction of Lot as God's punishment of homosexuality is also a choice. Not changing the way a religion has been interpreted for hundreds of years is also a choice - none of these choices have any overwhelming reasons to be the right choice (outside of culture, tradition and myopia).
Islams choice is to condemn homosexuality, if one chooses to be a muslim better not make a choice to be homosexual then.
Semi, your post was really disappointing. It had no value add arguments, just tangential topics and you did not answer to anything that was said.
You have made no point regarding genetics and sexuality. What is it you want to achieve by proving that homosexuality and genetics are connected (which I think it more than probably true).