So u support terrorists? You support discrimination? You twist logic all you like, but reality is plain for all to see. The only reason you and ur ilk opose drone attacks is not because of the innocents that are killed, but because despite killing of criminals, you hate that the drones are flown by those reviled kufr. So excuse me for calling you out for such blatant example of bigotry and prejudice. And whats even.more disgusting is that u use civilian casualties as cover for your hatred.So at the risk of eating your brain again, try to think of all the lives that are saved by killing those terrorist dogs.Lets both pray that the Pak army take responsibility for defending pak, so drones would no longer be the necesary evil.
wohi murghi ki aik taang. Hello! Open your eyes.
Again you are twisting the words. Seriously, you need to realize that anyone condemning civilian causalities is not a fanatic like yourself. Not everyone sees the events in black or white. People like yourself have Nazi thinking and are a big danger to humanity.
Stop demonising people who are against the bloodshed, stop labelling them as terrorist supporters.What a liar you are, you are the one who is covering up the war crimes by moaning around like a sissy. Stop your rant of "you're a terrorists supporter because you're not a war-monger like me". Nazi.
Again you are twisting the words. Seriously, you need to realize that anyone condemning civilian causalities is not a fanatic like yourself. Not everyone sees the events in black or white. People like yourself have Nazi thinking and are a big danger to humanity.
Stop demonising people who are against the bloodshed, stop labelling them as terrorist supporters.What a liar you are, you are the one who is covering up the war crimes by moaning around like a sissy. Stop your rant of "you're a terrorists supporter because you're not a war-monger like me". Nazi.
Uff... I give up.
"you're a terrorists supporter because you're not a war-monger like me.." Where did I say that? I said your someone who feigns concern for casualties of drone attacks, when in reality you your opinion is informed only by your bigotry towards non Muslims.
How am I a Nazi? Is that just a word you throw around?
Anyways, your entitled to your opinion, even I detest it on principle, I respect your right to have it. Take care.
Well yeah, thats because so called Muslim countries dont value human rights...Thats why the Arabs are in revolt...
Homosexuality is not established as a human right. Indeed, the view that it is merely a form of fornication and not the basis of a legitimate identity is not dead and buried just yet....
Homosexuality is not established as a human right. Indeed, the view that it is merely a form of fornication and not the basis of a legitimate identity is not dead and buried just yet....
When we talk about Gay rights, we arent just talking about their right to have Gay sex. Although how you as an adult choose to express yourself sexually is not the business of the state. We are talking about not being discriminated against due to sexuality, or having the freedom to live your life according to how you would like, at not being afraid of being attacked. Its about the right to choose, as consenting adults, who you would like to spend the rest of your life with without the state or individuals interfering with your personal life.
My point was that countries that refuse to recognize even those rights that ARE established, couldn't possibly be expected to be so mature and enlightened as to acknowledge the rights of homosexuals whether established or not.
And the view that its merely a form of fornication is only alive today due to the persistence of homophobes and bigots.
And whether it is a recognized right of Gays to be given full rights as equal citizens, including marriage rights, or not, they are as HUMAN BEINGS entitled to dignity and respect, and they are entitled to pursue their happiness as the rest of us are. Last I checked, such things are established rights are they not? Homosexuality is a state of being, the rights that pertain to that state of beings, are those established for all human beings, gay or straight.
So if you dont respect them as Homosexuals, and your not ready to give them their rights as homosexuals, why not instead look on them as human beings, with the same entitlements as the rest of us? Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, what is your beef with that?
My point was that countries that refuse to recognize even those rights that ARE established, couldn't possibly be expected to be so mature and enlightened as to acknowledge the rights of homosexuals whether established or not.
And the view that its merely a form of fornication is only alive today due to the persistence of homophobes and bigots.
Sir the are human beings but the are committing the biggest sin which is punishable by Death in Islam
And whether it is a recognized right of Gays to be given full rights as equal citizens, including marriage rights, or not, they are as HUMAN BEINGS entitled to dignity and respect, and they are entitled to pursue their happiness as the rest of us are. Last I checked, such things are established rights are they not...
So if you dont respect them as Homosexuals, and your not ready to give them their rights as homosexuals, why not instead look on them as human beings, with the same entitlements as the rest of us?
.S
Sir the are human beings but the are committing the biggest sin which is punishable by Death in Islam
And thats where we disagree... Tell me, is Islam about nothing more then finding a reason to kill people for you?
Why does it even make a difference to you? If Gays are given basic human rights, will that somehow effect your life in any way?
If tomorow Gays are legally allowed to marry for example, does that make your marriage null and void?
Gays can't be killed basic human rights in a Muslim Country first secondly they will be only given punishment of Death because it's the order of Islam and issue of GAY has a negative impact on whole society if damages whole of our society
When we talk about Gay rights, we arent just talking about their right to have Gay sex.
You make it sound as if homosexuals would be otherwise content if they were not afforded such a "right"...the fact is, it's all about sex. An act. Subtract that, and then what is there to the Gay identity?
That there are a billion+ world wide who think the state DOES have the right to legislate sexual matters simply means that opposition to gay rights for these people, in the minds of those who support it, is a matter of opposing the right of Muslims to rule by Shariah, or any aspect of it. In other words, the rhetoric of rights can be thrown out the window at that point.
So, we can either understand that there will be no agreement on this issue, or the West can presume that gay rights is akin to racial rights, deem muslim opposition to it as a neo-apartheid, and go down that ideological slippery slope.
As long as gays aren't hurting me then I don't have a problem with them. They can do whatever they want.
But really Muslims make Islam look so strict and violent. Honestly death penalty for gays?? The world has evolved and gotten to higher places yet Muslims are still stuck in their ancient times. No wonder why muslim majority countries are failing. Then look at Turkey a secular muslim majority state which is actually progressing. When you guys bring your religion into every sentence and portray it as a very harsh religion then you guys are only making your selves and your religion look bad. And its sad because I don't think Islam is too strict or violent but you guys have completely ruined its image.
And I'm not a gay activist or something but I believe in equality and freedom for all but that doesn't mean legalizing gay marriages.
You make it sound as if homosexuals would be otherwise content if they were not afforded such a "right"...the fact is, it's all about sex. An act. Subtract that, and then what is there to the Gay identity? That there are a billion+ world wide who think the state DOES have the right to legislate sexual matters simply means that opposition to gay rights for these people, in the minds of those who support it, is a matter of opposing the right of Muslims to rule by Shariah, or any aspect of it. In other words, the rhetoric of rights can be thrown out the window at that point.So, we can either understand that there will be no agreement on this issue, or the West can presume that gay rights is akin to racial rights, deem muslim opposition to it as a neo-apartheid, and go down that ideological slippery slope.
I already stated what this is about. Its about the right to live your life as you like with whom ever you like. You can choose to define it as u like, as crude and obsene as u like, but the issue is bigger then that. To u its all about sex, because you being incapable of seing these people as human being, would have to denegrate the issue in such a crass manner, in order to avoid having to acknowledge that it is genuine issue of human rights. I find ur claim of over a billion to be laughable. Have you actualy spoken to a billion plus people on this issue? Sharia law, is open.to interpretation. I choose to believe in humane set of laws guided by logic,.where.as some hardline extremist types perfer the inhumane, kill anyone u see doing anything even remotely unislamic. Its not a matter of sharia law or not, its about which version you apply. Should we choose the version that is cruel, and essentialy contradicts the spirt of compassion on which Islam, or tge version which compliments our understanding of a just and loving God. The problem with people like you is you are what they call, lakeer ka fakeer. You belive in black and white, over simplified world. It is this 2d, boxed in form of inflexible thinking that creates many of the problems we see today.
I already stated what this is about. Its about the right to live your life as you like with whom ever you like.
These are very old debates. The standard response to this is, of course, to say NO, and point out polygamous marriages enjoy no such support...precisely because it is viewed as obscene and offensive to core values held by those who oppose it.
Spoken to a billion plus? I'm afraid, given the status quo in Muslim countries, that the converse is what must be proven exhaustively. Sharia law may be open to interpretation...but it's kind of hard to argue with primary texts which at it's most basic would make it seem that homosexual sex is nothing more than zina. Logic follows from there...if one rejects the very premise of a permissive society, based on hedonistic pursuits, then you can't really be surprised if one's reasoning follows a different path than you would expect...
You've dodged the question on Muslims free to implement laws of their choice...
These are very old debates. The standard response to this is, of course, to say NO, and point out polygamous marriages enjoy no such support...precisely because it is viewed as obscene and offensive to core values held by those who oppose it. Spoken to a billion plus? I'm afraid, given the status quo in Muslim countries, that the converse is what must be proven exhaustively. Sharia law may be open to interpretation...but it's kind of hard to argue with primary texts which at it's most basic would make it seem that homosexual sex is nothing more than zina. Logic follows from there...if one rejects the very premise of a permissive society, based on hedonistic pursuits, then you can't really be surprised if one's reasoning follows a different path than you would expect...You've dodged the question on Muslims free to implement laws of their choice...
Its an old debate, but then so are many others. Polygomous marriage should be supported. Why not? As long as its btwn consenting adults.The status quo is established by the rulers, not by the ruled. So that arguement does not lend any credance to the claim of over a billion people espousing ur oppinion.I dont believe homosexuzlity is a choice. Its an inborn characteristic. So its pretty hard to argue in favor of such an interpretation as yours in.the face of actual facts. We can discuss what the koran refers to, but it is not what we assume it is. So if indeed homoswxuality is inborn, then it is as much a sin as your.skin color or your height.And no Muslims Cannot make laws that deprive others of their rights. You have a right to make laws,.only so long as they are justified. Any law that is just, is essentially Islamic, is it not?
As long as gays aren't hurting me then I don't have a problem with them. They can do whatever they want. But really Muslims make Islam look so strict and violent. Honestly death penalty for gays?? The world has evolved and gotten to higher places yet Muslims are still stuck in their ancient times. No wonder why muslim majority countries are failing. Then look at Turkey a secular muslim majority state which is actually progressing. When you guys bring your religion into every sentence and portray it as a very harsh religion then you guys are only making your selves and your religion look bad. And its sad because I don't think Islam is too strict or violent but you guys have completely ruined its image. And I'm not a gay activist or something but I believe in equality and freedom for all but that doesn't mean legalizing gay marriages.
I agree with everything u said, except doesnt the bible say something similar to the koran about homosexualitu? How do you reconcile your faith, with ypur progressive attitude towards gays? Some of the biggest opponents of gay rights are christian.
You make it sound as if homosexuals would be otherwise content if they were not afforded such a "right"...the fact is, it's all about sex. An act. Subtract that, and then what is there to the Gay identity?
That there are a billion+ world wide who think the state DOES have the right to legislate sexual matters simply means that opposition to gay rights for these people, in the minds of those who support it, is a matter of opposing the right of Muslims to rule by Shariah, or any aspect of it. In other words, the rhetoric of rights can be thrown out the window at that point.
So, we can either understand that there will be no agreement on this issue, or the West can presume that gay rights is akin to racial rights, deem muslim opposition to it as a neo-apartheid, and go down that ideological slippery slope.
In a similar discussion with a friend he asked me at what point in my life did I choose that I liked women and that I'm attracted to women? The corollary would be at what point in life does a homosexual decide that nah men are hotter than women and they'd rather be with men.
The nature vs nurture debate on homosexuality is old. You imply that a billion plus people would be against homosexuality, well anywhere from 3-9% of those billion should be gays and lesbian - and I'm sure they'd differ with your opinion.
As for interpreting the Quran in a way that is okay with homosexuality - many have done that - a couple of groups in the UK come to mind. Its possible.
Other than saying that homosexuality is bad for society - can you or the other posters who believe this - explain how exactly does it harm society?
In a similar discussion with a friend he asked me at what point in my life did I choose that I liked women and that I'm attracted to women? The corollary would be at what point in life does a homosexual decide that nah men are hotter than women and they'd rather be with men.
You honestly mean to tell me you don't remember being asexual? I certainly do, as a young boy. I had no idea what sex was or entailed...anyhow, that's neither here nor there.
[quote]
The nature vs nurture debate on homosexuality is old. You imply that a billion plus people would be against homosexuality, well anywhere from 3-9% of those billion should be gays and lesbian - and I'm sure they'd differ with your opinion.
[/quote]
There are probably a significant fraction that are also fornicators and adulterous. Let them differ...
[quote]
Other than saying that homosexuality is bad for society - can you or the other posters who believe this - explain how exactly does it harm society?
[/QUOTE]
A law based on Islamic principals does not tolerate sexuality outside of wedlock. Hence, anything deviating from this norm is considered harmful.
Its an old debate, but then so are many others. Polygomous marriage should be supported. Why not? As long as its btwn consenting adults.The status quo is established by the rulers, not by the ruled. So that arguement does not lend any credance to the claim of over a billion people espousing ur oppinion.
Had I used the word multitude, are you suggesting your arguments would evaporate? Or are you taking liberties with an already imprecise figure, LOL?
The point is, it's not supported, and I don't see anyone clamouring for the UN to push such an agenda, wrt polygamous marriages. A bit forced, when it's said to make a point.
I think homosexuality is a complex phenomena not to be compared with skin colour or hair...but it boils down to human sexuality, and therefore sex. My primary point, lost in this rather silly number game playing, was that this is viewed as nothing more than fornication. The retort that the government should keep out of the business of people's sex lives is not a universally held one. This leads us down the slippery slope of denying (a universally held) right of a people to govern themselves for the sake of justifying peoples choice in sexual partners.
I guess I should make myself clearer, my apologies:
You honestly mean to tell me you don't remember being asexual? I certainly do, as a young boy. I had no idea what sex was or entailed...anyhow, that's neither here nor there.
Oh yes I do, but I don't remember one day comparing a hot guy and a hot girl in my head and being like - I CHOOSE WOMEN.
Do you remember your transformation from asexual - to heterosexual being a choice or did it come naturally to you as well?
There are probably a significant fraction that are also fornicators and adulterous. Let them differ...
They might be fornicators and adulterers - they're still part of those 1 billion Muslims
A law based on Islamic principals does not tolerate sexuality outside of wedlock. Hence, anything deviating from this norm is considered harmful.
Yes I know what the dominant interpretation of the law is, however I don't see how two men or two women sleeping together is a threat to society - other than you or other people saying that it is.