Islam,The Religion of Peace: Thread to remove misconceptions!

Mrfazee, read this carefully and try to comprehend. the idea of murdering someone for being homosexual is an abhorrent idea to practically every western person. Nobody cares what your primitive book teaches or what these backward governments introduce as law. To kill someone on the grounds of their sexual preference is barbaric, abhorrent and subhuman.

If people have been mistaken about islam prescribing the execution of gays then lets hear your argument, But if all you can do is defend these actions then all criticism of islam is valid and no misconceptions are able to be removed.

The REASON people consider it to be a religion of violence, bigotry and hatred is specifically BECAUSE it prescribes the punishment of execution for the "crime" of having a private life.

 

I am not going to change what islam teaches and present it to you so you are happy because you find it not right to punish homosexuals! That is not why i started this thread!

The bible says to do the same! You may not like it but religion teaches that!

I THINK ALL OF YOU ARE AVOIDING WHAT I AM ASKING YOU, TO ASK MORE ABOUT ISLAM AND IF YOU WANT ME TO EXPLAIN WHY IT IS CORRECT TO ORDER THE EXECUTION OF HOMOS BY THE STATE THEN I AM READY TO ARGUE BUT WHAT I DONT WANT IS BASELESS ARGUEMENTS

 

Possibly because you already have enough of them.

Trust me, the best thing you could do to convince us Islam is peaceful is to convince us you're typing this from Tel Aviv and just want us to think Muslims have serious issues.

 

I'm not asking you to change it, I'm asking you stop pretending that we have "misconceptions" when you have freely admitted that islam teaches the exact thing which we find abhorrent, disgusting and barbaric.

1. I find the execution of homosexuals to be absolutely disgusting.
2. Islam teaches that homosexuals should be executed.

Where is the "misconception"?

 

All religions have some negativeness. Yes, the old testament teaches of killing homo's, but how many Christians or Jews do you now see are killing homosexuals because of religion? I say nil...

There is a old belief in Hinduism that you cannot directly see or touch your brothers wife, no matter what the circumstances. Even if she is drowning, you are not allowed to save her. Full stop!!! How many Hindus do you see following this practice now? Once again none...

Muslims believe in wiping out homosexuals off the face of the earth. How many Muslims practice or believe in this now? ALL (I said all, because if you do not believe in what the koran teaches, you are not a Muslim )

What I am implying that you have to extract, practice and preach the good things in your religion and cast out the bad ones. But that is not the case with Islam. You continue to practice the barbaric aspects of it and still call it peaceful. What I can simply conclude from this is that Muslims are dump to be not able to differentiate between what is good and what is evil. Just because a plagiarized source says so just not justify the actions.

And don't run away from the facts. This issue needs to be discussed to the point of resolution because it contradicts your statements as Islam being a peaceful religion whilst it condones killing of homosexuals. Until and unless you prove beyond all doubt that

killing of homosexuals equates to peace,

we need to continue discussing this issue...

 

You do know one thing about Islam, which is that it orders the execution of homos, yes you dont have a misconception when you say that islam orders the execution of homos. But where you are wrong is when you say the execution of homos is disgusting. Maybe i could shed some light on that:

Homosexaulity has deadly implications for humans!
The scientific evidence supporting this assertion is overwhelming. Mr. Firehammer writes that “Michigan's statewide 'gay' newspaper, Between the Lines, reports the risk of anal cancer 'soars' by nearly 4,000% for men who have [intercourse] with men. 'The rate doubles again for those who are HIV positive.' Between the Lines admits there's no such thing as 'safe [intercourse]' to prevent this 'soaring' cancer risk ...” Even a publication devoted entirely to a homosexual readership is willing to admit that the disparities in disease contraction between homosexuals and heterosexuals are enormous. The Medical Institute of Sexual Health reported in 1999 that


- "Homosexual men are at significantly increased risk of HIV/AIDS, hepatitis, anal cancer, gonorrhea and gastrointestinal infections as a result of their sexual practices."
- "Women who have intercourse with women are at significantly increased risk of bacterial vaginosis, breast cancer and ovarian cancer than are heterosexual women."
- "Significantly higher percentages of homosexual men and women abuse drugs, alcohol and tobacco than do heterosexuals." It seems that there is a correlation between the choice to pursue homosexuality and the choice to pursue other self-destructive behaviors as well, since the initial barriers of rational and moral restraint to the deleterious undertakings of those individuals have fallen.

The harm posed by homosexual practices to quality and length of life is indeed broad and all-encompassing: Oxford University's International Journal of Epidemiology reports: "Life expectancy at age 20 years for gay and bisexual men is 8 to 20 years less than for all men. If the same pattern of mortality continues, we estimate that nearly half of gay and bisexual men currently aged 20 will not reach their 65th birthday." Gary Glenn of the American Family Association of Michigan comments on this data that, “judging by the number of years at risk, homosexual activity is up to three times deadlier than smoking.” Furthermore, homosexuals serve to transmit venereal diseases at alarming rates. According to Glenn, “The Centers for Disease Control & Prevention report that men who engage in homosexual behavior are 860% more likely to contract a sexually transmitted disease (STD), increasing up to 500% their risk of contracting HIV/AIDS. Men who have [intercourse] with men ‘have large numbers of anonymous partners, which can result in rapid, extensive transmission of STDs,’ the CDC warns… Another CDC study ‘confirms that young bisexual men are a 'bridge' for HIV transmission to women.’" If we might look back to the 1980s, and wonder how AIDS, which had first been known predominantly as a “gay cancer,” was spread to the general population, we will find the culprit: the misguided behaviors exhibited by bisexuals. A modicum of self-restraint and repression of such attitudes would certainly have mitigated the proliferation of this disease.

Furthermore, the very nature of the human organism as an entity whose properties have evolved over time will point to the harms of homosexuality. Evolution, as postulated by Charles Darwin in his 1859 book, The Origin of Species, entails a natural selection of those traits best suited to an organism’s reproductive fitness, or the ability to pass on its genes. Through millions of years of natural selection in favor of organisms with the capacity to reproduce heterosexually, the mechanisms of heterosexual reproduction have become effectively safe, of course, when not taking into account environmental factors such as STDs. As Mr. Firehammer writes, “The natural function of the genitals… is their use by one man and one woman for sexual intercourse. Physiologically, those organs have the exact characteristics required for carrying out that act successfully, including the fact that it is simultaneously beneficial, enjoyable, and harmless.” Evolution has not made the same provisions for homosexual intercourse, since it is irrelevant, if not deleterious, to reproductive fitness. States Mr. Firehammer, “The only way the genitals can be used outside the heterosexual context is in some way that contradicts their natural function and is both dangerous and harmful. For an explicit example: the walls of [a certain female organ] are several cells thick, ‘designed’ for sexual intercourse. On the contrary, in a common practice of male homosexuals, [an organ] is involved whose walls are only one cell thick, and easily damaged. This is not a sexual organ and has one specific natural function, the dispelling of waste. Intercourse involving [this organ] is an opposite, contradictory, and harmful use of it, and a totally abnormal use of the male [genitalia.]” It is, moreover, a practice guaranteed to be evolutionally selected against, resulting in shortened lifespans and immense suffering for those undertaking it.

The fysical harms of homosexuality, however, are not the extent of its damage. Even more fundamentally, homosexuality causes devastation in an individual’s moral life. As Firehammer contends, to have anything but a platonic love for another of the same gender is to debauch the very significance of such a relationship. Of men who share a high degree of friendship and values, he writes, “It is not possible that such men would be tempted homosexually… That kind of love does not allow itself or the values that make it possible to be sacrificed on the altar of whim or desire or passion, and that knowledge makes any such desire itself impossible.” How can an individual truly care for and value his relationship with another, if he simultaneously urges that other to commit actions deleterious to his health and inconsistent with the nature and functionality of his organism? Homosexuality is, furthermore, morally damaging because it substitutes hedonism and the pursuit of carnal gratification for reason, prudence, and calculated judgment. Psychologist Dr. Neil Whitehead of the National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality writes, “A strong case can be made that the male homosexual lifestyle itself, in its most extreme form, is mentally disturbed… Rotello, a gay advocate, notes that ‘the outlaw aspect of gay sexual culture, its transgressiveness, is seen by many men as one of its greatest attributes.’ Same-sex eroticism becomes for many, therefore, the central value of existence, and nothing else--not even life and health themselves--is allowed to interfere with pursuit of this lifestyle.” Embracing homosexual practices implies individual acceptance of a whirlpool of whim over reality, for reality is comprehensible only through reason, and, in a rebellion against reason, the homosexual cuts off his only means of efficaciously living in this world. It also implies an obsessive inclination on the part of the practitioners to block off any voices of reason that might inform them of the undesirability of their actions.

This is the reason for such slurs as “homofobia” directed by gay activists against anyone who disagrees with their agenda. Such a tactic is a prominent feature of the moral depravity that some homosexuals venture into in their gratuitous attacks on others. Writes Mr. Firehammer, “The purpose of vilification is not to eliminate disagreement by convincing argument, but to eliminate disagreement by silencing those who disagree… The method involves two different approaches: overt accusations and innuendo… The overt approach works by applying certain pejorative terms… Anything that expresses an individual's objective judgment of homosexuality is ‘hateful.’ Any opinion that suggests homosexual practices are less than ‘marvelous’ is ‘homophobic.’ Anyone who suggests individuals ought to be in control of their passions, not the subjects of them, is a ‘prude…’ Anyone who has a genuine concern for homosexuals who desire to free themselves from this addicting, self-destructive life-style and attempts to help them is ‘abusive…’ Innuendo is much more subtle and much more insidious. No specific accusations are made. ‘Possibilities,’ are merely, ‘suggested.’ One of the most common examples is the absurd ‘suggestion,’ that strong opposition to homosexuality is the result of the ‘latent homosexual’ in the opposer.” Surely, someone who has a healthy moral life will not engage in such smear-hurling and attempts to poison the well against the opposition.

Furthermore, Mr. Firehammer argues that many homosexuals are profoundly impacted by a pervasive sense of guilt concerning their practices. He writes, “’It is me,’ is not an answer to the question, ‘on what grounds am I justified in enjoying this pleasure; how have I earned it; why do I deserve it; in what way am I worthy of it?’ But for homosexuals, ‘it is me,’ is the only answer available. Unless they can justify that answer, every homosexual pleasure they enjoy is a source of guilt, a value unearned and a pleasure undeserved. Since that is the supreme pleasure of their lives, the dominant emotion of their lives is a supreme sense of guilt.” This sense of guilt is recognized implicitly by the practitioners, and is a fundamental motivator for some of them to seek to pre-empt any attempts to prove the harms of their practices. A life lived morally ought not be permeated by guilt, and, thus, it follows that the life of the homosexual is not lived in full morality.

The fact that homosexuality, like all behaviors, is volitionally chosen, does, however, offer a viable alternative for all those engaged in it. They are not fated to be self-destructive and can at any time choose to renounce the fysical and moral harms associated with their habits. This is the moral imperative behind my argument, to seek to persuade such individuals and the general public that the abandonment of homosexuality, brought about by the spread.

This once agian proves that the rules that were set more than 1400 years ago are in accordance with modern science, islam has a strict punishment to warden off people from such an act, the stas prove it!

 

Are you out of your mind? How on earth the above verse can be translated into giving permission to kill for apostasy. Above verse talks about life after death and punishment from Allah and not by humans. Read the Quran carefully first then try to preach it. There is no verse in Quran and Hadith that gives even a slight hint to kill for apostasy.

 

Fine then, your punishment system is draconian, I can move on.
What does Islam have to say about the identification of Allah as a male even though that is attributing human attributes to God which could be construed as a form of idolatry?
What is Islam's position concerning those of us who are not descended from Arabs, do not want any part of any middle eastern land and who don't want to practice your religion? Are we ultimately to be cleansed from the earth for our heathenism or can we expect to be left alone after you are done with all the gay people and Jews in your own yard?
What is Islam's position regarding a persons right to self-determination and choosing ones own spiritual beliefs through honest searching as opposed to taking on the beliefs of ones community merely to conform and avoid "punishment"? Oh wait I think that was answered all ready, you said they should be killed. Guess I am out of questions for now.

 

OK, I stand corrected. Killing people makes your religion look infinitely more peaceful than all others. Can I go to bed now?

 

mrfazee, because a practice may cause a rise in infections, does it justify killing homosexuals? And not all homosexuals practice what you just stated. (of course, you copied it from somewhere). And they don't go about killing and suicide bombing people. I could very well start a religion now and say that the first commandment of it is to wipe away all the Muslims off the face of this planet. Would you, as a Muslim, say its ok to kill us because a religion tells that? Would you call my religion peaceful?

What about Islam allowing husbands to have more than one wife? Isn't that unnatural. Apart from Muslims, the only things I know who condone polygamy are animals. I could very well equate the two .

 

If you believe that these claims are accurate, Which they obviously aren't, they can only be a reason for you to decide that YOU don't want to have a homosexual relationship, Not valid reasons for executing those who decide that they do.

You can't execute people on the grounds that they chose to do something which you personally find unappealing.

I thought killing homosexuals was bad enough, But the fact that you see nothing wrong with it is even more worrying.

 

i dont fear/care about homos...i dont share the view of the small minority in islam that chooses to execute them...in the VAST MAJORITY of islam being a homo will not get you killed...leaving islam will not get you killed...

im not muslim...muslim people take their religion seriously and if you brand the whole of islam as bad whils less that 0.1% of islam is actually "bad" then its your own medias fault for trying to make money by spinning the word "muslim" to something that suits your politics and the medias best financial interest...

"god bless our troops" said the priest to the US pilots flying over half the globe to drop bombs on the 3rd world......but those bombs exploded in to flowers so its ok for you to have a phoney self approved double standard...

pretend i wrote 6-8 pages of AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAAA!

you extremist LOL...you are truly blind with propaganda...if you lived in the desert and armed men came to your house im sure you would bruce willis their asses

im terrified of people like you i really am...

according to you logic the US citizens harbor terrorists who drop more bombs than all terror organizations combined and kill waaaaaaaay more civilians than all terror organizations combined so does this make US citizens terrorists?

sorry to mention the 10.000-s of bombs you drop on others...

 

Cool...

Patriarchal society. Arab society, just like most societies at that time, were male-dominated societies. So, it is but natural that God would be identified as a male though it is stressed multiple times, that God does not have a form. It is just a way of addressing Him. If you could find a better way, let me know...

Muslims respect Christains and Jews and regrd them as people of the book. All the prophets are respected, fro Adam to Abraham, from Noha, to Soloman, to David, moses Jesus Christ and many others.. Muslims love them all. Now, these all were not "Arabs", were they?

The first muzeniun of Islam's first mosque, was an African - Hazrat Bilal. Islam does not differentiate on the basis of colour or nationality, between rich and poor. It is here for the whole of humanity.

You're wrong. There still are millions of Coptic Christains, in the heartland of Arabia. That dispells your myth... You are free to choose, but once you enter Islam, you cannot opt out.

The God of Christains, Jews and Muslims is the same One God. God has sent messengers for every tribe, every country, and in every age.

 

How many of you have read any others religion holy books except your own?

 

The first thing you asked, Allah is neither male nor female. Arabic has no neuter, and the use of the masculine is normal in Arabic for genderless nouns.

The second thing is Islam is not limited to any race, color, or nationality, it is a universal religion and teaches that ALL ARE CREATED EQUAL, man, woman, rich, poor, black or white. Nor does islam force any one to accept the religon! Yes it does prevent you from leaving it, and teaches you to fight against those who fight it! In an Islamic society the Prophet (pbuh) taught that non-muslims have a place in society as long as they are not violent, abide the laws of the state and pay their taxes, they should be given justice and equality when it comes to the law. In an islamic court a christan man and a muslim man have the same law, and if a judge gives a ruling against a non-muslim on the basis of religion he will be subject a severe punishment by Allah. I myself am not an Arab, and i can be a complete muslim without being an Arab! Infact if the world was to endorse the islamic economic system not a single person would not have food because he/she cannot afford it. IF ANY MUSLIM KILLS AN INNOCENT NON-MUSLIM JUST BECAUSE HE IS NOT MUSLIM, THE MUSLIM WILL BE EXECUTED UNDER ISLAMIC LAW! If a Muslim were to call for the killing of innocent non-muslims he is a criminal according to Islamic law and is subject to punishment.

The third thing you mentioned: Islam allows infact encorages you to learn more about the world and different religions and if you were to learn Islam in a correct sense you would not find a single reason to leave the religion. When you accept Islam, the religion does not allow you to leave it, if you do leave it in ignorance then you will be subject to punishment.

Read the post i made regarding homosexuality (Above) Science proves that it is very harmful to humans!

I dont know how many have, the real question to ask is how many have read books of even there own religion?

 

No it doesn't. The rantings of a bigot claim it may be harmful to the individual, The unsupported, fabricated ad-hoc rantings of a bigot. You must see that your argument is weak when your defence is copy and pasted from a geocities page.

 

For those who are asking for citations here they are:

Firehammer, Reginald. “What’s Wrong with Homosexuality?” The Hijacking of a Philosophy: Homosexuals vs. Ayn Rand’s Objectivism. 2004. http://usabig.com/autonomist/hijack/hijackhomobad.html.

Firehammer, Reginald. “Repress, Repress, Repress.” The Rational Argumentator. Issue XXIX. December 25, 2004. http://www.geocities.com/rational_argumentator/repress.html.

Glenn, Gary. "Compassionate Society Should Discourage Deadly Homosexual Behavior", State Director, American Family Association of Michigan. March 19, 2001. http://www.afa.net/homosexual_agenda/ha031901.asp

Whitehead, N.E., Ph. D. “Homosexuality and Mental Health Problems.” National Association for Research and Therapy of Homosexuality. September 19, 2004. http://www.narth.com/docs/whitehead.html.


Thank you

 

All you done was find some other bigots who share your repulsive views. those aren't "scientists", They are morons. I could find an equal, If not greater, number of cretinous bigots who think black people should be executed, It doesn't mean they have a valid point based on "science", it just means any old arsehole can publish whatever shit they like on the internet.

You have made the classic mistake of looking for the evidence after you have formed your conclusion. Unfortunately for you your conclusion is so vile, bigoted and repulsive that you had to use the authority of a geocities page to support it.