Active TopicsActive Topics  Display List of Forum MembersMemberlist  CalendarCalendar  Search The ForumSearch  HelpHelp
  RegisterRegister  LoginLogin  Old ForumOld Forum  Twitter  Facebook
Advertisement:
         

World Politics
 IslamiCity Forum - Islamic Discussion Forum : Politics : World Politics
Message Icon Topic: It’s gay rights laws that are intolerant,(Topic Closed Topic Closed) Post Reply Post New Topic
<< Prev Page  of 11 Next >>
Author Message
crasss
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 01 April 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 516
bullet Posted: 23 April 2007 at 4:00pm
Originally posted by Israfil

So promiscuity is exclusive to homosexuals?

Definitely not.

I thought his homosexual promiscuity was striking, but to tell you the truth, it doesn't strike me that much any longer, after discovering that the social norm amongst teenagers in the West, is not any longer "dating", but "hooking up", that is, casual sex with strangers. Promiscuity has simply become the norm all across the West.


IP IP Logged
crasss
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 01 April 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 516
bullet Posted: 23 April 2007 at 4:21pm
Originally posted by Duende

Until you resolve your personal conflict over your previous existence as a Christian

Christianity spawned a widespread and firmly entrenched movement of (atheist) hate of Christianity. Most people in Europe and a large proportion of people in the US are just anti-Christians:

In Paris, over a forty-eight hour period beginning on September 2, 1792, as the Legislative Assembly dissolved into chaos, three Church bishops and more than two hundred priests were massacred by angry mobs; this constituted part of what would become known as the September Massacres.

As late as 1799, priests were still being imprisoned or deported to penal colonies and persecution only worsened after the French army led by General Louis Alexandre Berthier captured Rome and imprisoned Pope Pius VI, who would die in captivity in Valence, France in August of 1799.

It is not a personal conflict. I simply agree with the reasons that led the French and Russian revolutionaries to identify Christianity as the root cause for racism and religiously sanctioned social inequality and oppression.

To an important extent, you do have a point. Muslims usually have more respect for Christianity than the vast majority of the population in Europe.
Originally posted by Duende

you are consistently breaking forum guidelines here and WE shall all report you every time you do

Don't count on the Muslims to protect Christianity from its self-spawned criticism. This is not about Muslims insulting Christianity. This is about Christianity's very nature leading to its own destruction. Were the French revolutionaries influenced by Islam?

IP IP Logged
crasss
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 01 April 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 516
bullet Posted: 23 April 2007 at 4:29pm
Originally posted by Duende

your previous existence as a Christian

So, before adopting Islam, I could happily spit on Christianity, just like everybody else in secular Europe, but after, I would suddenly be required to respect it? Why? I don't think so. I just keep the established right to spit on Christianity, just like before.

IP IP Logged
Angela
 Christian
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 July 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2555
bullet Posted: 24 April 2007 at 8:44am

(side note to Israfil and others)

I'm not stating that homosexuals should be banned from adopting.  I'm saying that religious groups who believe homosexuality to be a sin should not be forced to adopt children to homosexual couples.  This would be the same if they started forcing christian adoption agencies to adopt to non christians, or (if there were a thing) muslim adoption agencies to adopt to non muslims.

Secondly, I completely agree and in a small way disagree with Patty.  No gay, lesbian or bisexual really choses to be that way.  Why would anyone CHOSE to be a pariah to society and the norm?  Its against human nature.  Our drive goals are to find community and acceptance.  There are many studies that have show the hypothalimus (spelling is off) of the brain is smaller in gay men.  Also, their biological reaction to pheramones given off by the two sexes are reversed from a heterosexual person.  It could very well be genetic.

Now that being said, is it a test?  Many people are tested in many ways.  Physical and mental deformities are trials to face in this life.  Its in a person's belief system that defines there point of view on whether or not homosexuality is a natural acceptable occurance, or a temptation and sin to strive to get past and work against.

Again, from a different thread.  Its God's right alone to judge.  People should mind their own actions and teach their children and set examples.  But, its not our place to judge others.

I do not believe however, that anyone should be forced to participate in something they feel is morally wrong.  Whether thats wearing skimpy clothing, riba, homosexuality, polygamy or birthcontrol. 

IP IP Logged
Israfil
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 September 2003
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3984
bullet Posted: 24 April 2007 at 9:06am

I love when the singling me out part Angela (even though you threw in "and others") but for the most part I agree with you. The only divide in what you say that people are justified in discrimination. Now I would agree that in general "free" people shouldn't be forced to do anything but in making a distinction between private and public business in matters of upholding constitutional law I'll say public businesses that profess a religious group or an association of a religious institution they should conform with the law and understand its significance. very easily one can make the same argument and say "should a racist, be forced to like other cultures?" We could say no. But consciously we think morally speaking people should be accepting of others because we are all humans beings.

Similarly I would say to any religious group that in order to maintain consistency with your own doctrine you must do things that you yourself (as well as what your religion profess) is wrong inherently. Now in matters of adoption it still amounts to discriminating against the person. Even if you say "well Jesus said love the sinner, but hate the sin, yet I don't believe in homosexuals adopting" still contradicts that Biblical philosophy! In a way you're still punishing a man/man woman/woman for who they biologically. so even if the government doesn't force you and you act on religious principle you are still contradicting yourself by disallowing homosexuals to adopt. Rather looking at their ability as parents you look at their sexual orientation which in my mind is unfair and on par with many of those racist in the past who thought it was acceptable to keep minorities from institutions of higher learning, of course, I'm not calling you or anyone else a racist its a simple point.

Now if you're on the private sector of business then that is fine whatever is your business and whatever you do without governmental assistance is your personal thing. Like BYU I really couldn't argue their policies because everyone who attends is on contractual agreement so there really is no dispute...I personally wouldn't go there anyway so it wouldn't be a dispute. what I can say about this issue is we are making slow progress but to make any progress it first starts with us mentally and ends with our actions.

IP IP Logged
Angela
 Christian
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 11 July 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2555
bullet Posted: 24 April 2007 at 1:48pm

But, the fact is the law allows gays to adopt, but for example, LDS Family Services only adopts to LDS families who hold valid temple recommends due to our religious belief about eternal families.

Our religious belief is that ever child has a right to the temple blessings, if it was a perfect world, all children would be born within wedlock to already sealed parents.  But, that is not the case. 

Homosexual couples, no matter how loving or great parents cannot be married, they cannot have martial relations within the bounds of religiously recognized marriage and they cannot be sealed together in the temple.  Therefore, under our faith, they cannot adopt through our adoption agency.  It defeats the whole purpose of our belief in the divine nature of the family.

Now...you mentioned "a way you're still punishing a man/man woman/woman for who they biologically" 

A man and a woman come together to produce a child.  Only one animal on earth creates life homosexually, that is a rare lizard that all are female and they create "clones" of themselves after simulated sex with each other.  This is not a biological part of humanity.  A man and a woman are needed to conceive a child.  I'm not punishing them for what they can or cannot do biologically, its a basic rule of nature.

Now, there are options, privately run adoption firms not affliated with religious groups, surrogate mothers and artificial insemination. 

I would like to point out, that its not just a Bibilical thing either.  You will find religious disagreements with the homosexual lifestyle in ALL 3 Abrahamic Fatihs, Hinduism, some Tribal (pagan) faiths and in some Eastern traditions.  The majority of faiths do not support homosexuality.  You have some native american faiths that talk of the twin souls and acceptance in some eastern traditions.  Its said the only true love that can be felt by one Samurai is by that of another Samurai. 

The matter is that I can say love the sinner not the sin and still believe that they should not force religious groups to adopt to gays.  Just because I believe a person to be good, doesn't mean I have to aid in their sinful actions.  There is a fine line between letting someone to their own devices and condoning their activities.  By forcing the Catholic Church in England to adopt to gay couples, they are forcing them to condone a lifestyle they believe is absolutely sinful.

There is a group of LDS men who run a counseling service for gay LDS men.  All of them are themselves gay and have been married to a woman.  They have taken a different road.  They chose instead of living in a homosexual lifestyle to do "the right thing" and enter a marriage.  They are open, out of the closet, and honest with their spouses.  They have families and deal with life daily.

There are many differences of opinion on what to do with separations of church and state and racism/sexism/heterosexism.  You are right, once whites and blacks could not get married.  That is slowly fading as a stigma.  Once it was acceptable for white christian families to steal native children from the reservations and adopt them.  Now its absolutely illegal for a non-native american to adopt a native american child.

Why do I bring that up?  Well, what's right?  Protecting the child's cultural and religious hertiage or adopting to anyone who can be a good parent?  A friend I have from an Infertility support group had a child placed with her through Foster Care, the parents rights were terminated and she was placed for adoption.  But because her mother was 1/2 Cherokee, my friend had to petition the tribe to basically disown the girl so she could be adopted. It took 3 years. 

Now, say a child's muslim and her parents are abusive and neglectful.  And like in so many cases the child is eventually taken from her parents and given up for adoption.  Should the child's faith be considered when placing them? 

What about the Birth Mothers who are willingly giving up their children?  A black woman has a right to demand a black family for her baby?  Why can't a Christian girl demand similar?  Why is it wrong for the latter and not the former?

In the end, if a gay couple wants to be parents, they should expect that they will have to go to services that are sensitive to their wants and needs.  Agencies that work with the law and with the birth mothers who are willing and wanting to give these couples a chance.  Gay couples have extra problems with adoption.  In many states, they can't both be on the adoption certificate.  So in divorce, one gets the child and the other has no rights.  They have to set up things in advance, go extra lengths in cases of custody and guardianship.  And frankly, in some states they cannot legally adopt at all.  (Florida is one I believe), meaning that if they adopt outside the state, its not recognizable in cases of separation, meaning the non adoptive parent has NO legal recourse.

Biologically, a gay couple is infertile.  I suffer from this all the time.  I'm told flat out by the law, that I have no RIGHT to a child.  It is a luxury.  If I have the money to adopt or seek fertility treatments, its all on me.  If a birth mother won't choose me, or I'm not stable financially enough for Foster Care and treatments fail.  I am childless.  Frankly, gay couples should have no more rights than I do.  I can't adopt from some Christian adoption agencies, because I'm Mormon and they don't accept us as Christian.  So, why should a gay couple be allowed to adopt from them.  Its about fairness.  Giving nothing to a group that you aren't giving to anyone else.

Gays have rights, they have options.  Others shouldn't be forced to give up their personal beliefs.  Its a system that frankly doesn't need fixed (except maybe custody laws and florida).  But, they have just as many options as I do.

IP IP Logged
Israfil
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member
Avatar

Joined: 08 September 2003
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3984
bullet Posted: 24 April 2007 at 9:59pm

Ok Angela I see where you are coming from and for the most part I don't disagree with you. but I disagree that you said "It's a basic rule in nature" we develop laws that states "only a man and woman are allowed to legally marry and have the benefits of this union." Nature didn't create the constitution nor the supplimentary laws that went along with it, we did. So to use the nature argument is moot and even if I were to consider that just focusing in on america alone majority of the laws are in relation to the Judeo/Christian tradition.

Majority of the Anti-Gay movement believe that nature prohibts same sex union. well, it is their free right to state such opinions even though I may disagree. By the way the lizard you mention I'm sure what lizard you refer to but it's important to note that there are far more creatures that engage in homosexual activity then just the lizard. there are primates (for instance some Chimps) engage in homsexual behavior. But I understand where you come from and like I said before  if it is a private institution they can do whatever you want but if its in a public sector then we must uphold the standards that this country supposedly was built on.

I still think that the view that "gays shouldn't adopt Christian children because of their lifestyle" is inherely discriminatory plain and simple. Regardless how you word it, frame it or even recite it from doctrine it is still discriminatory. Just because there are other religious cultures both popular and small reject homsexuality does not mean their believers are immune to having such tendencies. I know for a fact there are gay Muslims, Jews, Christians Sikhs Hindus, Polytheist, Pagans, Wiccans just a small amount of people in these religious traditions you mentioned there are gays in every single one of them.

But in the end the issue is resolved with a simple disagreement/agreement and eeryone has the right to believe what they believe and I respect that even though  I may disagree.

IP IP Logged
crasss
 
Senior Member
Senior  Member


Joined: 01 April 2007
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 516
bullet Posted: 25 April 2007 at 3:55am
Originally posted by Israfil

In a way you're still punishing a man/man woman/woman for who they biologically.

Is is so hard to accept the gender you were born with? Don't we all have to do that?
Originally posted by Israfil

I still think that the view that "gays shouldn't adopt Christian children because of their lifestyle" is inherently discriminatory plain and simple.

I have no problem whatsoever that gays adopt the children that are the product of gay sex.  If gays want to adopt the products of heterosexual sex, they can only obtain from us, to the same extent as they supply to us.

IP IP Logged
<< Prev Page  of 11 Next >>
Post Reply Post New Topic
Printable version Printable version

Forum Jump
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot create polls in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum

Disclaimer:
The opinions expressed herein contain positions and viewpoints that are not necessarily those of IslamiCity. This forum is offered to stimulate dialogue and discussion in our continuing mission of being an educational organization.
If there is any issue with any of the postings please email to icforum at islamicity.com or if you are a forum's member you can use the report button.

Note: The 99 names of Allah avatars are courtesy of www.arthafez.com

Advertisement:



Sponsored by:
Islamicity Membership Program:
IslamiCity Donation Program  http://www.islamicity.com/Donate
IslamiCity Arabic eLearning http://www.islamiCity.com/ArabAcademy
Complete Domain & Hosting Solutions www.icDomain.com
Home for Muslim Tunes www.icTunes.com
Islamic Video Collections www.islamiTV.com
IslamiCity Marriage Site www.icMarriage.com