Misconception clear up about Islam

Due to the media of just about everywhere, Islam has been seen as a very violent and inhumane type of religion. Which of course this is not true but due to the lack of knowledge that i have about Islam, what choice do i have? but because of osmosis, their fails knowledge has seeped into my brain and i am forced to believe in what the media says.
(Note: i am not here to speak badly about Muhammad or the Islamic God, i am here to clear misaccusations that i have about Islam.)

Here are the many questions i have about Islam.

1.) Please explain to me about the Sharia law, for have very negative opinions about this law such as homosexuality, the severing of the hand, beating of the wife, and rape victims.
2.) Would Allah consider Islamic extremists to be a disgrace to Islam or would it be an act of honor?
3.) What does the Quran say about non-believers, Atheists, and the spread of Islam?( i am some what an Atheists)
4.) The Christianity God is know at the "3-0 God" which is that God is all-knowing all-powerful and all-loving, does the Islamic God follow this 3-0 God?

(There are many more questions about Islam but cannot think of any on the top of my head, many more questions will arise)

in the name of Allah

اقتباس:

---

Due to the media of just about everywhere, Islam has been seen as a very violent and inhumane type of religion. Which of course this is not true but due to the lack of knowledge that i have about Islam, what choice do i have? but because of osmosis, their fails knowledge has seeped into my brain and i am forced to believe in what the media says.
(Note: i am not here to speak badly about Muhammad or the Islamic God, i am here to clear misaccusations that i have about Islam.)

---

The media often gives the wrong idea.You can ask about Islam in any place, anyperson

http://sphotos-f.ak.fbcdn.net/hphoto..._6408594_n.jpg

اقتباس:

---

Here are the many questions i have about Islam.

---

Welcome, you can ask what you want


Continued....

1

اقتباس:

---

1.) Please explain to me about the Sharia law, for have very negative opinions about this law such as homosexuality, the severing of the hand, beating of the wife, and rape victims.

---

Homosexuality is unacceptable in Islam.

The Qoran says:

Those who commit unlawful sexual intercourse of your women - bring against them four [witnesses] from among you. And if they testify, confine the guilty women to houses until death takes them or Allah ordains for them [another] way. (15)


And [We had sent] Lot when he said to his people, "Do you commit such immorality as no one has preceded you with from among the worlds? (80)


Indeed, those who like that immorality should be spread [or publicized] among those who have believed will have a painful punishment in this world and the Hereafter. And Allah knows and you do not know. (19




Does Islam allow wife beating?

Respected scholars! Does Islam allow wife beating? Some husbands are violent and they say that the Qur'an allows them to beat their wives. Is there any logical explanation given regarding men being allowed to beat their wives, as stated in surat An-Nisa', verse 34?


In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful.


All praise and thanks are due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon His Messenger.


Dear questioner, we would like to thank you for the great confidence you place in us, and we implore Allah Almighty to help us serve His cause and render our work for His Sake.


The verse you mention has been greatly misconceived by many people who focus merely on its surface meaning, taking it to allow wife beating. When the setting is not taken into account, it isolates the words in a way that distorts or falsifies the original meaning. Before dealing with the issue of wife-battering in the perspective of Islam, we should keep in mind that the original Arabic wording of the Qur'an is the only authentic source of meaning. If one relies on the translation alone, one is likely to misunderstand it.


Commenting on this issue, Dr. Muzammil H. Siddiqi, former President of the Islamic Society of North America, states:


"According to the Qur'an the relationship between the husband and wife should be based on mutual love and kindness. Allah says: "And among His Signs is this, that He created for you mates from among yourselves, that ye may dwell in tranquility with them, and He has put love and mercy between your (hearts): verily in that are Signs for those who reflect." (Ar-Rum: 21)


The Qur'an urges husbands to treat their wives with kindness. [In the event of a family dispute, the Qur'an exhorts the husband to treat his wife kindly and not to overlook her positive aspects]. Allah Almighty says: “Live with them on a footing of kindness and equity. If ye take a dislike to them it may be that ye dislike a thing, and Allah brings about through it a great deal of good.” (An-Nisa’: 19)


It is important that a wife recognizes the authority of her husband in the house. He is the head of the household, and she is supposed to listen to him. But the husband should also use his authority with respect and kindness towards his wife. If there arises any disagreement or dispute among them, then it should be resolved in a peaceful manner. Spouses should seek the counsel of their elders and other respectable family members and friends to batch up the rift and solve the differences.


However, in some cases a husband may use some light disciplinary action in order to correct the moral infraction of his wife, but this is only applicable in extreme cases and it should be resorted to if one is sure it would improve the situation. However, if there is a fear that it might worsen the relationship or may wreak havoc on him or the family, then he should avoid it completely.


The Qur'an is very clear on this issue. Almighty Allah says: "Men are the protectors and maintainers of women, because Allah has given the one more strength than the other, and because they support them from their means. Therefore the righteous women are devoutly obedient and guard in the husband's absence what Allah would have them to guard. As to those women on whose part you fear disloyalty and ill-conduct, admonish them (first), (next), refuse to share their beds, (and last) beat them (lightly); but if they return to obedience, seek not against them means (of annoyance); for Allah is most High and Great (above you all). If you fear a breach between them twain, appoint (two) arbiters, one from his family and the other from hers. If they wish for peace, Allah will cause their reconciliation; for Allah has full knowledge and is acquainted with all things." (An-Nisa': 34-35)


It is important to read the section fully. One should not take part of the verse and use it to justify one's own misconduct. This verse neither permits violence nor condones it. It guides us to ways to handle delicate family situation with care and wisdom. The word "beating" is used in the verse, but it does not mean "physical abuse". The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) explained it "dharban ghayra mubarrih" which means "a light tap that leaves no mark". He further said that face must be avoided. Some other scholars are of the view that it is no more than a light touch by siwak, or toothbrush.


Generally, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) used to discourage his followers from taking even this measure. He never hit any female, and he used to say that the best of men are those who do not hit their wives. In one hadith he expressed his extreme repulsion from this behavior and said, "How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then embrace (sleep with) her?” (Al-Bukhari, English Translation, vol. 8, Hadith 68, pp. 42-43)


It is also important to note that even this "light strike" mentioned in the verse is not to be used to correct some minor problem, but it is permissible to resort to only in a situation of some serious moral misconduct when admonishing the wife fails, and avoiding from sleeping with her would not help. If this disciplinary action can correct a situation and save the marriage, then one should use it."


Dr. Jamal Badawi, professor at Saint Mary's University in Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, and a cross-appointed faculty member in the Departments of Religious Studies and Management, adds:


"If the problem relates to the wife's behavior, the husband may exhort her and appeal for reason. In most cases, this measure is likely to be sufficient. In cases where the problem persists, the husband may express his displeasure in another peaceful manner, by sleeping in a separate bed from hers. There are cases, however, in which a wife persists in bad habits and showing contempt of her husband and disregard for her marital obligations. Instead of divorce, the husband may resort to another measure that may save the marriage, at least in some cases. Such a measure is more accurately described as a gentle tap on the body, but never on the face, making it more of a symbolic measure than a punitive one.


Even here, that maximum measure is limited by the following:


a. It must be seen as a rare exception to the repeated exhortation of mutual respect, kindness and good treatment. Based on the Qur'an and Hadith, this measure may be used in the cases of lewdness on the part of the wife or extreme refraction and rejection of the husband's reasonable requests on a consistent basis (nushuz). Even then, other measures, such as exhortation, should be tried first.


b. As defined by Hadith, it is not permissible to strike anyone's face, cause any bodily harm or even be harsh. What the Hadith qualifies as "dharban ghayra mubarrih", or light striking, was interpreted by early jurists as a (symbolic) use of siwak! They further qualified permissible "striking" as that which leaves no mark on the body. It is interesting that this latter fourteen-centuries-old qualifier is the criterion used in contemporary American law to separate a light and harmless tap or strike from "abuse" in the legal sense. This makes it clear that even this extreme, last resort, and "lesser of the two evils" measure that may save a marriage does not meet the definitions of "physical abuse," "family violence, " or "wife battering" in the 20th century law in liberal democracies, where such extremes are so commonplace that they are seen as national concerns.


c. The permissibility of such symbolic expression of the seriousness of continued refraction does not imply its desirability. In several hadiths, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) discouraged this measure. Here are some of his sayings in this regard:


"Do not beat the female servants of Allah";


"Some (women) visited my family complaining about their husbands (beating them). These (husbands) are not the best of you."


In another hadith the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) is reported to have said: “How does anyone of you beat his wife as he beats the stallion camel and then he may embrace (sleep with) her?”


d. True following of the Sunnah is to follow the example of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) who never resorted to that measure, regardless of the circumstances.


e. Islamic teachings are universal in nature. They respond to the needs and circumstances of diverse times, cultures and circumstances. Some measures may work in some cases and cultures or with certain persons but may not be effective in others. By definition, a "permissible" act is neither required, encouraged or forbidden. In fact it may be to spell out the extent of permissibility, such as in the issue at hand, rather than leaving it unrestricted or unqualified, or ignoring it all together. In the absence of strict qualifiers, persons may interpret the matter in their own way, which can lead to excesses and real abuse.


f. Any excess, cruelty, family violence, or abuse committed by any "Muslim" can never be traced, honestly, to any revelatory text (Qur'an or Hadith). Such excesses and violations are to be blamed on the person(s) himself, as it shows that they are paying lip service to Islamic teachings and injunctions and failing to follow the true Sunnah of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him)."






Allah Almighty knows best.


http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t195680.html

اقتباس:

---

and rape victims.

---

What is the ruling on the crime of rape in Islam?.

Praise be to Allaah.
The Arabic word ightisaab refers to taking something wrongfully by force. It is now used exclusively to refer to transgression against the honour of women by force (rape).


This is an abhorrent crime that is forbidden in all religions and in the minds of all wise people and those who are possessed of sound human nature. All earthly systems and laws regard this action as abhorrent and impose the strictest penalties on it, except a few states which waive the punishment if the rapist marries his victim! This is indicative of a distorted mind let alone a lack of religious commitment on the part of those who challenge Allaah in making laws. We do not know of any love or compassion that could exist between the aggressor and his victim, especially since the pain of rape cannot be erased with the passage of time – as it is said. Hence many victims of rape have attempted to commit suicide and many of them have succeeded, The failure of these marriages is proven and they are accompanied by nothing but humiliation and suffering for the woman.


Islam has a clear stance which states that this repugnant action is haraam and imposes a deterrent punishment on the one who commits it.


Islam closes the door to the criminal who wants to commit this crime. Western studies have shown that most rapists are already criminals who commit their crimes under the influence of alcohol and drugs, and they take advantage of the fact that their victims are walking alone in isolated places, or staying in the house alone. These studies also show that what the criminals watch on the media and the semi-naked styles of dress in which women go out, also lead to the commission of this reprehensible crime.


The laws of Islam came to protect women's honour and modesty. Islam forbids women to wear clothes that are not modest and to travel without a mahram; it forbids a woman to shake hands with a non-mahram man. Islam encourages young men and women to marry early, and many other rulings which close the door to rape. Hence it comes as no surprise when we hear or read that most of these crimes occur in permissive societies which are looked up to by some Muslims as examples of civilization and refinement! In America – for example – International Amnesty stated in a 2004 report entitled “Stop Violence Against Women” that every 90 seconds a woman was raped during that year. What kind of life are these people living? What refinement and civilization do they want the Muslim women to take part in?


The punishment for rape in Islam is same as the punishment for zina, which is stoning if the perpetrator is married, and one hundred lashes and banishment for one year if he is not married.


Some scholars also say that he is required to pay a mahr to the woman.


Imam Maalik (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:


In our view the man who rapes a woman, whether she is a virgin or not, if she is a free woman he must pay a “dowry” like that of her peers, and if she is a slave he must pay whatever has been detracted from her value. The punishment is to be carried out on the rapist and there is no punishment for the woman who has been raped, whatever the case. End quote.


Al-Muwatta’, 2/734


Shaykh Salmaan al-Baaji (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:


In the case of a woman who is forced (raped): if she is a free woman, the one who forced her must pay her a “dowry” like that of her peers, and the hadd punishment is to be carried out on him. This is the view of al-Shaafa’i, and it is the view of al-Layth, and it was also narrated from ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib (may Allaah be pleased with him).


Abu Haneefah and al-Thawri said: the hadd punishment is to be carried out on him but he is not obliged to pay the “dowry”.


The evidence for what we say is that the hadd punishment and the “dowry” are two rights, one of which is the right of Allaah and the other is the right of the other person. So they may be combined, as in the case of a thief whose hand is cut off and he is required to return the stolen goods. End quote.


Al-Muntaha Sharh al-Muwatta’, 5/268, 269


Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr (may Allaah have mercy on him) said:


The scholars are unanimously agreed that the rapist is to be subjected to the hadd punishment if there is clear evidence against him that he deserves the hadd punishment, or if he admits to that. Otherwise, he is to be punished (i.e., if there is no proof that the hadd punishment for zina may be carried out against him because he does not confess, and there are not four witnesses, then the judge may punish him and stipulate a punishment that will deter him and others like him). There is no punishment for the woman if it is true that he forced her and overpowered her, which may be proven by her screaming and shouting for help. End quote.


Al-Istidhkaar, 7/146


Secondly:


The rapist is subject to the hadd punishment for zina, even if the rape was not carried out at knife-point or gun-point. If the use of a weapon was threatened, then he is a muhaarib, and is to be subjected to the hadd punishment described in the verse in which Allaah says (interpretation of the meaning):


“The recompense of those who wage war against Allaah and His Messenger and do mischief in the land is only that they shall be killed or crucified or their hands and their feet be cut off from opposite sides, or be exiled from the land. That is their disgrace in this world, and a great torment is theirs in the Hereafter”


[al-Maaidah 5:33]


So the judge has the choice of the four punishments mentioned in this verse, and may choose whichever he thinks is most suitable to attain the objective, which is to spread peace and security in society, and ward off evildoers and aggressors.


See also question no. 41682


And Allaah knows best.

اقتباس:

---

2.) Would Allah consider Islamic extremists to be a disgrace to Islam or would it be an act of honor?

---

There is a difference between self-defense and terrorism
If terrorism is killing innocent people without reason, Islam is denied


Koran says

And do not kill the soul which Allah has forbidden, except by right. And whoever is killed unjustly - We have given his heir authority, but let him not exceed limits in [the matter of] taking life. Indeed, he has been supported [by the law]. (33)


http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t179414-3.html


http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t6786.html?langid=13


http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t32690.html


http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t69268.html

اقتباس:

---

3.) What does the Quran say about non-believers, Atheists, and the spread of Islam?( i am some what an Atheists)

---

I do not understand what you mean, anyone who does not believe Islam is an unbeliever

اقتباس:

---

4.) The Christianity God is know at the "3-0 God" which is that God is all-knowing all-powerful and all-loving, does the Islamic God follow this 3-0 God?

---

http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t8956.html

http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t196074.html

اقتباس:

---

(There are many more questions about Islam but cannot think of any on the top of my head, many more questions will arise)

---

Better to ask questions in a sequence

اقتباس:

---

such as homosexuality

---

Please define your Question better than that, Are you asking about Homosexuality or same-sex intercource ?

اقتباس:

---

( i am some what an Atheists)

---

What do you mean by that ?
Are you totally against the existence of God or Deity ? or you don't know whether he is existed or not ?

I am sorry for my poor description on the many subjects i have presented and i am thankful for your reply.
By non-believers i do mean that people who do not believe in the Islamic God but do believe in other Gods.
What does the Koran say about atheists? Would they be stoned to death or would they be forced to convert?
By homosexuality i mean the love between two of the same-sex such as marriage and sexual intercourse. would sharia law allow this, if not what would be the punishment and what are you view and this matter (feel free not to answer this if you do not wish to answer)
I would define myself as someone who believes in their own version of god, not the Christian God, or the Islamic God or the Hindu God.(If you would like to learn more about my version of God feel free to ask)

Here are my replys on your replys
On the subject of sharia's law i look at this as not religious acts but political standpoints. I strongly disagree with the severing of a hand when stealing, although it does set a STRONG example for the consequences of stealing i do not believe that a person should be incapacitated for the rest of his/her life because of stealing. For Example say that a wife in a village is deathly ill and doctor found a cure for her sickness, like many medications they are extremely cheap to make, but the doctor charges a ridiculous amount for the medication in which the husband could not afford. So the husband then goes into the pharmacy and steals the needed medication leaving behind all the money he has and a note that says that he will pay the rest overtime. the wife then takes the medication and is cured but the officials are seen at the property the cuts off the husbands hand even though we had good intentions for stealing and would sooner or later repay. i would see this as unjust.

On the subjects on homosexuality if the Islamic God knows that a person is going to be a homosexual then why turn him into something that will be forbidden in which what person will be punished unimaginably, this is the view that homosexuality is not a choice. On the view that homosexuality is a choice why would God allow this person to chose the path of homosexuality?

On the subject of wife beating would you say this is a very realistic view of the world we live in now? Anger is a VERY strong emotion in which we might act without thinking. Just "lightly punishing" a person is very hard to preform because of the anger the dwells in that person the might even have murderous intent. When i think of beating i usually think of physical harm but according to the Koran's definition of beating it is a light tap that causes no marks. I do not think this is realistic and consider light taps as petting (i am truly sorry if i offended you in anyway.)

On the subject of rape victim would the victim of rape be considered unclean and undesirable in the eyes of other men?

On the subject of Islamic extremest what would happen if the Islamic extremest were to kill people in the name of the Lord and the spread of Islam?

On the subject of the 3-O God Christian bible is much older than the Koran and their god having human attributes such as fatigue, having regret, losing possessions, and growth in knowledge. Maybe during the old days of the bible God was seen as having finite attributes so would this suggests that we humans are the gods of this world even though that the bible does talk about one God?

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
I am glad you came . I'm the one on YouTube by the way :) So let's see .

اقتباس:

---

Please explain to me about the Sharia law, for have very negative opinions about this law such as homosexuality, the severing of the hand, beating of the wife, and rape victims.

---

First of all , let me explain the meaning of Sharia . It is the singular of Shara'i which is the path or road , it can also mean the path of a running water . Sharia means the rules and laws God has ordered us to follow . So there are many situations and rules in Sharia which are taken from the noble Quran and the authorized sayings of the prophet peace upon him . Now , you firstly ask about :
1 - The punishment of homosexuality
2 - Cutting the hand of the thief
3 - Beating of the wife in a certain situation
4 - You want details of what is applied with raping or adultery
I'm giving you an advice , choose one subject to discuss at a time so that there is no distraction or misunderstanding , OK ?

اقتباس:

---

Would Allah consider Islamic extremists to be a disgrace to Islam or would it be an act of honor?

---

It depends on the definition of an extremist . Generally , we see an extremist as someone who attacks the innocent and civilians defying God's saying
((Fight in the way of Allah those who fight you but do not transgress. Indeed. Allah does not like transgressors.))
And we can go through this in details if you choose to discuss this . But on the other hand , some people find the ones defending themselves as extremists although they work with God's saying
((And if you punish [an enemy, O believers], punish with an equivalent of that with which you were harmed. But if you are patient - it is better for those who are patient.))
And notice that Allah tells us to be patient if the situation allows it . And I would like you to see a confession of the real number of the extremists among Muslims
http://www.loonwatch.com/2010/01/terrorism-in-europe/
http://i1.wp.com/www.loonwatch.com/w...size=502%2C502
Funny how they say all terrorists are Muslims , don't you think :)

اقتباس:

---

What does the Quran say about non-believers, Atheists, and the spread of Islam?

---

It says
((There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing.))
But if you're asking about the law of apostasy , we can go through it in details if you choose to discuss it .

اقتباس:

---

The Christianity God is know at the "3-0 God" which is that God is all-knowing all-powerful and all-loving, does the Islamic God follow this 3-0 God?

---

First , I must tell you that we don't say that God almighty has a characteristic unless he mentions it in his noble book or he reveals it to his prophet peace upon him . In Islam , God has 99 Husna names ( I don't know how to translate it properly ) and from them we find out that God is merciful , holy , peace , creator , forgiving , knowing , fair , truth , powerful , avenger , and many others . Now , when it comes to the term of "All-loving" I don't think it makes sense ! Because God said he doesn't like those who transgress . Unless I didn't understand what it means correctly .
So , as I said , we'd like you to choose one subject at a time to discuss it .
God knows best

:) nice to meet you in this form, i am truly grateful that you have shown me this site.
For the subject of sharia i want to talk about number 1 first which is about homosexuality. why is it wrong, what are course of actions for preforming homosexual acts.(any kind of act)

For the subject of non-believers and the spreading of Islam, in the Koran of 4:89 its says that "They wish you would disbelieve as they disbelieved so you would be alike. So do not take from among them allies until they emigrate for the cause of Allah . But if they turn away, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them and take not from among them any ally or helper." ( quran.com/4/89 ) is this the wrongly translated or is this wrongly understood? and what about 9:5 in the Koran "
And when the sacred months have passed, then kill the polytheists wherever you find them and capture them and besiege them and sit in wait for them at every place of ambush. But if they should repent, establish prayer, and give zakah, let them [go] on their way. Indeed, Allah is Forgiving and Merciful."( quran.com/9/5 )

اقتباس:

---

What does the Koran say about atheists? Would they be stoned to death or would they be forced to convert?

---

You're talking about atheists punishment in Islam
In this world, do not punish them

The Koran says

There shall be no compulsion in [acceptance of] the religion. The right course has become clear from the wrong. So whoever disbelieves in Taghut and believes in Allah has grasped the most trustworthy handhold with no break in it. And Allah is Hearing and Knowing. (256)


Day of Resurrection: God punish them

[Allah] will say, "Thus did Our signs come to you, and you forgot them; and thus will you this Day be forgotten."(126) And thus do We recompense he who transgressed and did not believe in the signs of his Lord. And the punishment of the Hereafter is more severe and more enduring. (127)

اقتباس:

---

By homosexuality i mean the love between two of the same-sex such as marriage and sexual intercourse. would sharia law allow this, if not what would be the punishment and what are you view and this matter (feel free not to answer this if you do not wish to answer)

---

Was answered here

http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t194596.html

اقتباس:

---

Here are my replys on your replys
On the subject of sharia's law i look at this as not religious acts but political standpoints. I strongly disagree with the severing of a hand when stealing, although it does set a STRONG example for the consequences of stealing i do not believe that a person should be incapacitated for the rest of his/her life because of stealing. For Example say that a wife in a village is deathly ill and doctor found a cure for her sickness, like many medications they are extremely cheap to make, but the doctor charges a ridiculous amount for the medication in which the husband could not afford. So the husband then goes into the pharmacy and steals the needed medication leaving behind all the money he has and a note that says that he will pay the rest overtime. the wife then takes the medication and is cured but the officials are seen at the property the cuts off the husbands hand even though we had good intentions for stealing and would sooner or later repay. i would see this as unjust.

---

Was answered here

http://www.ebnmaryam.com/vb/t194498.html

اقتباس:

---

On the subjects on homosexuality if the Islamic God knows that a person is going to be a homosexual then why turn him into something that will be forbidden in which what person will be punished unimaginably, this is the view that homosexuality is not a choice. On the view that homosexuality is a choice why would God allow this person to chose the path of homosexuality?

---

This is wrong, man is responsible for his actions

Wrong to kill one of them, and said that God is the one who led me to that

God does not help to do evil and wrong

Satan and self responsible for any wrong act

The Koran says

O you who have believed, do not follow the footsteps of Satan. And whoever follows the footsteps of Satan - indeed, he enjoins immorality and wrongdoing.And if not for the favor of Allah upon you and His mercy, not one of you would have been pure, ever, but Allah purifies whom He wills, and Allah is Hearing and Knowing. (21)

OK , so you chose to start with the homosexuality . I believe having one interlocutor speak with you would be better but I just want you to have a look at this .
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/15/he...infe.html?_r=0
http://americansfortruth.com/2008/01...mrsa-outbreak/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kaposi%...a#Transmission
http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/arc...9/aug/09082609
http://www.thelancet.com/journals/la...347-9/abstract
Sorry if the links are too many , I don't need you to read them throughly , just have a quick look .

How do you feel about America and its political idea of democracy and also their people in which 20% are homosexuals(including women). Do you think that America is a nation of sinners?

Dear vietazan,
welcome to our forum hoping that you find you desired objective here.
I have noticed that you ask so many questions without completing any of them, and ask new more questions, but non has not been finished yet. So please choose one topic only to discuss. After you complete it, start another topic not to be scattered.
So now choose only one topic of what you started. .

Great job brothers,
شمائل & نصر الدين
May Allah bless you both

i have skimmed though the articles and i have noticed that all but one mentions HIV. This virus will weaken your immune system making all other diseases and other viruses susceptible to your body. Granted that HIV are more common in homosexuals, they are also contacted in non-homosexuals due to the lack of protection. BUT all of this does not matter, what matters is that they are who they are and we should not judge them based on their preference in their mates. What they do is none of our concern as long as they are happy. Who are we to take away their happiness or who are we to take away anyones happiness? Homosexuality is not a choice they chose i am unable to explain this clearly but i will explain the best i can if you would like me to explain.

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة vietazn325

Who are we to take away their happiness or who are we to take away anyones happiness?

---

Dear vietazan it's not us who legislate, it's God's legislation.
So, He is the only one who guides His creatures' deeds.

7|157|Those who follow the messenger, the Prophet who can neither read nor write, whom they will find described in the Torah and the Gospel (which are) with them. He will enjoin on them that which is right and forbid them that which is wrong. He will make lawful for them all good things and prohibit for them only the foul; and he will relieve them of their burden and the fetters that they used to wear. Then those who believe in him, and honor him and help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him: they are the successful.

Homosexuality is against the nature that people were created with. This disgusting action is forbidden by God.
And the only accepted sexual relation is between a husband and his own wife, NOT any other relation whatever it looks like.
So with no regard to the harms behind the action, it's forbidden by God.
And whoever has this kind of relation is a sinner even the whole world have it!
A sin is a sin even the whole world commit it.

16|72|And Allah hath given you wives of your own kind, and hath given you, from your wives, sons and grandsons, and hath made provision of good things for you. Is it then in vanity that they believe and in the grace of Allah that they disbelieve?


Let's look at the situation from a different perspective, happiness is not the criterion on which the action is approved or forbidden
adultery happens between married pepole and both feel happy during it, but can it be accepted?!
If the sexual relations are not controlled and it's up to happiness and however has it as he likes, you will find a sick world of animals!!!
As incestuous cases, a man with his mom, sister, daughter ... etc will happen as dog families !!
wives' swingers , orgies, realtions between humans and animals, orgies; ...etc.
Those sick people feel happy, but no one can see it's acceptable, so God set strict rules to control this relation.

Happiness must NOT go away from the frame of the legislation

In the Koran, Alexander The Great (Dhul-Qarnayn) was seen as a great leader, but there is one thing that some people might not know about him and that was the fact that he was a homosexual or at least a bisexual person as well as the great warriors of Sparta. Many professors that i have talked about over the years agree that Alexander The Great was at least a homosexual. Everyone in Greece honestly did not really care if they were homosexual or not. It was not until the Christians came and burned down many of the records and declaring that homosexuality is a sin and should be forbidden.
If Alexander The Great was mentioned in the Holy Koran and homosexuality is forbidden then why was he mentioned in the Holy Koran with out any criticism about him being a homosexual?

HALT ! There isn't an evidence that Alexander was the one mentioned in Quran . No , after discovering that he was a polytheist scholars excluded this thought because Thu Al-Qarnain was a believing monotheist . To cut it short , the saying that Alexander was Thu Al-Qarbain is invalid . And what are we supposed to say about God

annihilating the people of Lut for their crime ? It is invalid to refuse the clear with the doubted .

My Apologies for the false accusations i have made about Al-Qarnain. I don't quite understand the question of "What are we Supposed to say about God annihilating the people of Lut for their crime?" Also if its is invalid the refuse the clear with the doubted, then how are we suppose to question anything, For example a lot people believed that the earth was flat but those who questioned this knowledge proved that the earth was indeed round. Without questioning the "clear" with their knowledge of doubting the "clear" where would we be right now? ( I might have misunderstood this saying as well, and if i did i apologies in advance:unsure:. )

During the ancient Greek era why was homosexuality so common and without harsh criticism?

I already said it would be better if the number of interlocutors is few but I'll just clear this up .

اقتباس:

---

I don't quite understand the question of "What are we Supposed to say about God annihilating the people of Lut for their crime?"

---

You mentioned the story of Thu Al-Qarnain and assumed that he was Alexander the great . It isn't really a problem if you thought so because some scholars thought he might be , but these are efforts done by them and may be correct or wrong . When Alexander the great was found out to be a polytheist - they didn't know - they excluded the idea because it contradicts Quran . The problem is , you thought that since Alexander the great was gay - And I'm not sure if that's true or not - and that he was Thu Al-Qarnain , then Quran actually doesn't criticize Sodomy . That's wrong . Quran mentions the story of Sodom and its people and clearly says that they were doomed for their acts . The point is , do I look at the clear saying of "Sodomy is a sin" or do I go with something that LOOKS like it's against that saying ?

اقتباس:

---

Also if its is invalid the refuse the clear with the doubted, then how are we suppose to question anything, For example a lot people believed that the earth was flat but those who questioned this knowledge proved that the earth was indeed round.

---

Excuse me , what does this have to do with what I told you ? And no , it's a huge difference here . Those who doubted that the Earth was flat had evidences it was a sphere . They didn't doubt it JUST for doubt . But on the other hand , saying that Earth was flat was also something which needed proof . As I know , most have said that Earth which is "Ground" is flat as wee see , but when it comes to the whole planet they used to say "God knows" . Am I clear ?

اقتباس:

---

During the ancient Greek era why was homosexuality so common and without harsh criticism?

---

Pardon , but this isn't an excuse ! Saying that something is right just because people agree to it is invalid . If so , then why object on punishment for homosexuality since people in the Islamic world agree to it ? Or did I get it wrong ?

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

. The problem is , you thought that since Alexander the great was gay - And I'm not sure if that's true or not - and that he was Thu Al-Qarnain , then Quran actually doesn't criticize Sodomy .

---

This is not what i meant, i thought if Alexander the Great was mentioned in the holy Koran and he was not criticized for being gay, then why does the holy Koran talked about Sodomy as a sin when Alexander the Great was mentioned in the holy Koran and described as a great leader but might have possibly had relations with Hephaestion. What I'm saying is that why does the holy Koran talk so highly about a homosexual when the holy Koran says that Sodomy is a sin in which Alexander the Great possibly committed this sin. This argument is now invalid because i wrongly accused Thu Al-Qarnayn as Alexander the Great.

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

Those who doubted that the Earth was flat had evidences it was a sphere . They didn't doubt it JUST for doubt . But on the other hand , saying that Earth was flat was also something which needed proof . As I know , most have said that Earth which is "Ground" is flat as wee see , but when it comes to the whole planet they used to say "God knows" . Am I clear ?

---

As Humans, we tend to believe what we see; such as the earth being flat because it looks flat or the sun revolves around us because it looks like it revolves. The church was so sure of this fact that they even put it in the bible. but there are those who doubted this "fact" not just because they want to go against society or anything but because they found evidence to prove this "fact" wrong. So everyone thought that the earth was flat and the sun revolved around the earth because seeing is believing, and everyone believed this "fact" making it a "Clear Fact" but Copernicus and Galileo doubted this fact because they have evidence to doubt their fact. (hopefully i did not confuse you) so I'm not doubting homosexuality a sin because I'm just doubting it, I'm trying to persuade you that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality with the evidence that i have that is why i am mentioning the Ancient Greek era.

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

Saying that something is right just because people agree to it is invalid

---

Saying something is right just because people agree to it is valid, this determines right and wrong. For example imagine millions of people agree that the night sky happens because the night god killed the sun god, turning day into night and the sun god killed the night god, making night into day. With millions of people agreeing to this "logic" it must be true right? Yes because a lot of people agreed to this, a very sad but true world we live in. Now for a realistic example; Hitler convinced MANY people that Jewish people are bad because they are the reason that the Germans lost WWI and thus creating the holocaust(Of course this was not true). Why did he do this? because he made many people believe that Jews are bad. If saying that something is right just because people agree to it is invalid. Then the holocaust would not happen. Its a very unfortunate thing but if a group of people think its valid and a smaller group thinks its invalid, then the larger group over powers the smaller one.

So back to the Ancient Greek topic. As you might have herd Ancient Greek has ruled this world for many many years from 800 AD until 600 BC, That's more then 1000 years and there was nothing wrong with homosexuality until the Christians came and burned everything and declared that homosexuality is a sin. So my question to you is that why was homosexuality accepted for about 500 years minimum during the Ancient Greek era? (Note: This question only applies to the fact that God has been with us since the beginning of man.)
Even if the Christians did not burn down everything and the Greek's knowledge, culture, and everything else was passed down from generation to generation, would the world still think that homosexuality is still wrong? Remember Ancient China also accepted homosexuality and of course theses ancient cultures did have rules and regulations on homosexuality.

اقتباس:

---

Saying something is right just because people agree to it is valid, this determines right and wrong. For example imagine millions of people agree that the night sky happens because the night god killed the sun god, turning day into night and the sun god killed the night god, making night into day. With millions of people agreeing to this "logic" it must be true right? Yes because a lot of people agreed to this, a very sad but true world we live in. Now for a realistic example; Hitler convinced MANY people that Jewish people are bad because they are the reason that the Germans lost WWI and thus creating the holocaust(Of course this was not true). Why did he do this? because he made many people believe that Jews are bad. If saying that something is right just because people agree to it is invalid. Then the holocaust would not happen. Its a very unfortunate thing but if a group of people think its valid and a smaller group thinks its invalid, then the larger group over powers the smaller one.

---

According to what you just said , anything can be right since people agree to it . Rape can be moral if people say so , sex with animals can be right because people say so , killing can be right because people say so . My mate , this is no way to determine what's right and wrong . And if you want to take people's tolerance of homosexuality as evidence that it is alright then you shouldn't object since Muslims see it wrong .

اقتباس:

---

So back to the Ancient Greek topic. As you might have herd Ancient Greek has ruled this world for many many years from 800 AD until 600 BC, That's more then 1000 years and there was nothing wrong with homosexuality until the Christians came and burned everything and declared that homosexuality is a sin.

---

Again , what does this have to do with anything ? First of all . Can you really say that NOBODY saw homosexuality as a sin through the world ? You said Greece . That has nothing to do with it . If what you said is true then they are the same as the people of Sodom .

اقتباس:

---

So my question to you is that why was homosexuality accepted for about 500 years minimum during the Ancient Greek era? (Note: This question only applies to the fact that God has been with us since the beginning of man.)

---

I find it an odd question actually . But to answer you , it's because people have gone astray from the teachings of the messengers God sent . Here's a question from me : Why did the most of the world consider homosexuality as a crime throughout history ?
So to cut it short , I don't see what's your point in mentioning nations which agreed to homosexuality . If that's an evidence then the sun could be made of cotton candy if people say so !
I'd like to clear something up . It seems you're mixed between two things . There is a difference between people saying that something exists or that its characteristics are as they describe , I'm saying , there's a difference between that case and between people saying what's right or wrong . Even if all the people of the world say that the moon is full of gardens and rivers the fact remains that it's a desert . But when it comes to morals you're saying that right and wrong are defined by what people agree on . That is incorrect . For example , there are countries allowing prostitution and allow making organizations for it . There are countries allowing prostitution but don't allow organizations . And there are countries banning both . So how do we declare who's right and who's wrong ? As I said , people agreeing to something doesn't make it right .

Now , to the second part of my reply .
In Islam , having a fetish or desire for something wrong isn't a sin itself . For example , if someone thinks of stealing something but he backed down then he hasn't commit a sin . The sin is to DO the act . And saying that (it's someone's DNA or biological traits what makes him do something and therefore he isn't to be blamed) is invalid as well . Otherwise , psychopathics shouldn't be punished !

God knows best

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

Anything can be right since people agree to it . Rape can be moral if people say so , sex with animals can be right because people say so , killing can be right because people say so . My mate , this is no way to determine what's right and wrong. And if you want to take people's tolerance of homosexuality as evidence that it is alright then you shouldn't object since Muslims see it wrong .

---

Yes, Anything can be right since people agree to it. Just look at Hitler, he convinced people that Jews were bad and a lot of people believed him and thus killing six million Jew. Why did they not just stop killing the Jews at 500, 100, or even 50? and well honestly those people did not know the difference between what was morally right and what was morally wrong but they just kept killing and killing......why? Because they thought what Hitler said was true. But now today we know now that this event was one of the worst things that happen in human history. With this example numbers are always in power. One person cannot conquer a bear but with many can conquer and entire nation.( That's kind of how i see this world ) Yeah rape, sex with animals, and killing can be right IF the mass of people agree to this, it is unfortunate but this is the world we live in. It may not be right to us in our eyes, but in the MASS of people that do see rape, sex with animals, and killing as a morally right thing to do then what are we suppose to do? Look at the world today, there are many protests going on right now as we speak, you think a one man band will make a difference in these protests, absolutely not but with with 100,000 people yeah they might even rewrite history.

And yeah shouldn't object because Muslims see it wrong but i just feel that homosexuality is nothing to be ashamed of. Yes there are certain deadly diseases when having relations with the same sex, but when you are trying to pursue happiness and prosperity you do whatever you can to achieve the highest happiness and keep that happiness until death. With the world we live in right now.... why not? why not look for happiness, if that means being homosexual then so be it.

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

Again , what does this have to do with anything ? First of all . Can you really say that NOBODY saw homosexuality as a sin through the world ? You said Greece . That has nothing to do with it . If what you said is true then they are the same as the people of Sodom .

---

Its not country Greece itself but the people in Greece, civilians, warriors, philosophers, emperors. Yes, it is true that i cannot say that nobody saw homosexuality as a sin though out the world, but what i could say is that one of the greatest empires the world has ever seen tolerated homosexuality and also one of the oldest civilizations also tolerated homosexuality. That is almost half of the world(maybe a bit exaggerated) and this is before the time of Christianity and Islam . I do not know what other countries thought about homosexuality but if i had to make an estimate i would probably say that the rest of the world did not really care and that it was just a sexual preference, yeah some might disagree on homosexuality maybe even more then i thought, but if the Ancient Greeks and Ancient Chinese tolerated homosexuality then imagine what other ancient civilization thought about homosexuality.(Note: These civilizations were not yet exposed to the teachings of Christianity and Islam).

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

I find it an odd question actually . But to answer you , it's because people have gone astray from the teachings of the messengers God sent . Here's a question from me : Why did the most of the world consider homosexuality as a crime throughout history?

---

The answer to your question is that the reason why most of the world considered homosexuality as a crime throughout history was because the Christians declared this a sin and spread all of their teachings throughout the world. And now being gay is wrong. Christianity has influenced everything from what we eat, to what to say when we sneeze. I think that Christianity is the reason why homosexuality is considered a crime throughout the world now. That is my theory.

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

But when it comes to morals you're saying that right and wrong are defined by what people agree on . That is incorrect . For example , there are countries allowing prostitution and allow making organizations for it . There are countries allowing prostitution but don't allow organizations . And there are countries banning both . So how do we declare who's right and who's wrong ? As I said , people agreeing to something doesn't make it right.

---

Yes, there are countries that do all those stuff but this is related to government and people honestly don't really have a say in the matter(maybe a tiny bit), even in the USA. Just look at North Korea making bombs and starving their people, most of the world wants North Korea stop all of this but they are not doing anything just making more bombs.
For the question of declaring who's right and who's wrong i really don't know. I would like to say that it is the people who determines what is right and wrong but with this example i am really not sure. But there are examples where people agreeing to something does make it right.

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

Now , to the second part of my reply .
In Islam , having a fetish or desire for something wrong isn't a sin itself . For example , if someone thinks of stealing something but he backed down then he hasn't commit a sin . The sin is to DO the act . And saying that (it's someone's DNA or biological traits what makes him do something and therefore he isn't to be blamed) is invalid as well . Otherwise , psychopathics shouldn't be punished !

---

I do agree with you on that.

We are to God and to him we return !
My mate , your statements are shocking !

اقتباس:

---

Yes, Anything can be right since people agree to it.

---

When you agree to this thought , all the meanings of humanity collapse . It makes us nothing different from machines . No standards , no morals , and nothing to determine what's right or wrong . My mate , according to your statement , if the majority of your people want to attempt suicide and kill those who don't want to then you should just agree because it's the majority ! According to your statement , what's right today can be wrong tomorrow and what's wrong today can be right tomorrow . This is no way of living ! We are to God and to him we return !

اقتباس:

---

And yeah shouldn't object because Muslims see it wrong but i just feel that homosexuality is nothing to be ashamed of. Yes there are certain deadly diseases when having relations with the same sex, but when you are trying to pursue happiness and prosperity you do whatever you can to achieve the highest happiness and keep that happiness until death. With the world we live in right now.... why not? why not look for happiness, if that means being homosexual then so be it.

---

You break down your first claim with these words . Since you think people are who decide what's right or wrong , why go against it ? Since the majority of people say homosexuality is a crime , why go against it ? Why do you object about Islam deeming sodomy a sin since you say people are the ones to decide it ? We are to God and to him we return !

اقتباس:

---

Yes, it is true that i cannot say that nobody saw homosexuality as a sin though out the world, but what i could say is that one of the greatest empires the world has ever seen tolerated homosexuality and also one of the oldest civilizations also tolerated homosexuality.

---

And now you go back to the idea that majority is what matters , might is over all !

اقتباس:

---

That is almost half of the world(maybe a bit exaggerated)

---

TOO exaggerated ! And I'd like you to give us the sources of which you got all these ideas from . Although as I told you , just because Greece and China deemed it right doesn't MAKE it right .

اقتباس:

---

I do not know what other countries thought about homosexuality but if i had to make an estimate i would probably say that the rest of the world did not really care and that it was just a sexual preference

---

Evidence please ?

اقتباس:

---

yeah some might disagree on homosexuality maybe even more then i thought, but if the Ancient Greeks and Ancient Chinese tolerated homosexuality then imagine what other ancient civilization thought about homosexuality.

---

This is a logical fallacy , I still can't see what do Chinese and Greeks have to do with this . If you think that since the two greatest empires in the world deemed this act ok and therefore everyone else must agree , you go against your own words again . According to this , you shouldn't object on Hitler killing the Jews because Germany was the greatest force back then !

اقتباس:

---

The answer to your question is that the reason why most of the world considered homosexuality as a crime throughout history was because the Christians declared this a sin and spread all of their teachings throughout the world. And now being gay is wrong. Christianity has influenced everything from what we eat, to what to say when we sneeze. I think that Christianity is the reason why homosexuality is considered a crime throughout the world now. That is my theory.

---

With due respect , your theory isn't backed up by evidence and doesn't make a difference even if true . If it is , why object on Christians saying this is a sin since they are the majority ? Might is over all . Since they said it's wrong , it HAS to be wrong .

اقتباس:

---

Yes, there are countries that do all those stuff but this is related to government and people honestly don't really have a say in the matter(maybe a tiny bit), even in the USA.

---

Haven't you said the majority is the one to decide ?!

اقتباس:

---

Just look at North Korea making bombs and starving their people, most of the world wants North Korea stop all of this but they are not doing anything just making more bombs.

---

Well , since they aren't doing anything then they DON'T want this to end . Therefore , Korea killing its people must be moral !
God helps .

اقتباس:

---

When you agree to this thought , all the meanings of humanity collapse . It makes us nothing different from machines . No standards , no morals , and nothing to determine what's right or wrong .

---

I don't think he wants to say this; he is trying to claim that what people think is right and agree to it, so it's right according to them and their point of view.

Is this right vietazn325 ?

If not So Hitler have to be right killing 150,000 Homosexuals in Nazi Holocaust !!

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة الدعم الفني

I don't think he wants to say this; he is trying to claim that what people think is right and agree to it, so it's right according to them and their point of view.

Is this right vietazn325 ?

If not So Hitler have to be right killing 150,000 Homosexuals in Nazi Holocaust !!

---

Yes, This is correct. What is a plan when no one will support it? For example if no one supported Hitler then the Holocaust would not happen not. Would you still think the Holocaust would still happen if there was little to no people supporting him? It would probably be highly unlikely.

What my dear friend is looking at is the most extreme case in which it could probably happen IF people agree to it. And yeah it could happen like that IF we did live in a world where people would say "its okay to kill other people" or some other extreme conditions.

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

When you agree to this thought , all the meanings of humanity collapse . It makes us nothing different from machines . No standards , no morals , and nothing to determine what's right or wrong . .

---

Yeah, this could happen, but humanity is still here and will not collapse anytime soon, but in a world with extreme conditions like that i would assume that we would all be dead. But in our world, we do have morals and standards. I know its bad to kill, i know that its wrong to kick a baby, and i know that i should not run a red lights. And you would probably know that those things are bad to, along with everyone else reading this. If we all did not agree and it is okay to kill, kick babies, and run red lights then yeah humanity has collapse, every standard, and morals we have has been thrown out the window. We as humans know what right and what wrong besides controversial topics such as homosexuality, religion, science and many other more. Yes, humanity could collapse if what i said were to happen, but this only applies to extreme cases in which will probably never happen.

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

You break down your first claim with these words . Since you think people are who decide what's right or wrong , why go against it ? Since the majority of people say homosexuality is a crime , why go against it ? Why do you object about Islam deeming sodomy a sin since you say people are the ones to decide it ? We are to God and to him we return !

---

But there are more followers that believe homosexuality is not a crime. Recently in California, they allowed gay couples to marry one another. Support for gay relations is gaining ground about 50% of Americans do support gay marriage and maybe right now(unsure) half of the world would support homosexuality. But right now it is probably less then that, maybe 30% of the world or so. I never said to give up on your beliefs. Although if what you believe is out numbered by people that do not support your cause then all you can do is just convince people to support your cause and gain as much people as you can so they so can spread the word.
What your saying is that if the majority of the people do not support your cause and your the only one supporting it then might as well give up and join the party, this is not what i meant to say. If people did give up then convincing people that killing is good would be as easy as 1.....2.....3.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/p...ights/2479541/ (American Gay support)

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

And I'd like you to give us the sources of which you got all these ideas from . Although as I told you , just because Greece and China deemed it right doesn't MAKE it right .

---

http://factsanddetails.com/china.php?itemid=130 (China) (might contain 1 image that might be disturbing for some)
http://www.religionfacts.com/homosex...ent_greeks.htm (Greeks)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charle...b_1677851.html ( Native Americans )
http://reflectionsasia.wordpress.com...nd-homophobia/ (This one has ALOT of info.)
http://articles.timesofindia.indiati...ation-offences (India)
http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/homosexuality-iii (Persia)

Not only did ancient China and Greece tolerated homosexuality but also many other ancient civilizations

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

With due respect , your theory isn't backed up by evidence and doesn't make a difference even if true . If it is , why object on Christians saying this is a sin since they are the majority ? Might is over all . Since they said it's wrong , it HAS to be wrong .

---

None taken, i actually like it when people object to my theory hahaha and i very much enjoy this argument, you make very interesting statements that makes me question about my beliefs :p018:. Now it is true that the Christians did conquer the great Greeks but this is how i see every civilization; so imagine that you are building a giant tower and time after time you keep building higher and higher, as you build higher and higher the tower will get heavier and heavier and pretty soon the bottom of the tower cannot withstand the weight of the tower and it collapses.
The Greeks were already in a mess due to the constant wars with each other and was bound to fall and so the spread of Christianity was set. If it Has to be wrong then why did God allow homosexual acts during the ancient times for a thousand years or so? Would this suggests that humans were the one that claimed that homosexuality is wrong?

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

Haven't you said the majority is the one to decide ?!

---

Yes i did say that majority is one that decides but I'm not a very political man and i don't know how much influence the people have on the government. But i believe that here in the U.S our government is corrupted because of the power they have, in which we all know power corrupts especially when it comes to money. but look at Egypt, the people just won. They kicked Mohamed Morsi out of power and all because the people wanted him out, the people decided that they did not want him anymore and they got what they wanted.

اقتباس:

---

المشاركة الأصلية كتبت بواسطة نصير الدين

Well , since they aren't doing anything then they DON'T want this to end . Therefore , Korea killing its people must be moral !

---

Of course they don't want to end it, they think that the more weapons they have the more powerful they become, although this is true the power of the people is more powerful then any weapon on earth. These people in North Korea are forced to bow and obey their "supreme leader" Whatever hes says the people will believe, they have no choice, its either believe or die. If their "supreme leader" says that its okay to kill people then they would probably think its okay since he said it. Theses people of North Korea probably see him as God, whatever he says goes.

اقتباس:

---

Yeah, this could happen, but humanity is still here and will not collapse anytime soon, but in a world with extreme conditions like that i would assume that we would all be dead. But in our world, we do have morals and standards. I know its bad to kill, i know that its wrong to kick a baby, and i know that i should not run a red lights. And you would probably know that those things are bad to, along with everyone else reading this. If we all did not agree and it is okay to kill, kick babies, and run red lights then yeah humanity has collapse, every standard, and morals we have has been thrown out the window. We as humans know what right and what wrong besides controversial topics such as homosexuality, religion, science and many other more. Yes, humanity could collapse if what i said were to happen, but this only applies to extreme cases in which will probably never happen.

---

I repeat the question : By what standards do you decide what's right or wrong ? Are morals changeable ? Can a crime become right tomorrow ?

اقتباس:

---

But there are more followers that believe homosexuality is not a crime. Recently in California, they allowed gay couples to marry one another. Support for gay relations is gaining ground about 50% of Americans do support gay marriage and maybe right now(unsure) half of the world would support homosexuality. But right now it is probably less then that, maybe 30% of the world or so. I never said to give up on your beliefs. Although if what you believe is out numbered by people that do not support your cause then all you can do is just convince people to support your cause and gain as much people as you can so they so can spread the word.

---

First of all , from what I see , 99% of the Islamic world - 1.8 billions - view it as a crime . That's almost 25% . I greatly doubt that those who support homosexuality around the world reach 50% . And if they did , I ask you again : What are the standards you'll use to say who's right or wrong ? Let's suppose they are really 50% , the other 50% opposes them . So how do we determine who's right ?

اقتباس:

---

What your saying is that if the majority of the people do not support your cause and your the only one supporting it then might as well give up and join the party, this is not what i meant to say. If people did give up then convincing people that killing is good would be as easy as 1.....2.....3.

---

Why not ?! If you're the only one then why go against 99.999999999999999% of mankind ?! What makes you think you're right and all of them are wrong ? Do you get what I mean ? Majority or agreeing to something is no way to deem it right or wrong .

اقتباس:

---

http://factsanddetails.com/china.php?itemid=130 (China) (might contain 1 image that might be disturbing for some)
http://www.religionfacts.com/homosex...ent_greeks.htm (Greeks)
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/charle...b_1677851.html ( Native Americans )
http://reflectionsasia.wordpress.com...nd-homophobia/ (This one has ALOT of info.)
http://articles.timesofindia.indiati...ation-offences (India)
http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/homosexuality-iii (Persia)

---

According to what I read about Persia , this was in the poetry of some individuals and not the whole nation . And as I said earlier :
"Although as I told you , just because Greece and China deemed it right doesn't MAKE it right ."

اقتباس:

---

If it Has to be wrong then why did God allow homosexual acts during the ancient times for a thousand years or so? Would this suggests that humans were the one that claimed that homosexuality is wrong?

---

Because God gives people time but he doesn't neglect them . I don't know what you may think of Christianity but in Islam God doesn't just annihilate every and any nation which does sins . He gives them time to repent AND he sends prophets and messengers to them may they repent . God is merciful , but if he punishes , he punishes with might .

اقتباس:

---

Yes i did say that majority is one that decides but I'm not a very political man and i don't know how much influence the people have on the government. But i believe that here in the U.S our government is corrupted because of the power they have, in which we all know power corrupts especially when it comes to money.

---

In this case , people are NOT the ones to decide but it is might . If one has might , he can do as he pleases and decide what's right or wrong . Therefore , it makes democracy a fairy tale . And I didn't want to get into politics because the forum clearly says - in Arabic - on the main page that politics are banned here since they are not of the forum's goals , but I just want to say that what's happening in Egypt is a farce ! The man didn't rule to begin with ! A lot went behind scenes and the rule of secularist was still going on . The people were deceived . And now they're paying the price ! All the Islamic channels were closed and the ones working in them got arrested just because they seeked to educate people . And what's with "They got what they wanted ?" Almost 50% of the people are supporting him - don't forget THEY elected him in the first place - but now they are chased by the army and police as if it's an inquisition . So as I said , it's a farce .

اقتباس:

---

Of course they don't want to end it, they think that the more weapons they have the more powerful they become, although this is true the power of the people is more powerful then any weapon on earth. These people in North Korea are forced to bow and obey their "supreme leader" Whatever hes says the people will believe, they have no choice, its either believe or die. If their "supreme leader" says that its okay to kill people then they would probably think its okay since he said it. Theses people of North Korea probably see him as God, whatever he says goes.

---

First , I meant that the Non-Koreans don't do anything and therefore they must agree with it . And again : Why do you think what he does is wrong ? The people accept it as you said so be it .