Do Foes of Gay Marriages Simply Fear Joy?

What a load of rubbish you have written!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Do you call yourself a muslim....no I mean a TRUE muslim who fears GOD???????????????????? Your comments are influenced by the non-believers!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Surely you must see that? You seem `educated` but only so far as to what you want to believe......this world is ruled by one and it is upto us mortals to obey as best we can.....you do not help a wronged person make more wrongs....or indeed ignore them.......instead you teach them of their misguided ways and show them the word of God.......direct them and help them to understand that this life on earth is short for your soul is the truth......what you do on earth will be judged in the Hereafter.....................DO YOU KNOT KNOW THIS? You may think that you`re being POLITICALLY CORRECT but to who`s rules and regulations? Certainly not to God`s? You allow the non-muslims to influence your thinking and go against the grain of what God put you on this earth for!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I was bornand raised in the west, I am NOT a fanatic in Islam and indeed I do not pray 5 times a day but I fear God and have him in my heart........I live amongst non-muslims, socialise and go about my daily life alongside them but my soul is my own and I will not be influenced by them.....I am no hypocrite or liar....no cheat or two-faced......when people ask for my opinion I give it in abundance and I do not care of whether I am `treading on toes` because my religious beliefs do not match upto their non-religious beliefs!!!!! I do not speak with offensive words whenI air my opinions...................I am straight to the point but my focus remains with that of my love for Islam and all its` fairness that people like YOURSELF seem to have faltered on.........what a crying shame that there are so many people like you who thinks that by `fitting` in with the non-religious people you have to `sell` your soul........when you die you die alone and your soul will be judged with no-one supporting your hand or patting you on the back.........you fought to marry someone you fell inlove with and so be it, we have all been there mate, but just because you think you conquered the narrow-mindedness of your families does not mean that you should be so open with your opinions on anyone marrying anyone.......................life is a test my friend and to lose your way is a very sad encounter.........................think about your opnions and what you are portraying into many societies around the world...........Islam is a beautiful religion, way of life, and those who are born to muslims parents are the most privileged.......so why do we take it for granted?..................because we do not fear enough and we are constantly influenced by the devil in many different ways.........................it is easy to do bad than good?....it is easy to believe the bad from good?............to be honest is like a reward? To be good should be the norm in everyone but the world is not perfect as we all know but if we bring God into our hearts each and every day that will come ouot into our actions and influenece the people who we meet and then the people who they meet, etc etc......a revolving circle......but it has to satrt with people opening their eyes and looking around at the world in which we live in and to take charge of the bad.........homosexuality may not be harmful to the people who are involved with each other but infact it is!!!!!!!! Commiting a murder is bad isn`t it? In the twenty-first century people are looking towards bettering their lives with more material gains.........replacing all reason of spiritual gain.....WHY? Because people are forgetting about God and instead listening to scientists and governments, etc......who are......mere mortal men!!!!!!! They are not powerful, they do not rule the world in which we live in, they may think that they do but God is the ulitmate force......God created man, not the other way round........Satan if the ruler of the evil side so the more man becomes accustomed to evil then good will never fall upon us!!!!! HOW FRETTING IS THAT? We are all God`s creations but we are influence by whatever is around us and it is upto our hearts and mind to pursue either good or evil!!! By taking on board both, you not only become a hypocrit but also a totally unfocussed bad judge of character........all these un Godly things do infact infiltrate society as their are now heterosexual people who feel empathy for the homosexuals..................a very result..........yes we have all heard of the expression `God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve`,......but this is true!!!!!!! God made us all for a reason and if we are going to allow the devil to influenece our lives then indeed to HELL we shall all go..................but as ALL God-fearing people know for this not to happen to us we must seek the only way to not be thrown into the fires of hell and the ONLY WAY IS GOD`S WAY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I have no idea why people do not understand the meaning of marriage. Marriage has no meaning without religion. Let it be Hindus, Muslims or Christians or any other religion. The religion asks you to marry and defines limits and rules for those. For example if Islam says that a Muslim can not marry a Hindu, thats it. there are no ifs and buts. If a muslim marries a Hindu, it is not a marriage, its adultry. So there is no reason to marry at all. Two of them could live together without it. mariage makes no difference to their relationship.

Marriages in civil law has to do with defining who will get what of ones property once one of the partners die or they seek seperation. As far as Gays/Lesbians are concerned there are no issues of legal or illegal children. So if they love each other why are they so much concerned about the property etc. of each of the partner. They can live together as long as they want. Why bother to marry? There are no restrictions for them to live together in western world, its only that they cant marry. And again no religion accepts gay marriage, so marriage is a hollow word in such a case anyway.

sohail.

=== Interact Filtered ===
view this users filtered interacts

Your comment
“If you believe your religion doesn`t permit gay marriage, then simply don`t marry a person of your own sex. End of story. Why would you wish to impose this standard on people who believe that religion, in their interpretation, does not exclude same-sex marriages?”



One should not impose on others what he or she believes. True and I agree with you on this issue. However if one follows a religion then he or she is expected to follow it completely. Partially following a religion is akin to not following a religion at all. This is similar to doing half of the office work and leaving the rest. Rest assured you will get fired soon.

Being a Muslim I feel easy talking about Islamic teachings. Quran has two type of verses. The first ones are called “Muhkamats” and the later are called “mutashabehats.” Muhkamats are the codes of life revealed by Allah that are clear in nature like do not lie, do not gamble, do not intoxicate etc. Muhkamats do not need interpretations, as they are clearly revealed in Quran. Mutashabehats on the other hand are the verses that need to be interpreted in the context of their revelation.

Same sex marriages falls under the category of Muhkamats and need no interpretation as they are clearly stated in Quran. If you are a Muslim then no one is imposing his or her beliefs on you. It is you who have chosen to lead your life in the way prescribed by Allah. Not following it completely is your choice but please do not blame others.

btw, just as a way of experiement to see how many actually read the arguments here before firing off attacks, I deliberately threw in some glaring contradictions. Sample, in #181, i wrote: ``2. Empirical data relating to cross-gender intergenerational erotic encounters (sexual or otherwise) doesn`t support the idea that it is harmless. It forMan-boy encounters. Look up Rindd Report on Google.``. I meant `harmful` instead of `harmless`, but obvoiusly, no one was reading with any desire to comprehend, enough to spot this inconsistncy.
In the same post, and pthers, I deliberatly misspelled ``Rind`` as ``Rindd`` to see how many would actually look up the said report and well, report that they were unable to find any info on it. (Google certainly doesn`t find anything!) Again, no one seems to have bothered. Like I said, who needs science and reason and empirical data when we have our prejudices inculcated at the bosoms of our mothers!

Romair:
Here you go!. Consider it a service rendered to an aspiring philosopher. :-)

Previous post contained link to American Psychologist (Journal of the American Psychological association) Abstracts--March 2002, Volume 57, Number 3
Only those interested in scientific treatment of psychological issues (as opposed to often traumatizing psychobabble emanating from the frenetic child sbuse industry) need visit.

Dost:
I think I concur with your definition of morality. I regret if I gave the imprression of discontent with your level of participation.
That said, (and you knew this was coming, didn`y you! ;-) ) maybe one day you can tell me how expression of a view can be ``commended`` even when one disagrees strongly with that view/position. :-)
No, am not waiting.
rgds,
PM

PM:
I am not a student of philosophy. Morality to me is based on individual values, determined by one`s upbringing and moderated by the cumulative learning and evironmental factors. Therefore, I have expressed my opinions based on my morality without any vigorous participation in the philosophical debate.

Dost:
Your suggestion that one `wait a few years` is appreciated for what it is-- advice.
However, in the context of the debate over the desireability of the age-of-consent laws (in most states), it has no place. And in the context of the morailty of the issue, it simply begs the question.
But thanks for your moderating input.

Urstruly, Romair:
Cat got your keyboards??
:)

Dost:
You make a point. However, please note that I said ``not limited``, not ``does not include``.
Vaisey, I don`t think love (true Boolywood wala pyaar :)) has any respect for calenders-- and neither should it! And therein lies the problem of course.
P.S. There are different degrees of `consummation` that might appropriate to different ages, don`t you think?

PM:
[Your question betrays a perception that my interest is limited to the physicality of the boy.]
In that case you would not necessarily be oriented towards `boys`. You would simply be attracted to a person who happens to be a boy. The society, and I, still would have the same kind of problems, but if your love is true (a la bollywood), you could wait a few years before the boy is an adult before ``consummating`` your love.

Romair, further to my last reply:
You write: “I have had long discussions with her on these issues. The affects of child sexual abuse on children is so damaging, that it is impossible to express it in words. I would put it as the next worst thing to actually killing the child. It can and does disturb the child psychologically, forever. One of the facts the psychologist brought out (with studies) is as follows:”
This is, with all due respect (to the actual studies as opposed to psychology-pandering-to-public-hysteria) pure Bull$hit-- even if you’re talking about actual abuse (you know, the coercive, against-one’s-wishes type).
It is really interesting how you are so quick to believe that psychologist friend of yours, and are seeking the help of Shrink Shankar on this too, while at the same time you dismiss a meta-study conducted by a team of physchologists and statisticians, has gone through nine-months of rigorous peer-review, and been published in the most prestigious, scientific journal on psychology in America.
Need I remind you of the Recovered Memory Syndrome farce just a decade or so ago, or the Satanic Cult Child abuse hysteria that gripped all of The Land of the Free (Free to palm bull$hit off as science, perhaps) twp decades ago.
One thing I will agree with you on: even consensual sexual activity as kidscan cause psychological damage to folks in places like the US. Small wonder, given the powerful way in which these phony psychological theories are given currency in what is, after all, the Land of the Perpetual Victim. I can relate to you a documented story of a 13yo, who, on insisting on defending his man-lover charged with ‘abuse’, was finally subjected to the ignominy of a rectal examination, with probes stuck up his arse to determine whether he’d been sodomized. As one of the more humane officers on duty remarked, “If the kid hadn’t been abused by his lover, he sure was by the authorities!” This should give you some idea of the absolute hysteria prevalent in that society, that needs new demons now that the Commies are kosher and homosexuals pretty much mainstreamed.
Since you’re so fond of argument-by-analogy, I invite you to imagine a situation where women are made to believe that being raped, or divorced renders them cheapened, in a devastating way. Heck, why imagine?—just look at your country back home.
“A high proportion of the people who abuse children sexually tend to have been abused themselves as children.”
If by the abuse, you are implying coercion or devious manipulation, then this is a no-brainer. WE don’t need psychologists to tell us that “children live what they learn”. (As an aside, I am beginning to see, increasingly, the frustration and annoyance that echoboom has with Westernized folks, who seem to need the word of ‘experts’ to decide on even the most obvious things.)
But I should caution you on a possible error you are making here: If the word ‘abuse’ includes all forms of sexual activity regardless of motivation, circumstance and consent, then you are saying nothing new at all. But more importantly, you have then, by your choice of definition, already decided on the rightness and wrongness of the issue, in which case, there is no need to put on any pretense of debate. You would be more honest, if, like Roohi, you simply said there was nothing to discuss, and like TAhmed, bid me 20-30 years behind bars where I can get all the rear-ending he secretly craves.
”In any case, if you feel justified in your actions, you should not have any problem in answering the question. And if you cannot answer this question, or do not want to, then maybe your actions aren’t as justified as you may seem to think
Thank you, Dr. Freud. Now, please tell me what actions it is you are referring to, the justification of which would be ‘proved’ by my willingness to answer.
Post script:
I sense a certain sense of prurience in all the ‘urgent’ questions about my past and my motivations. Or maybe it’s just poor reading skills. Or maybe both. After all, in the very excerpt that Roohi posted, there was this:
Other boys have entered my life, almost able to recognize and respond to a mutual need. The friendships have all been non-sexual, if what is meant by that word is genital non-involvement. On the other hand, they have been full of the erotic --full of possibilities, full of the promise of completeness, of excitement about the undiscovered. If they haven’t ventured into the physical realm, it is not for want of opportunity. Boys have been more than coy in expressing what they want. But I carry too much conventional moral baggage with me that takes away the spontaneity that is vital for fulfillment in that area. Presently, I suffer from a bad case of neo-Platonism: there is much form but no substance. You could almost say I draw boys toward me only to shut the door to further
intimacies.”