top
US
US
Indybay
Indybay
Indybay
Regions
Indybay Regions North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area North Coast Central Valley North Bay East Bay South Bay San Francisco Peninsula Santa Cruz IMC - Independent Media Center for the Monterey Bay Area California United States International Americas Haiti Iraq Palestine Afghanistan
Topics
Newswire
Features
From the Open-Publishing Calendar
From the Open-Publishing Newswire
Indybay Feature

Total Liberation Tour 2004

by TLF (tl [at] resist.ca)
:: Announcing the Total Liberation Tour 2004 ::
:: Announcing Total Liberation Tour 2004 ::
A nationwide series of benefit concerts and revolutionary conferences on state repression, political prisoners, and liberation struggles, coming to a city near you this July...

nc-flier.jpg"
by wild and free
Ditch the homophobes or expect resistance.

by just wondering
And the proof of this is?
by wild
The proof of this is the inclusion of Naziri and and the homophobic, anti-choice theocracy-lovin' goons of Taliyah. On the total liberation message board Naziri is given free reign to call people "sodomites and pro-sodomites" and threaten them with violence while pro-queer resistance messages are deleted.

This is too bad because there are some good people on this tour and it is a benefit for a good cause.

I encourage "sodomites" and "pro-sodomites" to show up and bring some extra liberation.
by question...
can you give us a link? I just went to the site to find what you were talking about and couldn't find anything.

Please give folks some reference.
by me
Most of the stuff I was referring to has now been deleted from the TL message board now but you can check out Naziri's Taliyah website: http://www.taliyah.org/

Here's a direct link to his anti-homosexual thesis: http://www.taliyah.org/articles/empirical.shtml

by me
Naziri has been taken off the tour.
by tkat
I like dead prez and think they are great producers with great politics. But really if you listen to the content, they are steppin up by standing on the shoulders of homosexuals. "Faggot this, faggot ass, dj get that white man's dick out your mouth."
For the real fans out there, are they ever challenged on this, is it ok casue they are stars and trying to appeal to gangstazs? Just turn a political blind eye even if it enforces the worst parts of patriarchal capitalism, if it has bump and some radical politics.
It is sad.
by me
just so people know
by _
that's true of tons of "conscious" hip hop. i'm not giving it as an excuse, just a fact.
by _
i think it is important to draw a distinction between homophobia and use of sexual terminology as insult.

use of sexual words like cunt and dick to berate people,
and use of sex acts to indicate humiliation or submissiveness is not necessarily homophobic. yeah, it may rub sex positive folks the wrong way that words having to do with sex have these negative slang meanings, but it doesn't mean everyone is a bigot.
by think first, talk second
>i think it is important to draw a distinction between homophobia and use of sexual terminology as insult.

Use of sexual terminology as insults *perpetuates" homophobia and misogyny.

by tkat
Like I said I actually like the dead prez, good production and all that, but I choose not to support them, cause it is just not one line depicting gay sex as a tool of submission or domination or whatever they are trying to say about other people in the music business. It is a whole attitude, calling everybody faggot who they don't like. "faggot club owner, faggot policeman, faggot gynacologist" I am not offended by the use of faggot, but I would respect them if they came clean and one of them was a faggot, or bi but identified as queer. It is this repetative trap of nationalistic power movements, they want to write off gayness or same sex attraction as being the deviance of the white world. Um, tell that to june jordan, audre lorde, marlin riggs, or any number of wickedly creative cultural queer revolutionaries.
I find it really pretty lame that white activists lap it up without, being very clear that they are not homophobic or anti gay. Just cause they generally have great politics, we can kinda turn a blind eye to this one thing that they aren't so great on.
Maybe dp have expressed something around this, I am sure they have been interviewed by tons of intelligent reporters.
by _
again, i'm not defending DP. in comment #1 i am pointing out that the problem should not be considered as just a DP thing. it is all over the place in hip hop. and it is not just something that the artists who express homophobia should address. as with any effort against hate, hip hop artists who aren't homophobic (i.e. the whole hh community) need to take a stand on it. white left/revolutionary interviewer types putting the screws to DP is not going to effect the change we want to see.
by _
Yes, words have meanings. You say:

"Use of sexual terminology as insults *perpetuates" homophobia and misogyny."

HOW? Don't just declare it, explain it. I disagree. But I want to know why you think you are right.
by tkat
hey someone just pointed out to me that DP, means double penetration. Meaning two guys and whatever gender sharin the one or two holes. What is more gay than that? God I love being queer.
by since you asked . . .
Use of sexual terminology as insults perpetuates homophobia and misogyny because of the way human consciousness is structured. We are who we think we are, we say what we think, and we think primarily in groups. The vast, overwhelming part of individual consciousness is culture. What language you speak, what food you eat, what clothes you wear, how you make a living, the shape of your family constellation, what kind of house you live in, how you view each of the people around you, the criteria for your routine value judgments, in short, almost everything you think about, is not unique to you, but shared consciousness. This is called culture.

We think in groups because we have been living in groups since long, long before we were even human. We are hard wired that way. It’s in our genes. If it weren’t, we never would of evolved. Those of our otherwise potential ancestors who had a genetic predisposition not to fit in, wound up not as parents, but as leopard turds. This is called natural selection.

Since we say what we think, we also think what we say. Since we think as groups, every think we say not only reinforces how we ourselves think as individuals, it also reinforces what others think. We are social animals. That makes us conformists. We are hard wired to want to belong to a group because our very survival depends on it. Only a minuscule fraction of a percent of humanity can survive more than a few days, at most a few weeks, on their own. Even they do so only with benefit of a knowledge pool accumulated by generations of our ancestors.

We want to fit in because we have to fit in. It’s that or die, or worse. That makes conformity a biological imperative. If they others dislike you enough, you will be cast forth into the Outer Darkness, and die a grim and hideous death, or at the very least lead a lonely, hellish existence. We are, by our very nature, social. Ergo, loneliness *is* hellish. Even the most reclusive among us avidly partake of culture every day of their lives, just by speaking the language, eating the food, and making a living.

We try to fit in by being like those with whom we want to fit. We act like them, dress like them, eat like them, and above all talk like them. By talking like them, we think like them. Thought and speech are not two different things, but two aspects of the same thing.

When you use a homophobic or misogynist slur, those who want to fit in with you will use it too. They will talk like you, so they will think like you. The over all result is that their behavior gets reinforced. So does your own, as you hear them speak. So does the behavior of everyone around you both. This interplay between the speech of individuals and the thought of those who hear it, constitutes the multiplicity of behavioral feedback loops that *is* human culture.

Our language creates who we are as much as we create what it is. We are what we do. We do what we think. We think, to a very great extent, what we say, and what the others around us say. Just as consciousness and speech are two aspects of the same thing, so too are consciousness/speech and behavior two aspects of a single phenomenon. They interact to such a degree that the lines that divide them are purely academic. They constitute a holistic gestalt. We’re all not only in it together, we *are* it. And it is us.

As long as you use words like “faggot” or “cunt” as pejoratives, they and the people who hear them, including yourself, will continue to reinforce, both in yourself and others, the the demonstrable delusion that there is something wrong with “faggots” and “cunts.” That’s reinforcement. That’s how reinforcement works.

Reinforcement is how homophobia, misogyny, and every single other human behavior, good or bad, perpetuates itself. When you pass along a meme, you are not thinking for yourself. You are being though for by the meme itself. That’s culture. That’s how culture works. Fortunately, we can also think for ourselves. That means that we can can, and do, constantly reshape our culture every day by choosing, consciously or otherwise, which memes to pass on, and with them, what behaviors to reinforce.

Not all memes are beneficial to our culture as a whole. Homophobia and misogyny have a great many negative effects, not least of which is the reinforcement of our propensity to allow ourselves to be thought for, and in an irrational manner, to boot. Homophobia and misogyny are irrational because they are not based on empirical data, but on a priori assumptions. A priori assumptions are inherently irrational. Irrational thought produces irrational behavior. Irrational behavior reinforces irrational thought processes. They become habitual. It is a feedback loop.

You become their slave. Wanna be a slave? Then think like a slave. Wanna be free? Then break out of the prison of irrationality. Stop talking like slaves talk. Stop thinking like slaves think. Stop telling others to think like slaves. Or else, stop complaining about the size of your cage and the length of your chain.

by _
i don't take isssue with what you wrote above. i don't think that _ALL_ sexual slang is homophobic or misogynistic.

for example, talking about getting fucked in the ass ("yeah, the IRS really fucks you in the ass") or putting someones dick in your mouth ("liberals are always sucking michael moore's dick") or telling someone to "eat me" ("eat me, you dumb motherfucker").

this is sexual language, but i don't think the use ALWAYS qualifies as misogynistic and homophobic. do you disagree?
by Re:um
I think such language does promote homophobia and sexism, but its also not something thats easy to correct. Since words that are deeply rooted in culture seem safe most people will always take these sorts of complaints to be PC without realizing that other views are propagated by the words.

One sees in most dictionaries:
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=niggardly
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?book=Dictionary&va=gyp
In the Mid West one hears "jewed" to mean ripped off and in terms of long term use its similar to those words but was made unacceptable when people acknowledged that it was propagating sterotypes.

To use "fuck up the ass", "screwed" or "fucked" as expressions to mean disrespect one is equating being on the receiving end sexually with being direspected. It is almost more misogynistic than homophobic since it is tied to an equating feminization with not being respected. Of course "fuck" is so widespread in use you wouldnt get any postive reponse if you tried to get people to stop using it; and compared to "fuck up the ass" its more tied to a sex negative view of sex as rape than purely a view of feminization as the ultimate disrespect.

All the expresions related to dick sucking are likewise propagating a view that sucking dicks is disrespectful and submissive. Expressions related to "kissing ass" are similar in that its a combination of an expression of disgust at a certain behavior tied with a view that certain sexual behaviors inherantly make one participant submissive to the other.
If at work someone refers to someone else as "kissing the bosses ass" you wouldnt really be able to tell if the person saying that had homophobic feelings since the word is in such widespread use. But, it does draw up images and if those images are found appealing by someone the expression takes on a slightly different tone (to those disgusted by ass licking or kissing, the image is one of a desperate worker humiliating himself to get ahead, wheras for someone turned on by the image it may have more of a feeling of them trying to get ahead by being a "teacher's pet")

Since sexual words used as insults are so widespread, use doesnt imply belief in the reason for the origin of the use of the word as an insult. But, one does notice that those that overuse such expressions usually have the belief. People who focus on words tied to fear of homosexuality are usually insecure with their own masculinity (sometimes as an expression of discomfort with repressed feelings of their own). People who focus a lot on sex negative words in their daily speach usually have feelings of mysogyny often tied to insecurity over their own sex life.
by Re:
When I say that "niggardly" carries an element of racism in its use, its different from gyp or jew. In those cases and in the case of negative sexual insults, the origin of the word was related to the problematic views. Some words have come to carry meanings due to similarities to other words. The use of Saddam (pronounced almost like Sodom) rather than Hussein is an example of this (that could also be tied to the pronounciation of Satan by the Church Lady on SNL at the time of the First Gulf War since the way Bush Sr stressed the syllables was almost an immitation and he was a big Dana Carvey fan). Whenever people dislike someone or something the words used to express dislike usually try to mix in other hatreds or phobias. One cant really get away from that even with words like idiot, moron, asshole, or the many shit related insults that exist in just about every culture.

Getting back to the subject of the previous posts:
Homophobia and mysogyny are such a strong part of teenage male identity its a little strange anyone would have to wonder if homophobic words used by musicians targeting that audience might actually be connected to homophobia or mysogyny.
by etymology matters
"Niggardly" and "nigger" come from different roots and have different meanings. They aren't related. They just sound similar, that's all. So do "grilled cheese" and "chilled grease," but which do you want for lunch?

by Re:
Saddam Hussein's last name has nothing to do with Sodom and Gomorrah or Satan yet the use of it as the identifier for him by the media (whereas everyone else has a last name used) is tied to the similar sounds of the words. Word origins dont always explain current use of words and why they are chosen. Even if a word is found to be uncomfortible to people due to false associations, the tendency for people to avoid a word out of a respect lends a new meaning to the word since it then becomes a statement that you wont bend to the pressure.

In the case of 'niggardly', a staffer of the mayor of DC was recently let go for the use of the word in a private staff meeting and was later reinstated when the controversy surrounding the firing let to a discussion of the word's origins (see http://www.cnn.com/US/9902/04/dc.word.flap/ ) The staffer has said he wont use the word again since people get the wrong idea from its usage. In response some right wingers will now make a point of using the word to be antiPC, and a new tone is added to the word where it makes an additional statement along with its original meaning. In addition to dictionary definitions every word and phrase carries with it associations to past usages in the media, etc... When Bush is criticized by European leaders for acting like a cowboy, how would you define what is meant; its an image tied to the Old West but also tied to a modern view of cowboy movies as tacky mixed together to create an image of someone who acts on gut impulses and is a little dimwitted.

English is an evolving language and its not technically possible to complain that a majority of the population misuses or even mispronounces a word since by doing so the word is itself changed.

On the question of homophobic language. How would you explain the reason for phrases like "the IRS really fucked me up the ass" and "If you keep doing that Im going to shove my foot up your ass"? You would never say "If you keep doing that Im going to fuck you in the ass". "foot in the ass" expresses violence wheras "fucked in the ass" expresses something closer to humilation. Its not that the phrases are set in stone and its just that the whole phrase has taken on the meaning since you are allowed to change the words and people will still understand what you mean. "Does the IRS just expect me to bend over and take it" and "If you dont stop blasting your radio Im going to shove it so far up you ass..." make sense to people. But you would never say "the IRS really shoved my tax returns up my ass" or "stop playing your radio so loud or I will make you bend over and take it". When you try to explain why certain phrases make sense and others dont you have to come to the conclusion that one set of phrases is tied to feminization and being perceived to be playing a feminine role during sex wheras the other is tied to a view of acceptable domination between men that has to make use of objects that are non sexual (as long as its a nonsexual object its ok for a man to threaten to shove it up another man's ass)
To homophobes, maybe. Not to everybody. Some people take pride in it.


by amerikan anarchist muslim
i am probably one of the few that actually knows and has a conversation with 'Isa. He is a white guy from the suburbs of Cincinnatti. He basically has a website and a small following for his interpretation of the return of Imam Mahdi, it is a small group with Islamic messianic ambitions. He believes he can interpret what the Mahdi will be like and what the Mahdi will say. I do not, then again I am a queer muslim. I agree with Isa on many issues but do not agree with his interpretation on sexual issues or on the rights of women. but to be fair, he is entitled to his beliefs and to be challenged when they appear to be homophobic and sexist. One issues of racial justice he is stellar, as is usual with most white guys that convert to Islam. He is married to african woman and they have a kid. Believe it or not you can actually hold a pretty good conversation with Isa on many topics and he will listen, but I wouldn't expect him to give up his religious interpretations, they are at it's root based in emotional longing rather then points of fact, it's religious passion not deductive thought.

When I saw him on the list i was surprised not because i know him to be a revolutionary muslim amerikan but because his organization is small and marginalized even within the Islamic Shi'a community.
by um
"To homophobes, maybe. Not to everybody. Some people take pride in it. "

Sure but if the expression is used in a negative sense it clearly is carrying the homophobic meaning. The expression could be reclaimed but it hasnt yet been as far as I can tell When people use the expression it is almost always in the homophobic sense (even when used by people who enjoy anal sex)
by TL message board reader
"the direct answer to your question - one without a pseudo-intellectual tirade of any kind - is yes, there are individuals opposed to homosexuality on the tour. though they will not be speaking (or rapping, as the case may be) about this on the tour unless directly asked.

we trust that just as you (seemingly) do not object to hearing malcolm x, mumia abu jamal, or h. rap brown speak out against the U$ government and against oppression in general (despite all those individuals stance against homosexuality), you will not object to ramona africa, amir suleiman, foeknowledge, or isa naziri speaking/rapping about and against the same injustices (despite their similar position against homosexuality)."
§?
by ?
Mumia abu jamal isnt openly homophobic, is he? Perhaps he used to be but I would have a hard time believing he still is today. A lot of radical left groups used to be openly homophobic (such as the CP, RCP, etc..) but now march for gay rights and have denounced the homophobia of their past.
by _
i accept that you can argue that all of these phrases (the sexual ones) are homophobic and/or misogynist. i still disagree, but even so, lets say you are right.

with what do you propose replacing their important function in the vernacular? i mean seriously, isn't any word that connotes a humiliating or controlling or dominant act going to be rooted in some kind of biogtry? if i cant say get his dick out of your mouth, i cant say stop kissing his ass, i cant say stop sucking up to him, stop being his bitch, what can i say?
by tkat
these people are all probably pro life too. One good check for me is checking my positions against the Christian Rights' , when there is cross over it is appropriate to look at how your beliefs are based on flawed patriarchal supremacy.
Seeing people who are otherwise incredible thinkers and passionate revolutionaries, fall into the traps of patriarchal reason, makes me actually respect people from the scientific/humanist perspective even more. I am basically against the sun gods, there goes the big three religions. They actually seem to be key to the worst that this world has to offer humanity. We have been seeing it everyday, from each of them, with god on all their sides. How can people be for this? Capitalism and colonialism just did pop out of a box of fresh new repression techniques. All these tools of control are linked. Look at how indigenious cultures both encorporated and embraced people of other genders and orientations.
Anyway, does the apparent anti queer perspective of all these "liberators", detract from their message? I don't think so. But know what you support. It would be nice to see, some queer representation on a tour that is representing itself as total liberation.
by well
"if i cant say get his dick out of your mouth...what can i say"

I cant think of many contexts where this expression would be useful. I guess in a threesome it might come up but otherwise its a little rude to interupt. I guess if wou werent homophobic but just against public sex "get his dick out of your mouth and get a room" might make sense but it seems a little prudish.
by primate ritual dom/sub behavior
Primates engage in ritual dom/sub behavior because, among other things, it minimizes intra-group violence. Some monkeys "mount" each other, not sexually, but as a ritualistic-heirarchical thing. Others, like certain of the apes, actually seem to construct social bonds with same-gender sexual expression, to mutual benefit-- including humans.

Humans, when we want to do the ritual dom/sub thing and minimize violence, usually resort to words. Isn't it funny how often those words come down to "fuck you"?

The further we get away form our roots, the more they show.

None of that is meant to mitigate how appalled I am, and every conscious person in favor of human liberation should be, at public expressions of homophobia-- or to be more precise, homo-hatred-- anywhere, let alone from self-professed "revolutionaries." We should have some standards. Sexual freedom should be one of them. It is a real good measure of true freedom, and of the repressive nature of a society.
by hmm
I find that men who call themselves feminists are often the most sexist and homphobic when push comes to shove. Women are often placed on a pedistal and idealized by some of the creeper "women are godesses" newage feminist types, resulting in even more patronizing behavior and often homophobic ideas of women needing men for some cosmic ballance thing. Even among political (non-newage) male feminists, its a matter of listening to women when there are protests and actions directly related to women but pushing them aside when "serious issues" arise. Sexism and homphobia among activists also show up in daily interactions and power relationships and isnt just a matter of men listening to women like Gloria La Riva and Medea.
by me
"It would be nice to see, some queer representation on a tour that is representing itself as total liberation."

There are some people working to make this happen for the Oakland shows. Any suggestions for speakers?
by relayer
As one of the organizers, I'd like ot state for the record that Total Liberation includes Queer Liberation. It also includes religious freedom and respect for a diversity of opinions.

MOVE & Islam both do not believe that homosexuality is "natural"; I strongly disagree, yet have Muslim friends. We live with these contradictions while struggling together to create a better world for ALL oppressed beings.

No one will be speaking out against homosexuality on the tour. That is not a part of the vision for total liberation, in my opinion. People can have their own belief systems as long as they don't try to force them on others. None of the Taliyah folks I know personally, including Foekus, have ever tried to do that. Maybe some Taliyah folks do, but they are not the ones who have been asked to be a part of this.

Also, for the record, Adam Naziri bowed out because of this controversy, in order to keep us all focused on the goals of this tour rather than divided over issues of people's beliefs.

Respect & solidarity to Move & my Muslim sisters & brothers, despite our vast differences in opinions let us still struggle togeher against this rotten-ass shitstem!

xYOSEFx
queer-positive atheist TLF co-organizer
by Cite or Retract.
" Islam ... do(es) not believe that homosexuality is "natural""

Leaving MOVE aside (i.e. the editing of the quote):

I challenge you to cite your source on this assertion regarding an Islamic line on homosexuality, or retract it.
by relayer
I copied that message from the TL board, so if you want a response from Yosef post your message over there: http://66.36.244.198/forums/index.php?showtopic=105
by just for the record...
Just for the record, some chat board is not an authority on Muslim belief or the teachings of Islam.

There is enough ignorance on the subject without generating it like that, okay?
by relayer
"I challenge you to cite your source on this assertion regarding an Islamic line on homosexuality, or retract it."

Well, it looks like you got an answer.

http://66.36.244.198/forums/index.php?showtopic=105

Yikes!




by tkat
I checked out that message board. Um yeah, nice to see the diversity of opinion. Nice reminder that my enemy's enemy is not necessarily my friend. I personally like to see people showing their hateful ignorance and logic based in religious hear say. Like these books that people base their lives on, haven't been perverted by the ruling classes to produce docile and subservient masses.
Is religion a lifestyle or culture?
by links
Al-Fatiha Foundation is dedicated to Muslims who are lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, intersex, questioning, those exploring their sexual orientation or gender identity, and their allies, families and friends. Al-Fatiha promotes the progressive Islamic notions of peace, equality and justice. We envision a world that is free from prejudice, injustice and discrimination, where all people are fully embraced and accepted into their faith, their families and their communities. Founded in 1998, Al-Fatiha Foundation is a registered US-based non-profit, non-governmental organization.
http://www.al-fatiha.net/
see also
http://www.amboyz.org/articles/Fatiha.html
and
http://www.wired.com/news/culture/0,1284,35896,00.html
and
http://www.advocate.com/html/stories/807/807_signorile.asp
by annoyed at hypocrits (annoyed [at] autonomi.net)
Islam is not unlike any other movement or entity. Anarchist heros themselves are sexist and probably homophobic. The International WorkingMANS Association (not for womyn) is a prime example of how even 19th century revolutionaries fall short on modern conceptions of social justice. Are you really trying to define modern Islam, both those for and against Islam, by 6th century definitions? Islam is an open religion with no fixed interpretation, there are no Imams alive and all the Ayatollahs have been proven again and again to be fallible frail old men. The Qur'an again and again says it is a book of guidance to those that "think" (fikr) are you all so arrogant to think you can define what belief or non-belief is to other people. are you just as arrogant as the non-believers during the days of the Prophet (SAS) that you think you are more righteous or "revolutionary" then others that believe. Both secular anarchists and non-secular Islamists are showing nothing but contempt for the principles of social revolution.

Allah says through a hadith qudsi:

"I have forbidden oppression to myself, therefore it is fobidden to you"

you do not need a revolutionary vocabulary to heed that guidance.

if you are really interested in what Muslims have to say about homosexuality from a non-homophic viewpoint then try browsing http://www.al-fatiha.net

by links
In Arabic Islamic history one find many mentions of homosexuality:

"The libertine caliph al-Amin (reigned 809-813), in particular, who patronized Abu Nuwas, was notorious for his fondness for the court eunuchs, and in particular the black eunuch Kawthar. According to a famous story, his mother attempted to lure him away from the eunuchs by dressing up the court slave girls in boys' clothing, bobbing their hair, and painting artificial mustaches on their faces.

The ploy succeeded in deflecting al-Amin's attention but also initiated an extraordinary vogue among the aristocracy for these "boy-girls" (ghulamiyat) that was to persist for several generations.

There is no evidence that these ghulamiyat were identified in any way with lesbianism--they were, after all, meant to appeal to men. A few of them, however, were said to have had lesbian affairs, as were some of the slave girls in general, particularly some of those who were trained in poetry and song and commanded high prices--and considerable prestige--among the upper classes.

Lesbian Love Poetry

A certain amount of lesbian love poetry is preserved, but though the anthologists, uniformly male, evince little bias against lesbianism, they also display strikingly little interest in it, and most of the female poets we know of are represented as fully heterosexual in both their lives and their art.

Ninth-Century Court Wits

Some years after al-Amin, under the caliph al-Mutawakkil (reigned 847-861), homoerotic poetry again found favor at court, amid an atmosphere of general hedonism and libertinism. Al-Mutawakkil also offered encouragement to the mukhannaths, passive homosexual male transvestites who served as musicians and court jesters, and particularly the celebrated Abbada, whose witticisms were faithfully reported by anthologists for centuries.

Other court wits devoted their talents to composing scandalous essays with titles such as Lesbians and Passive Male Homosexuals, The Superiority of the Rectum over the Mouth, and Rare Anecdotes about Eunuchs. All these works are unfortunately lost, but we find extensive quotations from them in later Arabic works of erotica, the earliest surviving of which dates from the late tenth century."
http://www.glbtq.com/literature/mid_e_lit_arabic,2.html


In Persion Islamic history one find many mentions of homosexuality:

"Homosexuality is a topic in the Qabusname (1083), a book of advice from a father to his son. The advice of the father is that one should exclude neither form of sexuality but try both. Sometimes one is better than the other. For instance, intercourse with women is deemed healthier in winter, with young men in summer. On the whole, intelligence is seen as a more important criterion than gender for choosing a lover.
...
The most important Persian poet to explore the love of young men by men is Sa'di of Shiraz. He was born before 1189 and wrote his masterpieces, including the Golestan (Rose Garden), near the middle of the thirteenth century. Chapter 5 of the Golestan is wholly devoted to the love of youths, most of them male, some female, and some impossible to determine since Persian grammar is not gendered.

In Sa'di's poetry, as in most Persian poetry, the love of a beautiful boy, the shahid or "witness [of beauty]," is the means by which the poet focuses on the Divine Beloved. This spirituality does not, however, make the poetic expression less sensuous. Sa'di also wrote a number of pornographic poems, in which he exhibits the same artful skill as in his more spiritual work.

'Obeid-e Zakani

The greatest practitioner of erotic satire is 'Obeid-e Zakani (Nezam al-din 'Obeid Allah Zakini), who died around 1370. Much of his work, which is partly in prose and partly in verse, has considerable literary merit. It frequently takes the form of short anecdotes or jokes, some of them quite coarse and of a type still repeated everywhere.

For example: "A sodomite says to a young boy, 'If you let me fuck you, I promise I will use only half my dick.' The boy consents. The sodomite rams it in to the hilt. The boy reminds him of his promise. The sodomite replies that he meant the second half of his dick."


Of more literary significance is 'Obeid-e Zakani's parody of the Persian national epic poem, The Book of Kings, which was written by Ferdousi (Abu l-Qasem Mansur) in the second half of the tenth century. One of the main figures in this voluminous composition is Rostam, who performs numerous heroic deeds and becomes a national hero.

'Obeid-e Zakani gives an interesting twist to Rostam's duels with his opponent Human, turning one of them into an erotic tryst. This poem thereby provides one of the few examples of adult male reciprocal sex in which mutuality is emphasized. When the heroes put aside their martial weapons and attack each other with their impressive natural equipment, they alternate being top and bottom. The poet concludes: "Know that eternal bliss is in intercourse, but only he obtains bliss who also gives."
"
http://www.glbtq.com/literature/mid_e_lit_persian.html

by more
Homophobia in modern Middle Eastern societies is recent in the same way as it is in Europe (it was only invented as a term in the late 1800s). Eunuchs and expressions of attraction for men exist throughout Islamic history and are referenced even in the history of the early Caliphs.

Those who argue one cant be a Muslim and gay are identical to Christian fundamentalists who say the same thing about being Christian and gay. They speak out of their own interpretation of the religion and dont represent all followers.

Interestingly even among some fundamentalists (like those who run Saudi Arabia) sex change operations are allowed in certain circumstances:
see
"Five sisters in Saudi Arabia are having operations to become men. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3814041.stm
and in Kuwait one sees:
"A Kuwaiti court has said a 25-year-old man who underwent sex-change surgery can be officially regarded as a woman. "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/3657727.stm

In less fundamentalist countries, one sees the same thing:
"The Egyptian law has upheld the right of Egyptians to change sex. Sayed Abdullah was the first Egyptian to undergo a sex-change operation changing (his) name to Sali Abdullah. She was expelled from AlAzhar University Medical School in 1988 who condemned her as a "disgusting imitation of a woman forbidden by Islam." However an administrative court overturned the decision and Sali was allowed to return. Later Sali married after working as a belly dancer in Cairo. Although frequently photographed by the Egyptian press she has turned down numerous requests for interviews explaining that "my hustband is jealous and has forbidden me to speak to the press." (Source http://www.ilga.org/information/legal - survey/africa/egypt.htm.)"
http://www.gayegypt.com/egcouroksexc1.html

“The most important thing that happened to Imad during his sojourn was that he met an Iraqi cleric who sent him to a gland specialist, who in turn established that Imad’s original gender was female and that he should recover his nature,” Hiba said.
“The cleric assured Imad that having a sex change did not contradict the teachings of Islam, which aim to serve the interests of humanity and ensure the happiness of people,” she said.
http://www.gaymiddleeast.com/news/article17.htm

On a side note:
http://www.gaymiddleeast.com/
http://www.al-fatiha.net/
http://www.well.com/user/queerjhd/
http://www.helem.net/
http://www.al-bab.com/arab/
http://www.bintelnas.org/09map/contents.html
http://www.iraniangaydoctors.com/
http://www.gayegypt.com/
are great sites covering queer issues in the region
(plus if you ever visit the region
http://www.gayegypt.com/propositions.html
could be very useful
"umrak marist gins jamai? ma tishtigelsh. ehna hancaddi waqt sayeed. yellabina!"
)
by well no, just one thing.
it warms my heart to see intelligent response here. al-hamdu lillah!! a thousand thanks for saving me this hassle.

we are everywhere, and always have been. islam is a progressive religion of diversity and tolerance.

spread the truth, not the lies!! and peace be upon you.

by funny innit?
It seems that TL took down the homosexuality & Islam thread.

What's up with that?
by adsf
While I think the inclusion of Taliyah in the liberation tour is pretty fucked up, I just want to point out that the proceeds of the tour are going to support the SHAC 7, a group of activists who are facing 20 something years in prison for animal enterprise terrorism, in essence for doing nothing more than running a website. They have all been indicted and will be going to trial in the future and could use all the financial support they can muster. So for those who are turned off by the tour, I would urge you to send donations directly to the SHAC 7. Information about their case can be found on the SHAC website at shacamerica.net, or you can read about it in the latest earth first journal.
Calling All Anti-Homophobes!, Protest MTV

Yes, i know you may have heard that MTV is making the first all gay network... But that's beside the point really. They have Xzibit hosting "Pimp My Ride!" They even featured him on Cribs!

Xzibit has notoriously anti-homosexual lyrics such as:

"Bitching so much
you should tuck your nuts
and dick between your thighs
and color your eyes
and wax your legs
and buy some bras and thongs
and go crazy in the night club for Sisco song."

As well he says the word "fag" repeatedly.

How could MTV dare allow him to host a show? Yeah i know, he never even is talking about such issues in the shows he's on. But still, we are the PC thought police right? We have to take a stand and make sure that nobody who thinks things we disagree with be allowed to do anything.

Oh, unless they're black of course. Perhaps that's why rap groups had been saying "Fag" for years and no homosexual advocacy groups protested them UNTIL Eminem came along. THEN everyone was lining up to say how he needed to cut it out, become more enlightened and give Elton John a hug.

Still black hip hop artists continue to talk the same way without ANY voice of disapproval being raised by the PC elitists.

i wonder why that would be? After all, aren't these the same predominantly white middle class lot who claim to be so anti-racist?

Whatever the reason is for the contradiction, it doesn't stop there. Back when Hardline came to the hardcore scene it held the exact same beliefs regarding opposition to homosexuality and abortion as did groups like MOVE and Rastafarians. But did MOVE or Rastafarians gain the disapproval of the PC, white elite? Of course not. Black people weren't expected by them to be "enlightened," they were not held to the same standards as was the multi-ethnic (but non-black) founder of Hardline.

Now, white elitist PC kids want to cry that there is someone speaking at the Total Liberation Fest who doesn't agree with homosexuality (besides Ramona Africa). It isn't that such a person (me, that is) advocates violence against homosexuals, nor any sort of action whatsoever. Rather, his (my), religious beliefs - like the religious beliefs of almost the entire world - are opposed to it. As well, this is based on 8,000 years of Chinese Medical tradition, and Yin and Yang theories of coupling.

It isn't a "God hates fags" philosophy, it is an ancient way of life that seeks to harmonize the Yin with the Yang. Men are Yang, women are Yin. There is simply no harmony in two Yangs nor in two Yins. Thus, we oppose such unbalanced coupling (as does most of the world).

But i'm not black, i'm a mix of a number of backgrounds, Jewish, Cherokee, Melungeon, German... All of these can be held to scrutiny in the eyes of the PC white elitists (the same who called the Democratic Party "The White Man's Party" in the 19th Century).

Perhaps if we had African members of our group speaking, even my wife, then we would be off the hook for believing differently than you; just like Tupac, just like Xzibit, and most of hip hop, along with MOVE and Rastafarians...

For the rest of this text read: http://www.taliyah.org/articles/homo.shtml
by tkat
"it is an ancient way of life that seeks to harmonize the Yin with the Yang. Men are Yang, women are Yin. There is simply no harmony in two Yangs nor in two Yins. Thus, we oppose such unbalanced coupling (as does most of the world). "
Give us all a break, this gender polarity theory is total crap. Although lots of people believe that gender is determined by genitals, people believe alot of stupid garbage it doesn't make it right. Do you actually know many real people? I know so many strong women, who are way more yang than the strong men that I know. Just like so much in life, things don't fit into easy boxes of black or white / right or wrong. All that generalization garbage is a crutch for the weak minded who need absolutes and the illusion of purity.

Chinese medicine like all philosophies/religions are tools that you can use to help you digest and understand the world and your place in it, hopefully from a place of harmony. Yin and Yang is not even really that important to the overall practise.


by damn
http://www.taliyah.org/articles/homo.shtml is pretty sick. The first couple sections are not that bad but it gets worseand worse to the point where I would definitely boycott funding any event benefitting the person who wrote that.

from

"Homosexual advocates claim incessantly such unsubstantiated things as "We all know of the many gay people who are killed by homophobes." But do we? Who are these people. "

to

"By this we can see that homosexuals are not only NOT oppressed, but they are disproportionately wealthy and powerful."

"the actions of certain male homosexuals in recent history are reminiscent of the worst SS butchers"

I have rarely seen anything by the religious right that is even half as hateful. The income thing is the base of trying to defend bigotted right-wing views under a veil of a class based analysis. Gay youth end up homeless in a larger percentage than the general population and any supposed statistics about income level is dealing with those who are openly gay which skews towards those who can afford to be open. If you have ever been to the under 21 gay clubs in the Bay Area you know that the stereotype of the gay community is a fabrication; in the Bay Area a majority of gay youth are people of color from workingclass communities.

Being bothered by the demonization of any community is not a matter of being PC. Bigotry is bigotry and fighting against it should be a top priority of any radical or revolutionary movement. Aligning oneself with homophobes is akin to claiming one should align oneself with neonazis racists just because they claim to represent the white working class ( see http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/British%20National%20Party to see how racist parties can use workingclass appeals to promote right-wing agendas).
by Naziri
"Chinese medicine like all philosophies/religions are tools that you can use to help you digest and understand the world and your place in it, hopefully from a place of harmony. Yin and Yang is not even really that important to the overall practise."

Yin and yang are not really that important to the overall practise of TCM? Are you insane or just stupid?
by micah collins
Why do you feel the need to dress your hatred up in a bunch of pseudo-scientific bullshit?

by taliyah blows goats
gaywads.jpg
Wow the sub-morons at taliyah even made a cute little ad for their latest homo-hating article. They really care! Maybe they can be the God Hates Fags for the younger, hipper, gun-toting revolutionary set!

http://www.taliyah.org/images/ads/gaywads.jpg

http://www.taliyah.org/ is a hate site against gay people but I am confused how it came up in dicussion. I dont think it has any relationship to anyone who will be on the Total Liberation tour. It shouldnt be a surprise that such hate sites exist, but since it does contain strange undated interviews with Mumia I am curious to know if the site is for real or just an attempt to demonize people by linking them to past statements out of context.
by x
Originally taliyah's founder, Nazi-ri, was a scheduled speaker on the tour. He has since dropped out of the tour. A few of the remaining musical acts are members of taliyah (foekus, amir sulaiman) and taliyah will be tabling at the event.
by Who'da thunk it?
president_-_renau.jpg
In case you missed it, the section below is excerpted from Taliyah's "Vanguard." Looking at this, it seems to me that all of our concern about Taliyah's anti-choice and homo-hate dogma was really far too limited. Consider the following:

====

"This is a movement, and a way of life that lives by one ethic - that all innocent life is sacred, and must have the right to live
out it's natural state of existence in peace, without interference. Under these principles, all shall be permitted to do as they please as long as their actions do not harm, in any way, the rights of others. Any action that does interfere with such rights shall not be considered a "right" in itself, and therefore shall not be tolerated. Those who hurt or destroy life around them, or create a situation in which that life or the quality of it is threatened shall from then on no longer be considered innocent, and in turn will no long have rights."

====

Am I too quick to pass judgment when I state that, having read the above paragraph, I really don't need to hear any more from these folks?

Is my interpretation too extreme when I read this as saying, "We are the arbiters of proper thought and proper action; those who oppose us will be enslaved and/or killed."

How can I make clear my utter distaste for this?
How about:
"They make capitalism look good by comparison."

by spelling flame
Actually, it's "God Hates Figs."
by think about it
I don't know if the person who said "pseudo-scientific bullshit" was referring to chinese medecine or not, but if they were it doesn't make them racist.

If you act like a totalitarian shithead (I've read your writings, you do) then don't be suprised if someone calls you a nazi. Just because your name is hebrew, it doesn't make them racist.

This shit is funny coming from someone who cries "PC! PC!" at people who point out his hatred.

The fact is you are spreading hate against people who have done nothing to harm you, people you will never know. No one is trying to stop you from believing whatever you want to believe. But do you want to help people or hurt people? Because you share your ideas in a hateful way and that leads to people getting hurt.
by X
If your people want to try to cure themselves of their homosexuality, more power to 'em. I'm down with chinese medecine but if someone wasn't, to insist that that would make them racist is silly. You can dislike or disagree with things from different cultures without hating on the people. You should try it sometime.
The problem is that those people saying this are not educated about Chinese Medicine but they say that it is "psuedo-scientific." That is their Western, RACIST prejudice against all things Eastern. So actually, yeah, it DOES make them racist whether they or you like to acknowledge that or not.
by asdf
"WRONG. We didn't say WORD ONE against homosexuals except that our religion prohibits it."

you people are so fucking backwards it is unbelievable. yeah, that person who posted that you are preaching your views in a hateful way was really off base. i cant imagine how anyone could accuse you of that when you post under the name KMS (Killing All Sodomites), or right articles justifying the murder of trans people. I think the fact that you were ever included in the tour speaks volumes unfortunately about the organizers of this conference, as well as the other tour participants if they had any clue what you were all about. Maybe next year they can invite Jerry Falwell. Taliyah makes his bullshit look mild by comparison.
by Talib
Man, this Taliyah group is really hilarious. A white boy and some other white boy "converts" to Islam that don't have any education in Arabic or Fiqh going around pretending to know what Islam teaches. As well as threatening to kill fellow believers. You think Saudis are munfiqin when your very ideology is one big nifaq (hypocrisy). Al hamdilillah that you belong to a marginalized movement which has no following amongst Muslims, well except maybe 20 people spread around the world. It does show the ignorance of westerners about Islam and the many different Islamic groups that practice a revolutionary vision in this world. Taliyah is nothing more than a vanguardist entity that follows it's own egotistical wims rather then the Holy Qur'an. Enjoy your fifteen minutes of fame amongst the radical scene, it is all your going to get. So Adam are you going to karate chop me, a Muslim, for disagreeing with you and your positions. Is that your best answer? Your nothing but a fascist yourself and a joke.

by Dawud
The funny thing is that Talib things that white skin or not has anything to do with Islam. It shows his extreme ignorance of his own Din. Aside from that, the lame accusation that the majority of the Taliyah al-Mahdi are "white" is absolute bullshit. The founder is hispanic, most members are African American, African Brazilian, Pakistani, Irani, Arab, and Chinese. The number of "whites" in the group are a small section.

It wasn't until homosexuals and their advocates started threatening our membership with violence and threatened to shut down the TL tour that ANY articles on homosexuality appeared.

As for anyone making a claim that we don't have knowledge of Fiqh, that's simply idle speculation. Knowledge of fiqh is quite easy to come by. Maybe you should take your ilm al-fiqh issue up with 99.9% of Sunni Imams, since most of them likely cannot even speak Arabic.

al-Fatiha's and Talib's weak claims at there being justification for homosexuality within the Din al-Islam in the Qur'an or ahadith are just that, weak. They usually make the claim that the reason that Sodom and Gommorah were destroyed was because they raped men in passing caravans... however, logic demands that you address such a claim by looking directly into the text of the Qur'an... NO WHERE does it mention passing caravans, rape or the People of Lot together. What it does say, is that Lot said to his people "you approach men in lust instead of women, surely you are an extravagant people." Lot even offered his own daughters to the Sodomites telling them "they are better for you, if you but knew." It is when the Sodomites ignored Lot's warnings and refused his offer, that they were destroyed my Lot's angelic guests.

Thus, if you are going to take issue with the Taliyah al-Mahdi and its stance on homosexuality, you have to take issue with Islam, the Qur'an, and the majority of sincere Muslims in this world. The uneducated, no knowledge of fiqh, ahadith, Qur'an, or Quran tafsir constituents of the 7 member al-Fatiha organization or similar extreme leftist "Muslims" are certainly NOT authorities on Islam or anything related to it. They are, however, huge authorities on Arab and Persian homosexual poetry.

FYI gay "Muslims," a "natural eunuch" as some of you have asserted would have to naturally be without testicles... thus rendering him impotent to both women and men.
by ...a simple question.
Ok, O you homo-hating, learn-ed ones:

What is your position on ijtihad?

That is to say:

Does a true Muslim, according to you, have the right to the use of independent reason in Quranic interpretation or not?

If so, who says your interpretation is any better than anyone else's?
Did you use your right to ijtihad to come to your own conclusions?
Anyway, if not, it's only polite to cite the authoritative source for your interpretation. Who's your mufti?

Also if not, then you do truly espouse a fundamentalism. Nothing wrong with that per se, but to espouse it without copping to it is textbook hypocrisy.

So, which is it?
by Tawhid
Salaams,
I am really enjoying your tirade, it's entertaining how a white boy from the suburbs of Cincy can go out and lead people astray. You continue to try to use analogy, it's interesting the analogies you draw. Obviously you are not aware of the many diverse opinions in Islamic jurisprudence, it is not in BLACK AND WHITE about homosexuality and Islam, there are many jurisprudents that have many different opinions on homosexuality in Islam including those that accept it. Gosh, oh, my, now your going to call anyone that disagrees with you a munafiq. Again, it is you that are full of nifaq and you are the muzallim (one whose heart is dark). Again, your fruits show your kind of Islam an Islam rejected by the majority of Muslims, I am a Shi'ite so don't even try and pull your backwards and sectarian threats with me. You are a marginalized minority that is part of the small but very loud contingency of Islamo-Fascists and that is what your idealogy is based on. It's warped that you spend so much time living your fantasies. You are not the vanguard and you never will be. You read the hadiths through the eyes of your own ego and practice an Islam that is of no benefit to those suffering under oppression. Inshallah, Islam will grow and it will change, because change is good and it will change to a revolutionary and progressive force that will overthow the ignorant ways that you preach and Islam will evolve and the beautiful Muslims and Muslimahs which practice true Islam, both Sunni and Shi'a, will forge a new Islamic society which is truly full of the din of Salaam. I feel sorry for you Adam, you are lost in your own delusions. May Allah forgive you if you ever hurt anyone. Shariati will live on through the revolutionary spirit of the new Muslims which is true Liberation (Tahrir).

Further Reading: Progressive Muslims, http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/185168316X/qid=1090437360/sr=2-1/ref=sr_2_1/102-2035121-2360957

Fi al Iman,

Tawhid
by Talib
For those interested in this subject and want a deeper understanding of the complexity of the issue involved.

Queer Sexuality and Identity in the Qur'an and Hadith

by Faris Malik

The Qur'an generally scorns "approaching males in lust", as well as the castration of males, as the sin of the people of Lot (Qur'an 7:81, 26:165-166, 27:55, 29:28-29).


7:81: "Indeed you approach males in lust excluding women..."
Arabic: "Innakum lata'toona ar-rijaala shahwatan min doon in-nisaa'i."

26:165-166: "You approach the males of the worlds and forsake those whom your Lord has created for you for your mates."
Arabic: "Ata'toona adh-dhukraana min al-'aalameena, wa tadharoona ma khalaqa lakum Rabbukum min azwaajikum."

27:55: "Will you indeed approach males in lust excluding women?"
Arabic: "A 'innakum lata'toona ar-rijaala shahwatan min doon in-nisaa'i?"

29:28-29 "Most surely you are guilty of an indecency which none of the nations has ever done before you; What! do you come unto the males and cut the passageways [i.e. vas deferens and/or urethra] and do so in your private clubs?"
Arabic: "Innakum lata'toona al-faahishata ma sabaqakum biha min ahadin mina al-'aalameena. Innakum lata'toona ar-rijaala wa taqta'oona as-sabeela wa ta'toona fee naadikumu?"


But the Qur'an does not prohibit using, as passive sex partners, the ancient category of men who by nature lacked desire for women, since such men were not considered "male" as a result of their lack of arousal for women. This kind of man is often known as "gay" in modern times, but in the ancient world he was identified as an anatomically whole "natural eunuch." Although the Qur'an never uses the word eunuch [khasiyy], the hadith and the books of the legal scholars do. Furthermore, the Qur'an recognizes that some men are "without the defining skill of males" (24:31: "ghair oolaa il-irbati min ar-rijaali") and so, as domestic servants, are allowed to see women naked. This is a reference to natural eunuchs, i.e. gay men.

A person had to be indifferent to women's bodies in order to assume the role as a servant in women's private space. In one case, a servant who had been assumed to be indifferent to women due to his being an "effeminate" [mukhannath] was evicted by the Prophet because he unexpectedly demonstrated a lascivious attitude toward a woman:


Bukhari, Authentic Traditions, Book of Marriage, Chapter 114 (162) What is forbidden concerning the entering upon the wife by those imitating women. [It was narrated] of Umm Salama that the Prophet, peace be upon him, was at her house, and in the house there was an effeminate [mukhannath], and the effeminate said to the brother of Umm Salama, Abdullah bin Abi Umayya: If God makes you all conquer Ta'if tomorrow, I suggest to you the daughter of Ghailan, for surely she approaches with four and turns her back with eight [?]. Then the Prophet, peace be upon him, said: This one shall not enter upon you (pl.).


Muslim, Collection of Authentic Traditions, Book of Greetings, Chapter 912 (note: as translated into English by 'Abdul Hamid Siddiqi, who misleadingly uses the word eunuch as the translation for mukhannath. It is precisely because he was not a eunuch that he got into trouble!):

(5415) Umm Salama reported that she had a eunuch [mukhannath] (as a slave) in her house. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) was once in the house that he (the eunuch) said to the brother of Umm Salama: 'Abdullah b. Abu Umayya, if Allah grants you victory in Ta'if on the next day, I will show you the daughter of Ghailan, for she has four folds (upon her body) on the front side of her stomach and eight folds on the back. Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) heard this and he said: Such (people) should not visit you.

(5416) 'A'isha reported that a eunuch [mukhannath] used to come to the wives of Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) and they did not find anything objectionable in his visit, considering him to be a male without any sexual desire [fakaanoo ya'doonahu min ghair oolaa il-irbah]. Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) one day came as he was sitting with some of his wives and he was busy in describing the bodily characteristics of a lady and saying: As she comes in front four folds appear on her front side and as she turns her back eight folds apear on the back side. Thereupon Allah's Apostle (may peace be upon him) said: I see that he knows these things; do not, therefore, allow him to enter. She ('A'isha) said: Then they began to observe veil from him.


Note that in 'A'isha's telling of the story, she states that the women allowed him into their private rooms because they assumed he "lacked the defining skill" (the translator added the word male and put "considering him to be a male without any sexual desire," but the Arabic says only that they "deemed him to lack the defining skill"). 'A'isha actually quotes the Qur'anic verse about men who "lack the defining skill of males," demonstrating that his presence in the women's space would have been proper according to the Qur'an if only he had in fact "lacked the defining skill." However, the statement of the effeminate man about the daughter of Ghailan, whatever it meant, indicated to Muhammad that he did not lack the defining skill of males and that, on the contrary, he had an appreciation of women as sexual objects. This disqualifies him as an intimate domestic servant according to the Qur'an as well as the standards of the day. In a system that depends on household servants to be heterosexually indifferent, the main risk is that this indifference can be faked. In other words, a heterosexual male can pretend to be an exclusive homosexual in order to gain free access to the private space of women.

There are other hadiths (Bukhari LXXII 61.773 and 62.774) against cross-dressers in which the Prophet specifically curses "males" who imitate women and women who imitate "males," and in which the consequence of their malfeasance is that he "evicts them from the houses." The specification of "males" is made very explicit:


61.773 The Messenger of God, peace be upon him, cursed female-impersonators [m.pl.] who are males, and the male-impersonators [f.pl.] who are women.
Arabic: la'ana rasoolullah salla allahu 'alaihi wa sallama al-mutashabbiheena min ar-rijaali bil-nisaa'i wal-mutashabbihaati min an-nisaa'i bir-rijaali.

62.774 The Prophet, peace be upon him, cursed the effeminates [m.pl.] who are males, and the male-pretenders [f.pl.] who are women, and he said: Evict them from your houses, and the Prophet, peace be upon him, evicted such-and-such [m.sg.] and 'Umar evicted such-and-such [f.sg.].
Arabic: la'ana an-nabiyy salla allahu 'alaihi wa sallama al-mukhannatheena min ar-rijaali wal-mutarajjilaati min an-nisaa'i wa qaala: akhrijoohum min buyootikum, qaala: fa'akhraja an-nabiyy salla allahu 'alaihi wa sallama fulaanan wa 'akhraja 'umaru fulaanatan.


The words "males" and "women" are obviously emphatic here because the grammar does not really require them to be used. Masculine gender is already provided grammatically by the endings on the words "impersonators" and "effeminates," and feminine gender is already provided in the words "impersonators" and "male-pretenders." Given the emphasis, the curse is specifically directed only at "males" and "women," and does not cover non-males who might be female-impersonators (or non-women who might be male-impersonators, if indeed there was a recognition of "non-women"). It's okay to be a drag queen as long as you are not a straight man posing to gain access to unsuspecting women, or to the wives of unsuspecting husbands.

The Qur'an recognizes that there are some people who are "ineffectual" ['aqeem], thus neither male nor female:


42:49 "To Allah belongs the dominion over the heavens and the earth. It creates what It wills. It prepares for whom It wills females, and It prepares for whom It wills males. 50 Or It marries together the males and the females, and It makes those whom It wills to be ineffectual. Indeed It is the Knowing, the Powerful."
Arabic: "Lillahi mulku us-samaawaati wal'ardhi. Yakhluqu ma yashaa'u. Yahabu liman yashaa'u inaathan wa yahabu liman yashaa'u adh-dhukura. Aw yuzawwijuhum dhukraanan wa inaathan; wa yaj'alu man yashaa'u 'aqeeman: innahu 'Aleemun Qadeerun."

These last two verses (42:49 and 50) are usually interpreted differently in English translations to say that God bestows daughters or sons on whom It wills and gives some people both sons and daughters. But there are problems with this interpretation, one of which being that the word for causing to marry or pairing up [zawwaja] is used in the second verse. When families have boys and girls, the boys and girls do not usually arrive in pairs! The second problem is that, in Qur'anic verses mentioning males and females together, the males are usually mentioned first, and the females second (e.g., 3:195, 4:12, 4:124, 6:143-144, 16:97, 40:40, 42:50, 49:13, 53:21, 53:45, 75:39, 92:3). This is the only verse in the Qur'an, as far as I know, in which the female is mentioned before the male. If these two verses were talking about sons and daughters, we would expect sons to be mentioned before daughters.

In this case, the "males first" principle would indicate that the lines are referring to females and males not as offspring, but as counterparts, i.e. objects of desire, for "whom(ever) God wills." The female objects of desire are mentioned first because they are most typically objects of desire for males. Hence, even this verse is referring to males first, as the most typical "whom(ever)" for whom God prepares females. Yet the use of the word "whom(ever)" leaves it open for females to be objects of desires for other females as well, when God wills, and for males to be love objects for females and other passive non-males. I believe this verse is very neatly and concisely describing the varieties of sexual orientation and gender, which Allah, the All-Knowing and All-Powerful, creates as Allah wishes.

The ineffectual can include abstinent women as well as men, and in fact "the abstinent ones among women, who do not hope for marriage" [wal-qawaa'idu min an-nisaa'i allaati laa yarjoona nikaahan], are permitted to "put off their cover" in Sura 24:60.

Another intriguing example of a gender variant woman is Jesus's mother Mary. According to ancient notions about procreation, males were the only ones capable of producing seed. It would be impossible for a woman to give birth to a child, let alone a boy, without receiving seed from a male. In Christianity, this problem is solved by making God the male father of Jesus. According to the Qur'an, however, God does not procreate. This means that the seed that became Jesus came from within Mary. If Mary carried viable seed originating from within her, then by ancient definitions, she was a male, despite appearances to the contrary. So the Qur'an says that, when Mary was born, her mother declared that she was a female baby, but God knew better:


(Qur'an 3:36) Lord, surely, I have brought it forth a female - and Allah knew best what she brought forth - and the male is not like the female...
Arabic: Rabb, innee wada'tuha unthaa wa Allah 'a'lamu bimaa wada'at wa laisa adh-dhakaru kal-untha ...


There are other traditions about the gender variance of Mary. I have argued elsewhere that Mary's "virginity" is not merely the innocent state of a girl who has not yet known a man, but a more permanent rejection of sex with men, like that of the Vestal virgins in Rome. In Isaiah 7:14, it is predicted that a "virgin" will conceive bear a son, but the word for virgin used there is not the generic bethulah used throughout the Hebrew scripture for girls who have not yet had sex. Instead, the word almah is used, a very rare word in the scriptures, which is the female counterpart to elem, meaning boy. In the other verses in which it is used, it is compatible with a meaning of tomboy or rebuffer of men (cf. Proverbs 30:18-19, in which an almah appears to be impermeable to men).

Homosexual activity by straight men
Homosexual activity by homosexuals (eunuchs) is not spoken of in the Qur'an, which mentions only the unjust homosexual rape perpetrated by straight men against other straight men. Besides the Lut story, sexual exploitation of straight males is also alluded to in the assurance that prophet Joseph's slaveholders "abstained from him" (12:20: "wa kaanuu feehi min az-zaahideen").

But the Qur'an and hadith also have traces of the permitted homosexual desires of straight men. There is even a hadith in Bukhari, admittedly giving not the Prophet's opinion but that of Abu Jafar, according to which a pedophile is prohibited from marrying the mother of his boy-beloved if there is penetration:


(Bukhari LXII, 25) As for whom(ever) plays with a boy: if he caused him to enter him, then he shall not marry his mother.
Arabic: feeman yal'abu bis-sabiyy: in 'adkhalahu feehi falaa yatazawwajanna 'ummahu.


(This rule is accompanied in the same chapter by prohibitions against a man marrying both a mother and her daughter.) Apparently according to this hadith, even sexual penetration of a boy is not considered sodomy, because if it was, surely the sodomite would have more worries than whether he could marry the boy's mother! Like whether he preferred to die by fire, stoning, or falling from a high tower! These are some of the punishments mentioned in the hadith for "doing as the people of Lut did." [A reader wrote in to say that this hadith would not necessarily imply that penetration of boys was not sodomy, but could be a recognition of the fact that not all crimes will be discovered and punished and that one who does penetrate a boy, even if he is not punished for sodomy for whatever reason, should at least know in his own conscience that the mother of his boyfriend is off limits. In any case, one possible inference from this hadith is still very interesting: namely, that if a man plays with a boy without penetration, then marrying the mother is still a possibility!!]

The distinction between pederasty (sex with boys) and sodomy (penetration of "males") was commonly, albeit not universally maintained throughout the ancient world, and indeed survived throughout most of the history of Islam until at least the nineteenth century (in spite of the futile objections of some medieval scholars). Apparently, boy-love was considered okay by many people because, like "natural eunuchs," underage boys also lacked the "defining skill of males" (sexual potency with women). The Qur'an itself gives support to pederasts in its glimpses of paradise:


52:17-29 And they shall have boys [ghilmaan] circulating among them as if they were hidden pearls.

56:22-23 and dark-eyed ones [hoorun 'eenun], the like of hidden pearls

76:19 And immortal boys [wildaanun mukhalladoona] will circulate among them, when you see them you will count them as scattered pearls.

2:25 And they shall have immaculate partners [azwaajun mutahharatun] in [the gardens] ...

4:57 And they shall have immaculate partners [azwaajun mutahharatun] in them ...


One of the great male Sufi contemporaries of Rabi'a al-'Adawiyya provided a divine justification for a pederastic relationship, which was repeated without a hint of disapproval in a 10th century book about great Sufi women:


One day Rabi'a saw Rabah [al-Qaysi] kissing a young boy ["huwa yuqabbil sabiyyan"]. 'Do you love him?' she asked. 'Yes,' he said. To which she replied, 'I did not imagine that there was room in your heart to love anything other than God, the Glorious and Mighty!' Rabah was overcome at this and fainted. When he awoke, he said, 'On the contrary, this is a mercy that God Most High has put into the hearts of his slaves.'
(Quoted from as-Sulami, Early Sufi Women = Dhikr an-niswa al-muta 'abbidat as sufiyyat, translated by Rkia E. Cornell, Louisville, KY: Fons Vitae, 1999, pp. 78-79.)


Besides boys, straight Muslim men were occasionally interested in grown adults as well, provided they were not "male." There is a hadith in which the Prophet's companions asked whether they were allowed to use men (presumably prisoners of war) as "eunuchs" to fulfill their sexual urges, since they were far from their wives.


Bukhari LXII 6:9 [Narrated by ibn Mas'ud:] "We used to fight [in battle] together with the Prophet, peace be upon him. There were no women with us. We said: O Messenger, may we treat some as eunuchs [a laa nastakhsii]? He forbade us to do so."


The version in Bukhari LXII 8:13 says that rather than let the companions "treat [some] as eunuchs" in the absence of their wives, the Prophet "allowed them to marry corrupted women" [rakhasa lana an nankih al-maraa bil-shaub] from the vicinity, and he recited to them from the Qur'an: "O ye who believe! Make not unlawful the good things which Allah has made lawful for you, but commit no transgression."

The fact that Muhammad forbade the companions from designating men as eunuchs is not the point here. Of course, using a straight male as a eunuch was wrong -- that was essentially the sin of the people of Lut. But what about using a eunuch (i.e. one who permanently lacks arousal with women) as a eunuch? Given that ibn Mas'ud made reference to the use of eunuchs for sexual gratification, and given that the Prophet understood what he meant, that indicates that the use of eunuchs for sexual gratification was known in Arabic society, and was considered a use that was appropriate to eunuchs. Since eunuchs were not considered male, there was no prohibition against it, not even in the Qur'an.

Eunuchs were still sex objects for straight men in the Mamluk dynasty, according to David Ayalon in Eunuchs, Caliphs, and Sultans: A Study in Power Relationships (Jerusalem, 1999). They not only served to prevent older Mamluks from having sexual access to younger trainees:


The eunuchs seem to have served as a shield against homosexual lust in yet another way. They themselves formed the target of that lust, thus diverting it from the youngsters. They are described as being womanly and docile in bed at night and manly and warlike by day in a campaign and in similar circumstances (hum nisaa' li-mutmainn muqeem wa rijaal in kaanat al-asfaar; li-annahum bin-nahaar fawaaris wa bil-lail 'araa'is). [Arabic quoted by Ayalon from Abu Mansur al-Tha'alibi, Al-Latâ'if wal-Zarâ'if, Cairo 1324/1906-7, p. 79, lines 1-7; and the same quote from Tha'alibi in his Tamthîl wal-Muhâdara, Cairo 1381/1961, p. 224.]


As for the issue of whether Muhammad himself expressly acknowledged that some people by nature refrain from heterosexuality, thus being natural eunuchs, consider the following hadith. It is related that one of the Prophet's companions, Abu Huraira, went to the Prophet, saying that he was a "young male" who "feared torment for his soul," but that he "did not find the wherewithal to marry a woman" [innee rajulun shaabbun wa ana akhaafu 'alaa nafsee al-'anata wa laa ajidu ma atazawwaju bihi an-nisaa'a]. The Prophet remained silent, even after Abu Huraira repeated his statement three times. Finally after the fourth time, Muhammad said: "O Abu Huraira, the pen is dry regarding what is befitting for you. So be a eunuch for that reason or leave it alone." [ya Abaa Hurairata, jaffa al-qalam bimaa anta laaq fa'akhtasi 'alaa dhalika au dhar] (Bukhari, LXII 8). (For comparison, consider that when Uthman came to Muhammad asking if he could be permitted to live a life of abstinence, he was rebuffed.)

If Muhammad's answer to Abu Huraira is to make sense, then of course it must bear a relation to the statement Abu Huraira made. First we have to ask what kind of torment Abu Huraira feared for his soul [nafs]? Muhammad Muhsin Khan, the translator of Bukhari into English, interpreted it as fear of committing illicit sexual intercourse. If that interpretation is correct, then we still have to determine what "illicit sexual intercourse" would mean for Abu Huraira. As a self-described "male," two forms of sexual activity would be inadmissible and therefore the temptation to them would cause torment for his soul: the desire to be sexually passive with a man (known as ubnah) or the desire to commit adultery with a female. Yet, Abu Huraira ["the father of kittens"] seemed to hint at a solution to his dilemma when he said he did not find (in himself?) what was required for marrying a woman. Now, if that merely meant that he had no money to support a wife, for instance, and was tempted to commit adultery with a female, then the Prophet would surely have advised him to fast and be patient in accordance with Sura 24:33 (also Bukhari LXII 2 and 3), instead of advising him, as he did, to accept his fate and, if appropriate, be a eunuch, something which he denied as an option to Uthman. On the other hand, if Abu Huraira's statement meant he lacked potency with women, then obviously he could not be fearing the temptation to adultery with women. In that case, only passive homosexuality was a danger. However, if he would not ever marry a woman, due to impotency with women or for any other reason, then he would not be acting as a male, but rather as a eunuch, in which case passive homosexuality would not be forbidden for him. But Muhammad cautions him that his identity, either as a eunuch or as a male, has already been determined by his Creator ("the pen is dried"), and he must figure it out which it is and live his life accordingly. If he ever intends to have sex with a woman (i.e. act as a male), then he must avoid passive homosexuality and get married.
by link
Another interesting link related to traditions of transgendered peoples on the Arabian peninsula:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xanith
by Re:Taliyah
Your using a European definition of Eunuch. In most other cultures the word that translated into English as Eunuch includes any group of men not attracted to women. Hijra in India are often refered to an Eunuchs even though most are not castrated. Historical references in Islamic history to eunuchs are not all to men who have been castrated; Xanith are but one example.
by Talib
Salaams Sister,
Usually it is some twisted Zionist sending me death threats, so I am honored it comes from a fellow Muslim this time. Please, if you would so bless me with martyrdom. The article posted was by Faris Malik, not me. I believe what he is argueing is that homosexuality between homosexuals is not condemned in the Qur'an al-Karim, but homosexuality by a heterosexual is, it is following one's lusts, not love. When it comes to defaming Islam it is you that is the defamotory one. You and your organization is nothing but a source of conflict and division in the Ummah. And you will be dealt with in due time, you are blind, deaf and dumb and to the Path you shall not return. Your words speak volumes to the proof of the argument about who is practicing the true Islam. You worship your own egos rather then Allah. Then again you are rather harmless, I doubt you or Adam or anyone of your Taliyah could wield a steak knife let alone a blade to sever my head. You have two tongues in one you use the hadiths to blast those that disagree with you in the other you blast the very hadiths your beliefs are based on, when it is convenient to create a self-subsisting delusion of having special knowledge about Allah or how the Qa'im will appear or what the Qa'im will preach. You are very entertaining. So will you kill me, kill all that challenge your homophobic ways, where will the killing end? Come on now be honest. Whose next, those that don't wear hijab, are they your enemies too. You think you are heroic and revolutionary, when your models are dead and gone and being burried by a new generation of Muslims. You and your comrades cannot imprison the true Islamic leaders of this world, soon all the jails in Iran will be opened and the real knowledge will be preached a true revolution.
by Dawud
In Qur'an al-Karim it is clearly stated what the Divine position is regarding the practice of homosexuality. If the Divine position were that men could copulate with men or boys, and that women could copulate with women... it would have clearly been stated as such. The lawful (halaal) persons for marriage are explicity stated in al-Qur'an, for both men and women. It does not say any men are lawful to men or that women are lawful to women. It is also clear in al-Qur'an that it is unlawful to have sexual relations outside of zawaj al-nikah or zawaj al-mutah. If we know who the lawful candidates are for zawaj al-nikah and zawaj al-mutah (for men: women who are not mahram, for women: men who are not mahram), then it likewise becomes clear that anything outside of either of those forms of zawaj is considered zina(fornication, adultery). So, at the very least, you absolutely have to consider the practice of homosexuality to be zina and punishable by 100 lashes as per Surah an-Nur Ayat 2-3.

'Azzaaniyatu wazzaanii fajliduu kulla waahidim-minhu-maa mi-'ata jaldah; wa laa ta'-khuzkum-bihimaa ra'-fa-tun fii Diinillaahi'in-kuntum tu'-minuuna billaahi wal-Yaw-mil-Akhir: wal-yash-had-'azaabahumaa taaa-'ifatum-minal-Mu'-miniin. 'Azzaanii laa yankihu 'illaa zaaniyatan 'aw mushrikah: wazzaaniyatu laa yankihuhaaa 'illaa zaanin 'aw mushrik: wa hurrima zaalika 'alal-Mu'miniin.

"The adulteress and adulterer should be flogged a hundred lashes each, and no pity for them should deter you from the law of Allah, if you believe in Allah and the Last Day; and the punishment should be witnessed by a body of Believers. The adulterer can marry no one but an adulteress or his partner(in the act, or an idolatress), and the adulteress cannot marry any but an adulterer or her partner(in the act, or an idolater); This is forbidden to the Believers."

We also have to abide by that which is clear in al-Qur'an, not that which is unclear:

Huwallazii'anzala 'alaykal-Kitaba minhu 'aayaatum-Muhkamaatun hunna 'Ummul-Kitaabi wa 'ukharu Mutashaa-bihaat. Fa- 'ammal-laziina fii quluubihim zay-gun-fayattabi-'uuna maa tashaabaha minhub-tigaaa-'al-fitnati wabtigaaa-'ata'-wiilih. Wa maa ya'-lama ta'-wiilahuuu 'illallaah. War-Raasikhuuna fil-'ilmi yaquuluuna 'aamannaa bihii kullum-min 'indi Rabbinaa: wa maa yazzakkaru 'illaaa 'ulul-'albaab.

"He has sent down this Book which contains some verses that are categorically clear and the foundation to the Book, and others are allegorical/unclear. But those who are twisted of mind look for verses that are metaphorical, seeking deviation and giving to them interpretations of their own; but none knows their meaning except Allah; and those who are steeped in knowledge affirm: "We believe in them as all of them are from the Lord." But only those who have wisdom understand." Surah Al-'Imran Aya 7

Clearly you are following your own desires in taking ayat which say about men lacking skill with women to mean gay men, and thus according to your own "ijtihad" you and your ilk have ruled that homosexual acts are halaal in Islam. This is clearly not the case, when one considers al-Qur'an and the valid ahadith. Particularly Shi'a ahadith. Since you do not have the qualifications of a mujtahid, because you lack even rudamentary knowledge of fiqh, then you cannot safely practice ijtihad.

What are Faris Malik's hawza-i-ilmiyya qualifications? What maraji have signed his certificate of ijtihad?

The only same sex relations that is NOT directly addressed in al-Qur'an are female-female activities... which also appears to not be addressed within the realm of jurisprudence. HOWEVER, male-male sexual activity is CLEARLY condemned in al-Qur'an.

One could clearly send questions to various Shi'a maraji and find out what the hukm ash-Shariah is regarding homosexuality, if you are incapable of discerning the clear prohibition in al-Qur'an.

The Taliyah al-Mahdi TOLERATES homosexuals. We have never advocated violence towards homosexuals. We do not, however, accept homosexuality as a part of Islam and neither do the MAJORITY of Muslimeen or 'Ulama. While we might disagree with some maraji on certain topics(which are usually political), we stand with them in the basic elements of al-Islam.

Naziri is NOT the leader of the Taliyah al-Mahdi, but an incredibly vocal member... and one who happens to write a great deal of material on a number of topics. His phsychology thesis on homosexuality convinced his professor that homosexual tendancies are 'abnormal."

Just as nearly ALL Muslimeen, excepting the minority who dwell in Western nations and seek far left liberalism as their ideology not Tawhid, feel the exact same way we do regarding homosexuality. It is not our nafs that causes us to prohibit homosexuality, it is the Will of Allah.

Though, I can certainly say that the Qur'anic proclamation:

Wa minan-naasi many ya-quulu 'aamannaa billaahi wa bil-Yawmil-'Aa'khiri wa maa humbi-mu'-miniin. Yukhaadi-'uunallaaha wallaziina 'aamanuu: wa maa yakhda-'uuna 'illaaa 'an-fusahum wa maa yash-'uruun. Fii quluubihim-marazun fazaada-humullaahu marazaa. Wa lahum 'azaabun 'aliimumbimaa kaanuu yakzibuun. Wa 'izaa qiila lahum laa tuf-siduu fil-'arzi qaaluuu 'innamaa muslihuun. 'Alaaa 'innahum humulmuf-siduuna wa laakil-laa yash-'uruun. Wa 'izaa qiila lahum 'aaminuu kamaaa 'aamanan-naasu qaaluuu 'a-nu'-minu kamaaa'aa-manas-sufahaaa'? 'Alaaa 'innahum humus-sufahaaa-'u wa laakil-laa ya'-lamuun. Wa 'izaa laqul-laziina 'aamanuu qaaluuu 'aama-nnaa, wa 'izaa khalaw 'ilaa shayaatiini-him qaaluuu 'innaa ma-'akum 'innamaa nahnu mus-tahzi-'uun.

"And there are some who, though they say: "We believe in Allah and the Last Day," do not believe. The (try to) deceive Allah and those who believe, yet deceive none but themselves although they do not know. Sick are their hearts, and Allah adds to their malady. For them is suffering for they lie. When asked to desist from spreading corruption in the land they say: "Why, we are reformers?" Yet they are surely mischief-mongers, even though they do not know. When asked to believe as others do, they say: "Should we believe like fools?" And yet they are the fools, even though they do not know. When they meet the faithful they say: "We believe;" but when alone with the shayateen, they say: "We are really with you; we were joking." " Surah al-Baqara Ayat 8-14
by ...cuz I've seen enough.
As for this whole thread:
Gee, a self-righteous, religious fundamentalism-fueled bigot, in America. How original. Can't find that just anywhere. Government leaders, frat jocks, "radical" "leftists". Hate mail is a sign of doing something right. Adapt to the terrain and move on. Gee buddy, did you think that trick up all by yourself? Fucking brilliant.

As for bigot boy:
Nice dodge, except I noticed it. Who is your religious authority? Or are you making this up as you go?

BTW, no one is that scared of someone else's sexuality. Such a reaction is usually a projection of one's own inner demons. You really want to kill the fag inside yourself, don't you? Bonus clue: the fag within will win. Let go and learn to love him, because you only get one you.

As for ijtihad:
People who hate Irshad Manji, bless her heart, act as if she made it all up, and they try to discredit the technique by attacking its advocate. For your information, ijtihad has been around a lot longer than Ms. Manji, and it will outlast her too, al-hamdu lillah. Any introductory text to Islam will discuss the concept. Our self-righteous critic here slyly avoids the question, because he wants to practice it while passing it off as received wisdom. Maybe that works with his asshole buddies, but not here in a forum of critical thinkers.

It has been, is and shall continue to be practiced by Muslims of faith in all times and contexts, and it just doesn't matter what you or anyone thinks of it. No one needs permission to exercise a God-given right like a mind any more than you needed permission to turn yours off, bully boy.

As for queers and Islam:
Always have been, are, and always will be here, practicing, real, even vital to the deen and to their ummat. Anything bigots have to say about it is just hype designed to distract. The change has come, the war is over. All that's left is to dither over the details.

As for death threats:
That stuff is criminal activity, isn't it? A) Why is Indybay allowing it? B) If people actually know who this creep is, maybe they ought to call him in to America's own taliban-in-blue. Let the little martyr test his faith in the pokey, while his ass gets reeducated the old fashioned way by real criminals. Give him some real targets for his adolescent revenge fantasies. And maybe, ironically, for once, someone's presence in prison might make the world a safer place for innocent people.

Just some thoughts, like I said, and no more. I'm done giving energy to this kind of publicly-displayed illness. Over and, oh yes, quite out.
by Naziri
i posted a whole reply earlier today DESTROYING this fake Muslim's argument. It's gone now. How convenient.

There were no death threats in it so it probably didn't suit your propaganda very much.

"am really enjoying your tirade, it's entertaining how a white boy from the suburbs of Cincy can go out and lead people astray."

Go into ANY Masjid and ask people if you or i are leading people astray by me opposing homosexuality.

Beyond that you don't know anything about my background. i was raised by parents making a combined household income in the $20,000's in an otherwise all black neighborhood. My grandfather himself is half Cherokee and half Melungeon.

But in REAL Islam there is no such thing as "race." Muhammad (sal) made that clear at Ghadir Khumm. But you were obviously too busy choking on some dude's sausage instead of studying the din that you think is your birthright (even though only 15% of Muslims are Arabs).

"You continue to try to use analogy, it's interesting the analogies you draw. Obviously you are not aware of the many diverse opinions in Islamic jurisprudence, it is not in BLACK AND WHITE about homosexuality and Islam, there are many jurisprudents that have many different opinions on homosexuality in Islam including those that accept it. Gosh, oh, my, now your going to call anyone that disagrees with you a munafiq."

No, i would call you a kafir.

"Again, it is you that are full of nifaq"

Show me the nifaq then. Where is it? What do i claim and then do not do? Learn the meaning of nifaq.

"and you are the muzallim (one whose heart is dark). Again, your fruits show your kind of Islam an Islam rejected by the majority of Muslims, I am a Shi'ite so don't even try and pull your backwards and sectarian threats with me."

You are not a Shi'i, only non-Shi'a say "Shi'ite" when speaking to other people who know the word "Shi'a." Nearly ALL Shi'a HATE homosexuality.

"You are a marginalized minority that is part of the small but very loud contingency of Islamo-Fascists and that is what your idealogy is based on."

Wrong again. Most Muslims HATE homosexuality.

"It's warped that you spend so much time living your fantasies. You are not the vanguard and you never will be."

You are not Muslim and you never will be.

"You read the hadiths through the eyes of your own ego and practice an Islam that is of no benefit to those suffering under oppression."

Yet strangely we have many more members than your Al-Fatihah organization. How "queer."

"Inshallah, Islam will grow and it will change, because change is good"

Is all change good? Like if i broke your nose would that be a good change or a bad one? The Qur'an says homosexuality is haraam. You are a wanna-be Muslim and ANY one of over a BILLION Muslims would agree with that assessment.

"and it will change to a revolutionary and progressive force that will overthow the ignorant ways that you preach and Islam will evolve and the beautiful Muslims and Muslimahs which practice true Islam, both Sunni and Shi'a, will forge a new Islamic society which is truly full of the din of Salaam. I feel sorry for you Adam, you are lost in your own delusions."

How "queer" that you keep calling me Adam.

"May Allah forgive you if you ever hurt anyone. Shariati will live on through the revolutionary spirit of the new Muslims which is true Liberation (Tahrir)."

Shariati was not pro-gay.
by Talib
Actually I prefer Rafidi rather then Shi'ite or Shi'a or Shi'ah or whichever transliteration you prefer, there is power in being a "Rafidi". I'm sorry if I offended you about your race being white. I actually wasn't choking on someone's sausage. And I find it interesting that you assume I am a homosexual just because of my posts. Ask the majority of Muslims if Imam `Ali (a.s.) was the rightful successor to Prophet Muhammad (s.a.s.) and the vast majority will say no. Popular opinion (ra'y) does not proove a point. The main point is their is a diversity of opinions on the issue of homosexuality, rather then argue the points you rely on personal attacks and homophobia. It's rather entertaining to me that someone with intelligence chooses ignorance. You practice the same refutation of others as the Great Leader does in Iran, you lock up those that disagree with you, or have them killed. You have done wonders by responding in such a way and so openly. You have much to learn about the Shi'ite practice of taqiyyah (hiding ones true beliefs from oppressors). I have been practicing taqiyyah for a while. How do you think I became aware of these posts? Why do you assume I am Arab? I could be Iranian for instance, or even Pakistani. I could even be African American. Although there is a chance I could be Iraqi or Lebanese or even a Saudi, then again the greatest Shi'a philosopher was a Saudi, but most Shi'a think he is an apostate. I could be any Muslim anywhere even one that studies with you. So there goes popular opinion again. I think you've said enough for my friends to see what you are all about. If you want to do us a favor you and the rest of the Taliyah tribe can say more, it will be very informative. Ah, thinking of the great prowess of Salman al-Farsi at the moment. How do you catch a lion?
by topper


ILGA logo .gif (4897 bytes)

Homosexual Imam Prays For Tolerance

By Pam van de Bunt

AMSTERDAM, Sep 17 1998 (IPS) - Muammar Kaya is a homosexual Turk who has been forced to flee because of his desire to practise as an imam, or Muslim leader.

"Praying is between me and God, love is between me and my boyfriend," says 25-year-old Kaya. "Love and religion are two different things. So for me there is no conflict between Islam and my homosexuality."

Kaya completed his training as an imam but was prevented from taking up the position in his hometown of Konya in south-west Turkey because of his sexual orientation.

"I have been threatened with death by the (Turkish) Imam Union as well as by fundamentalists," he says. "In Turkey, they told me that because I am gay I have to pray not only behind everyone else but even behind the animals, as I am ‘worse than them’."

In Amsterdam, where Kaya lives while waiting for a verdict on his request for asylum, he was recently given a chance to lead a Friday prayer service.

The ceremony was conducted at the city’s large pink ‘Homomonument’. The only such monument in the world, it is a memorial to homosexuals killed during the Second World War as well as to everyone persecuted because of their sexual identity.

"Instead of being right at the back of the congregation, I was able to be at the front of the prayers for the first time in my life. This is so emotional for me," Kaya told IPS immediately after the prayers, his face still glistening with tears.

"It is not true that Islam rejects homosexuality," he insisted. "The Koran does not speak about sex."

Many Muslims interpret a Koranic story about the destruction of the people of Lot as proof that homosexuality is forbidden by Islam. But Kaya argues that homosexuality could not have been the cause. "If their city really disappeared because of homosexuals in their midst, why has Amsterdam not disappeared?" he asks.

The Friday prayers on the Homomonument were organised by the Independent Platform Of Turkish Homosexuals (IPOTH), partly as a gesture of protest against governments that refuse to grant asylum to homosexual refugees.

"We are here because in most Islamic countries homosexuals are not free," says Cen Ariklar of IPOTH. "A lot of people in our countries are tortured, abused or even killed because of their sexual identity.

"We are also here to protest against those countries which are sending back homosexual asylum-seekers." He claims that last year the Netherlands sent back 95 percent of homosexual asylum-seekers. The unsuccessful applicants’ home countries included Iran, Romania, Turkey and Zimbabwe.

"We are homosexual refugees and therefore need to stay— not for economic reasons but just to be free. We want to be free and we want to be loved. Allah has to prevent the Dutch government from sending us back and has to put pressure on those countries that are torturing us," says Ariklar.

He claims to be one of the few homosexuals to have been granted asylum-seeker status in the Netherlands.

Not everyone at the prayers led by Kaya agrees with his position on homosexuality. "I believe that the Koran forbids homosexuality," said 23-year-old Ersin Solmaz from Turkey, who now lives in Germany. "This made my life really difficult as I am both religious and gay.

"I constantly felt I was doing wrong and I even considered suicide. But I decided not to, because if you commit suicide you are sure to go to hell, but it is not so certain that is the punishment if you are a homosexual."

Some Christians interpret the Biblical account of the destruction of the cities of Sodom and Gomorra, a similar story to the Koranic account of the fate of Lot, as proof of rejection of homosexuality.

But Professor A. Wessels, a leading theologian at the Vrije University in Amsterdam, observes that "the difficulty with the holy books is that they are already centuries old. I would say that the Koran neither speaks about nor condemns (homosexuality)."

However, Dr. Ghassan Ascha, an Islamic specialist at the University of Utrecht in the Netherlands, says that although the Koran is open about love and making love, it rejects homosexuality:

"The difference is that the Koran is much milder about this than the Bible and the Torah (the Jewish scriptures)." Whereas in Christianity, he says, the apostle Paul compares homosexuals with whorers, thieves and drunks, "in the holy book of the Muslims there are only two clear condemnations of homosexuality.

It says lesbians should be put under house-arrest for life and gay men should be punished, though the punishment is not specified. However, a homosexual who shows regret and improves himself will not be punished."
by X
I don't blame indymedia for removing the veiled and not-so-veiled death threats but I would have left them up so people can see exactly what kind of behavior Taliy'ah is promoting.




by Omar Nahas
Islamic Studies on Homosexuality (1998)

Omar Nahas, M.A.

Is it possible for Muslims to talk about homosexuality in terms acceptable to their religion?

This is a primary question that needs to be answered if Muslims and non-Muslims are to discuss homosexuality and other related issues. It is also important for Muslims who want to discuss these issues among themselves for example, in conjunction with sexual education within the Muslim community.

The YOESUF foundation is confronted with this question because it provides informational services on the theme of Islam and homosexuality.

In this paper I attempt to answer the above question. I begin with selected passages from Islamic sources relating to sexuality. Next, I will discuss views of same-gender-sex taken from Islamic literature. Thirdly, I present a thematic cataloguing of information concerning Islam and homosexuality. This systematic classification of the material is intended to make the subject more accessible and debatable for Muslims. Lastly, I defend this approach and close with a summary.

I. Selected Passages from Islamic Sources:
II. Islamic View on Homosexuality
III. a. Categories of information concerning Islam and homosexuality
III. b. Why this heading division
IV Summary

I. Selected Passages from Islamic Sources:

The term sexuality and homosexuality are not a term found in the Koran. However, the concepts of sexuality and homosexuality can be directly perceived from texts from the Koran. There are two separate words for heterosexual sex relations inside and out of Islamic wedlock: Nikah and Zina.

There is no separate or special word in the Koran for homosexual sex relations. The Koran calls the acts against the people, from the prophet Lot 'sayi'at' (a general term meaning 'bad things')II. What those acts exactly were, can be found in the texts of the Koran. One of them is penetrating (Arab: ya'tun) males. This sexual activity, forbidden by the Koran, is referred to in the Koran with the verb (ya'tun) and followed by a noun as object. In Islamic texts, (liwata) is the acceptable term for 'penetrating males '.

Lesbian sexual acts are referred to with the same verb (ya'tun), only in the feminine form and followed by the noun (fahisha). This is a general term and means 'great sin'. The term that Islamic scholars use for sexual relations between women (sihak) is not in the Koran but instead in the pronouncements of the Prophet. Islam considers Lesbian sexual acts (sihak) an unacceptable form of sexual activity (III-footnote).

This brief explanation from Islamic sources make clear how important it is to study Islamic terms if we want to study homosexuality from an Islamic perspective.

II. Islamic View on Homosexuality

In order to discuss homosexuality in a manner acceptable in Islam, I have taken stock of the views on homosexuality according to Islam and based on Islamic literature. This point of view can be divided into six points:

1) Muslim scholars unanimously agreement that Islam rejects homosexual acts. However, it only becomes punishable when anal sex occurs in public (or is obvious, meaning where others can witness it) IV.
2) Islamic punishment for anal sex in public varies according to the situation. There is a light and a heavy punishment.
3) The Juridical tradition has written that anal sex can only be punished if four witnesses saw the actual penetration with their own eyes and are prepared to act as witnesses VI. The sanction is actually against having sex in public, because the punishment is also applicable to heterosexual acts in public.
4) The rule about 'four witnesses' weighs heavily. An accusation by someone without four witnesses (as evidence) is also punishable VII.
5) Above all, the Islamic law is only applicable for Muslims who live in a country with an Islamic tradition and where Islamic law in implemented VIII.
6) The Islamic view of homosexuality doesn't limit itself to strict statutory regulation. Islam recognizes that the sex drive is inherent in everyone. Islam has complete views concerning feminine and masculine homosexuality.

The above rules and summaries come from Islamic literature, written in Arabic and discussed in the Koran. Comparable summaries can be found in various Koran exegeses and other Islamic sources, in the languages of the Moslem world. These ideas are familiar with those who know Islam, regardless of origin.

The six points, seen in their entirety, give a rather negative impression of the Muslim viewpoint on homosexuality. Besides this view is a more positive one of the nuances and specifications from these concisely formulated points. These nuances and specifications can be found in the Islamic literature itself. The YOESUF Foundation and the people who work in an emancipatory yet Islamic way of discussing homosexuality will certainly give attention to these nuances in the coming years.

The image surrounding Islam and homosexuality depends upon the way in which people manage the above mentioned rules in discussion. When people stress the punishability of homosexual sex (as discussed in the point one) and negate the condition of public acts and the nature of human sexuality, they draw a much more negative picture than Muslim scholars intended. Both the four witnesses' rule and the pre-condition that Islamic law is only applicable in strict Islamic countries are very important. These laws have no consequences for the gay and lesbian lives (of Muslim or non-Muslims) in the Netherlands, the West or in not very strict Muslim countries.

This viewpoint is indeed Islamic but not practiced by all Muslims in their daily lives. Islam is practiced and interpreted in different ways by Muslims from different cultures. In Turkey and in Egypt, the religion is the same but the people give it different meaning. The local cultures give Islam its own Turkish or Egyptian flavor.

In daily practice, people from the same culture have different opinions on the subject. Islamic scholars and sexual freedom fighters try to influence these opinions in a number of ways. But because homosexuality is not a word found in the Koran, the discussion quickly becomes difficult. Even intellectuals with Islamic backgrounds use the same terms but give them different meanings. The term 'al Shuzuz al Jinsi' (literally translated as 'the sexual deviation') is used by Arabs (incorrectly) as a synonym for homosexuality.

The general public does not understand the literal translation for homosexuality 'Aljinsiya al mithliah' or 'Junusiyya'. As a result, the Arabic newspaper (Aljisr) in the Netherlands uses the more negative 'al Shuzuz al jinsi' instead of 'Junusiyya'. The consequences of this are obvious IX!

It is possible to relativize these consequences in the context of the emancipation process, but the difference in the meaning of the different terms which are wrongly used as synonyms remains too great to be acceptable. That shows the importance of researching the origins of the perception of homosexuality as a sexual deviation in order to make discussion possible.

Hereby is the difference between the Islamic view of homosexuality and the cultural viewpoint of Muslim cultures on this subject clearer; Islam considers homosexuality a sin but many Muslim cultures view it as a sexual deviation as well as a sin.

In addition to the aforementioned, there are also less well-known nuances for Muslims concerning homosexuality. Because these give a more positive image of homosexuality, they are unfortunately viewed with suspicion. Advocates of this line of thought are suspected of all sorts of ulterior motives and often oppressed. For example, Mohammed Jalal Kishk's book of stories entitled Muslim's Ideas About Sexuality X. The author gives his views on sexuality and homosexuality in paradise. Because of its rosy descriptions, the book first had to be examined by an Islamic commission chosen by al- Azhar XI. The commission was objective enough to release the book. But the Egyptian media was ruthless in its contempt the book, the members of the commission and Al- Azhar University.

The above examples, especially the last, clearly illustrate that homosexuality can be discussed in Muslim circles, but it remains a sensitive subject. This sensitivity must be kept in mind, especially when providing informational services on the homosexuality. Information must not clash with Islamic values and it should be made clear that Islamic ideas are respected, whether people personally agree or not. To achieve this, it is important to be open to advice and criticism from Islamic scholars and from the Muslim community. Above all, the information that is provided must be clear on the sources of that information.

The trick is now to develop information services geared towards emancipation and also sensitive to these other delicate aspects. Classifying the information gives insight into the subject matter and the method of study. The aim of this is to reduce the reservations that Muslims may have concerning the theme 'homosexuality and Islam'.

I have developed the following categories in order to thematically address the information.

III. a. Categories of information concerning Islam and homosexuality

I have organized the information into seven categories, each of them focuses on one aspect of the whole theme. Short articles (about one page) about different aspects of the specific themes of each category are researched, translated and edited. These articles contain answers found in Islamic sources to frequently asked questions.

The categories are:

1) Questioning homosexuality?
For example:
- Homosexuality in Islamic texts
- Lesbian relationships in Islamic texts
- Same sex love in Islamic texts
- Sexual acts and variations
- How do Muslims who believe in the ban on homosexuality function within this ban (examples from literature)

2) Generally speaking, how does the Islamic society feel (and behave) about gay and lesbian sexuality?
For Example:
- To what extent is homosexuality accepted by Islamic society
- Muslims ideas about passive and active role division

3) How does the Islamic law (sharia) affect gays and lesbians?
For example:
- The punishability of homosexuality (M-M and F-F)
- The various sanctions
- The applicability of the criminal punishment of homosexuality
- The meaning of these Islamic laws for everyday life in Muslim countries and the consequences for non-Muslim countries.

4) To what extent does Islam determine the lives of Muslims and what influence does it have on their sexual identity?
For example:
- Basic concepts of Islam
- The various manifestations of Islam
- The relationship between Islam and the cultures of Muslim countries
- Islam and sexuality in general
- Gender related problems in Islamic texts

5) What image do people have of Islam and homosexuality?
For example:
- The mutability of an image
- Reactions to articles and pronouncements of Muslims and non-Muslims on the subject of homosexuality

6) Modern challenges for the Muslim and non- Muslim worlds in the area of homosexuality.
For example:
- The use of condoms and HIV prevention by Muslims
- Gay sex tourism in the Muslim world
- The migration of gays and lesbians
- Human rights and homosexuality

7) What methodology do we use in this day and age to discuss homosexuality?
For example:
- Modern scientific approach to sexuality (the alpha and the beta sciences)
- Western models
- Islamic models

In this synopsis, two themes come out 'Questioning homosexuality' and 'The Islamic law'. These two points seem to overlap one another. The first discusses the relation between God and the Individual; the responsibility for ones behavior lies with the individual. Society is not responsible for what occurs in private. The second theme is concerned with the relationship between society and the individual. In this case, responsibility for individual acts lies with the individual and society (where these acts occur). Society involves itself with the consequences of these actions on society. From an Islamic point of view, the differences are certainly legitimate and this nuance is a conscious choice in order to make the subject more accessible to Muslims.

III. b. Why this heading division

1) The division into seven blocks of information is informed by the view of homosexuality in Islamic literature. The seven themes can be further researched, added to and expanded.

2) The division into themes should lead to a more accessible and ordered view of homosexuality and Islam. The information can easily be made into a booklet (a reference book).

2) These themes can aid discussions of emancipation and the Muslim community. The separation of themes one and three is already a step in the right direction. The difference between what is actually sinful, the punishment of certain acts, and the applicability of Islamic law can positively affect the way Muslims talk about homosexuality.

4) This thematic organization streamlines questions asked. People sometimes have vague and general questions about Islam and homosexuality. The thematic organization helps to clarify people's questions.

5) This organization gives non-Muslims a clearer idea of Islam and thus develops more understanding.

IV Summary

There is an approach to discussing homosexuality that is acceptable to Islam. The Islamic view of homosexuality and the exploration of the elements of this view lead to a thematic organization of the information on 'Islam and homosexuality'. This approach is accessible and works in an emancipatory way.


This paper is written by Omar Nahas, for YOESUF Foundation. 1998.

I. See 'The Index of Koran Words, Fouad abd el-Baki, Published by 'dar el-jil', Beirut 1945. This is a standard text with many re-prints.
II Koran 11:78, Sorat Hoed.
III See Fi Zilal el Koran, Sayed Kotb, pp. 598, Dar el-Shoroek 1988 Beirut. A well known explanation of the Koran, reprinted several times.
IV This sentence is taken from the book Sexual Education in Islam, pp78, Othman al Tawil. Dar al- Furkan Publishers, 1992
V Taken from the book, Zam Al liwat, pp 64. Written by Imam al Agerri ca. 360 according to the Islamic calendar. Newest edition Maktabat al- Koran Cairo, 1990.
VI see above note
VII see Fi Zilal, pp. 2429-
VIII see Fi Zilal, pp.2007- 2013.
IX see Aljisr: July 1998, pp. 5.
X the book is in written in Arabic.
XI Al Azhar is an influential Islamic university in Cairo
by Naziri
"The main point is their is a diversity of opinions on the issue of homosexuality, rather then argue the points you rely on personal attacks and homophobia."

Actually i DID post refuting your misguided notion that just any person can make ijtihad (with or without education formal or informal, dunya based or barzakhi). It was deleted because it proved you thoroughly wrong.
Incidentally, there was no death threat in ANY post of mine; vieled or apparent
by Naziri
"Ok, O you homo-hating, learn-ed ones: What is your position on ijtihad?"

That ijtihad cannot ever abrogate what is stated in black and white. The Qur'an says homosexuality is haraam. There is no role of ijtihad in interpreting that.

Ijtihad is used for taking textual dalil and extrapolating a fatwah based on the use of `aql to provide a ruling IN THE SPIRIT of existing dalil. In order to exercise ijtihad the mujtahid must first have sufficient `aql (which can be tested and determined by ability to argue using dalil), and also must have education in the Qur'an and Ahadith.

"Does a true Muslim, according to you, have the right to the use of independent reason in Quranic interpretation or not?"

`Aql is not "independent" if it is `Aql. `Aql must be BASED UPON something. If you are REASONING then you are basing your reason on SOMETHING. That is, if Islam says that `Isa al-Masih (as) was vegan and then says you can follow his example (in numerous Ahadith), then `Aql can be used to rule that veganism is the Sunnah of notable Anbiyah (as) and it is an acceptable diet.

`Aql can be used to note that Anbiyah (as) in non-desert contexts ate vegan/Ital and those in harsher climates ate animal flesh limitedly. Thus, through `Aql one can deduce that eating Ital is the ideal, though eating flesh is not outrightly prohibited.

One CANNOT however, deduce that - though the Qur'an says homosexuality is haraam and that the Qur'anic criticism of Sodom and Gomorrah was that is was a society rampant with homosexual deviation - homosexuality is somehow halaal.

Imam Zayn al-`Abidin (as) used to address Lady Zaynab al-Kubra (as) by saying to her "You are al-Hamdu-Lillah an untaught scholar" (Anti al-Hamdu-Lillah 'Alimah Ghayr Mu'allimah). Thus, it is clear that though she did not attend Hawza, she had sufficient self-study to still be an `Alimah. At the same time, we know that an 8 year old cannot be an "untaught scholar" except in cases of Ma'sumin of the Rusul and Anbiyah, or even simply of Muhaddathin perhaps; wa-Allahu `alim.

We know that Uways al-Qarni (ra) was taught via the Barzakh as well. So we can deduce - using `Aql - that Ijtihad is acceptable from Barzakhi instructed `urafa (who can demonstrate this via the information they bring back to `alam ad-Dunya), or by formally untaught `ulema who have studied immensely on their own, or by formally instructed `ulema with a certificate of ijtihad; OR by a combination of these. It is NOT acceptable for those who have not learned the Qur'an and Ahadith; those who cannot demonstrate their use of `Aql based on DALIL, to to abrogate passage of the Qur'an and claim it is merely their exercising of Ijtihad.

"If so, who says your interpretation is any better than anyone else's?"

The Qur'an.

"Did you use your right to ijtihad to come to your own conclusions?"

Again, ijtihad is not the "right" of someone to abrogate unambigous Ayaat of the Qur'an.

"Anyway, if not, it's only polite to cite the authoritative source for your interpretation."

That has been done and the Qur'an and Ahadith have been sited. But most notably, the QUR'AN condemns homosexuality and forbids it. There is thus, NOTHING to discuss beyond this reality.

"Who's your mufti?"

No one. What Mufti's do you supposedly follow in Shi'a Islam?

"Also if not, then you do truly espouse a fundamentalism. Nothing wrong with that per se, but to espouse it without copping to it is textbook hypocrisy."

We have no problems with sticking to the "fundamentals" such as the Qur'an and hadith/akhbar. But we also base our ijtihad on dalil from these sources. This

"So, which is it?"

It is CERTAINLY not following the Taqlid of Faris Malik who has NO islamic qualification, and is merely a german literature guy with a master's degree
by Dawud
You see, contrary to the majority opinion... Imam 'Ali's status as Amir al-Mu'mineen has plenty of dalil to back it up... and objective orientalist scholars like Wilfred Madelung in The succession to Muhammad: A study of the early Caliphate comes to the conclusion that 'Ali is the rightful Khalif. That is all from Sunni ahadith.

You attempt to speak for al-Qa'im, we do not. We speak of what the ahadith say about him. He will kill. His army with be that of anger. He will eat rough/coarse food... which incidentally is what al-Masih ate as well... vegetation, ruffage.

We PREPARE for the Rise, as is wajib upon all Muslimeen. Yet you try to degrade us for it. We spoke out against homosexuals because they threatened and strong armed others over our Islamic stance against homosexuality. There were no articles on the site, aside from a passing reference.

We must certainly be doing something RIGHT, we must certainly be on the STRAIGHT Path, when we get death threats and hatred from the extreme leftists among kuffar and so-called Muslimeen and the extreme right wingers among kuffar and so-called Muslimeen.

Even if we were to say it is a given that there are some who could be considered "natural eunuchs" as Faris Malik puts it... there is absolutely NO dalil that indicates they could indulge in homosexual relations. Particularly in light of the many references to Lut(as) speaking against his people for their male homosexuality. Even his argument regarding the Bible and homosexuality is invalidated because the Tanakh says that male homosexual relations are an "abomination."

You are astray if you honestly believe homosexuality is allowed in Islam, for that means you ignore the Qur'an and the numerous ahadith that prohibit this activity... and indeed prohibit men from even looking at other men's private parts, and women from looking at other women's private parts.
by oh why oh why
Why the fuck is it your business who anyone else sleeps with? You the bedroom police? That's revolutionary how, exactly?
by We just got it from the Quran.
So, you keep quoting the Quran at us and telling us what it clearly intends to mean to all people for all time. What is your qualification to make such interpretations, exactly?

And by the way, you keep quoting it in English. You think the translator didn't do some interpreting along the way?

Thanks anyway, bin Falwell, there's cheaper sources for your attitude. Dime a dozen where I come from.....
by a lit degree is a qualification, after all.
and it's more training than you've cited.
by sufi scholar
Here is an excellent article on internal divisions within Islam and the sin of calling a believer (muslim) a kafir, it is a grevious sin, and you all should repent for calling another believer a kafir and/or a apostate.

Also it is interesting that Dawud points out that the Qa'im will be a leader of killers, I guess Taliyah also sees it's role as destroyers of life as well. Apparently from the comments posted before they believe in killing those that disagree with them. How can you deny this after all the comments you have posted? How is a homosexuals sins greater then your sins?

Also, how can you deny that you believe in hurting and punishing homosexuals, according to Islam homosexuals are to be killed in some instances. What penalty do you believe there is for homosexuality? Seems to me that you do believe in killing homosexuals but aren't going to say it because that would be too honest. Be honest you support terrorism don't you? You believe in killing those that you consider Kafirun? Is this not true?

And on what religious scholars authority are you saying what you say anyway, do you have a point of emulation or is it all made up as you go along by a sort of group belief?

The Intra-Religion Conflicts Within Muslims
http://www.islamicsupremecouncil.com/intra.htm
by Mr. Obvious
"So, you keep quoting the Quran at us and telling us what it clearly intends to mean to all people for all time. What is your qualification to make such interpretations, exactly?"

Well, since i own EVER collection of Shi'a Ahadith (literally hundreds of volumes), an have read some collections multiple times, the Qur'an now around 7 times, and study Islam on a DAILY basis, have my articles quoted and even reproduced on Ayat'ullah Khumayni's (ra) website and the websites of many others, and i have a personal library of approximately 3,000 books that i have read... i would say that gives me the "untrained scholar" title at least to the extent that i can look at the Qur'an and quote you passages that say things that are haraam are haraam.

The Qur'an itself is in CLEAR, UNAMBIGOUS Arabic. When it prohibits something it just comes out and tells you. Ijtihad is for those issues which are UNCLEAR and have NOT been spelled out. Homosexuality IS spelled out in the Qur'an. Thus, Ijtihad is irrelevant to the discussion of the unambiguous Ayaat'ul-Qur'an.

"And by the way, you keep quoting it in English. You think the translator didn't do some interpreting along the way?"

Actually, i was letting Dawud do the quoting, would you like me to post it in `Arabi? i can break the Ayaat down word for word for you as well if you like. Just let me know.

"Thanks anyway, bin Falwell, there's cheaper sources for your attitude. Dime a dozen where I come from...."

Well that destroys the myth you were proposing that there is actually major disagreement within the Islamic world about homosexuality. If people agreeing with me are "a dime a dozen" i guess that actually lends credence to what i said about you all being a handful of Middle Eastern homosexuals who can't let go of the religion of your ancestors that you refuse to live.
by not one
To the rest of us, it's irrelevant.

by Naziri
"Why the fuck is it your business who anyone else sleeps with? You the bedroom police? That's revolutionary how, exactly?"

The real question is why is it YOUR business what our religion prohibits when the Qur'an clearly says in Ayat'ul-Kursi that there is no compulsion in religion. We are not forcing you to be Muslim, so why do you care what sexual activity our religion prohibits to the extent that you Homo-Nazi's have sent me and the organizer of the Total Liberation Tour DEATH THREATS and threats of protest and boycott just for me being there, speaking about issues completely unrelated to this matter?

"and it's more training than you've cited."

A degree in German Literature is nothing in Islam. i have studied Sociology, Psychology, Abnormal Psychology, African History... various things at a University level. But i would not cite these as Islamic credentials.

"Here is an excellent article on internal divisions within Islam and the sin of calling a believer (muslim) a kafir, it is a grevious sin, and you all should repent for calling another believer a kafir and/or a apostate."

Believer is a "Mu'min." A "Mu'min" is described in very specific terms in Ahadith. A Mu'min CANNOT be a homosexual. So what you are saying is inapplicable. i will not repent for calling a kafir a kafir. If the individual wants to leave behind his homosexual lifestyle and enter the fold of Islam, then al-hamdulillah, i would proscribe him the Traditional Chinese Medicine that i have proscribed elsewhere (which has helped a brother leave behind the Sodomite urges of the hormonal imbalance that he was born with).

"Also it is interesting that Dawud points out that the Qa'im will be a leader of killers, I guess Taliyah also sees it's role as destroyers of life as well."

Dawud doesn't point that out, Islamic Ahadith point that out in volume after volume. Pay particular atteniton to Bihar al-Anwar, volume 52... the whole thing.

"Apparently from the comments posted before they believe in killing those that disagree with them. How can you deny this after all the comments you have posted? How is a homosexuals sins greater then your sins?"

He said no such thing, he was merely quoting Islamic sources. We have never said we would bother to kill homosexuals. It is simply not worth it to us.

"Also, how can you deny that you believe in hurting and punishing homosexuals, according to Islam homosexuals are to be killed in some instances."

First of all are you not yourself claiming to be a Muslim? Yet you admit your abrogating and demonization of Shariah? How "queer."

The Shariah is also that zaniyaat should be given 100 lashes. We are not running around wiping all the sluts we see. This is the punishment that they deserve for the "Karma" or "Mazal" or "Qadar" of their actions. They will either accept their punishment in the Dunya, or find it amplified in the Barzakh.

"What penalty do you believe there is for homosexuality?"

Within an Islamic system or without it? i believe that homosexuals should be left to themselves as the Qur'an says. We should literally leave them to themselves and let them have their own secular society APART from an Islamic State.

"Seems to me that you do believe in killing homosexuals but aren't going to say it because that would be too honest."

Generally when Islamic sources referred to homosexuals, it was speaking of homosexual pedophiles and YES, i do believe they should ALL be killed ideally.

"Be honest you support terrorism don't you? You believe in killing those that you consider Kafirun? Is this not true?"

It is not at all true.

"And on what religious scholars authority are you saying what you say anyway, do you have a point of emulation or is it all made up as you go along by a sort of group belief?"

We ultimately pay taqlid to the Imam az-Zaman (as), and to all 12 A'immah (as) who have FAR MORE EXTENSIVE collections of writings than any of the maraji', but our views are often found reflected in the Fatawat of Fadhl'ullah.
by Anti-Fascist Action
Naziri says, "We ultimately pay taqlid to the Imam az-Zaman (as), and to all 12 A'immah (as) who have FAR MORE EXTENSIVE collections of writings than any of the maraji', but our views are often found reflected in the Fatawat of Fadhl'ullah."

That is the marja taqlid of the Lebanese Hezbollah Movement is it not? You have pictures of Muqtada as-Sadr on your website, but you live in America and enjoy the freedom of Americans but you admire the enemies of that freedom it's the price a free society pays for people like you. I think it's pretty clear you are extremists and do intend to create violence against those you disagree with. It's a pretty clear linkage, Taliyah-Hezbollah-Muqtada Sadr-Iranian Hezbollah and the Iranian intelligence service. You aren't revolutionaries your religious reactionaries, supporters of terrorism. You ignore legitimate Shi'a scholars when it is convenient and provide your own interpretations based on your political ideology. There have been dozens of false Mahdi movements in Islam and yours is just another of many competing for the mantel of leadership in that department today. One of the largest is the Baha'i Faith which has about 3 million followers.

Your members have made threats against others in this open forum, you espouse a violent ideology, your criminals espousing a criminal ideology, you train in martial arts and tell your adherents to arm themselves.

You say you are followers of Imam `Ali and the other Infallible ones, yet you break with those traditions when it is convenient for you. All these are symptoms of totalitarianism and extremism, you are ghulati (extremist deviants).
by blech
Wow has this thread degenerated or what?

A group of homophobic wanabe Islamic fundamentalists arguing against someone who stoops to the level or terorrist baiting (in this post Patriot Act world, using the T word is a pretty extreme form of hate speech).

While this thread seems to be leading nowhere fast, it does bring up some questions relating to radical support for third world liberation movements. While Taliyah seems like it is most likely just a buch of US based trustfundies playing fundamentalist since that seems cool these days, many of the radical left have sympathies for groups that if based in the US would be seen as right-wing. Supporting national liberation struggles while not really supporting the movements engaged in those struggles in tricky and can lead to confusing and alienating statements by many radical groups. For decades we have seen radical groups that support Civil Liberties in the US back Castro for reasons of national liberation of worker solidarity even though most who claim support for Castro would be fighting him if they lived in Cuba. Mnay of the national liberation movements in Africa also lead to dictatorships; while almost everyone on the left supported the liberation of Rhodesia, Zimbabwe is now in a troubling sutuation where the movement that fought for freedom is lead by Mugabe. Its easy to get stuck into a dualistic view of the world where one has to either support someone like Mugabe or support the economic inequality seen in Zimbabwe's rich white farmers, but simplified view of the world usually lead to dead ends. When in comes to the Middle East we should all take this into account; racism is wrong, Palestinians need freedom, descrimination based off religion is wrong, and so is homophobia, oppression of women, and fundamentalist interpretations of government. Most Iraqis support the resistance because its fighting against an occupier, but most Iraqis don't want the religious state envisioned by Sadr or Zarqawi.
by reality
that is so progressive of you blech. The T word is pretty accurate for this group. you need to wake up to the realities of this world. Killing others for political goals is Terrorism, threatening to cut someone's throat because they disagree with you is Terrorism. maybe you missed that threat before it was hidden by the editors.
by Mythology Goes Wild in Minds of Extremists
Is there really a Mahdi or is it made up by elites of early Iraqi society to justify their rulership over the Shi'a community?

Mahdi Studies Links:

Sunni Criticism:
http://www.ansar.org/english/mahditheory5.htm

Shi'a Writings:
http://www.yamahdi.com/books/pdf/justlead.pdf

by tkat
"For decades we have seen radical groups that support Civil Liberties in the US back Castro for reasons of national liberation of worker solidarity even though most who claim support for Castro would be fighting him if they lived in Cuba"

It was crazy, Mumia and lyn stewart both endorsed cuba's use of the death penalty against political prisionoers opposed to the cuban totalitarian state. It was totally shocking to hear them justify political murder, when both of them political prisoners/persecuted within the US. It made me wonder whether, leftists would really be fighting a totalitarian "worker" state. Anarchists would probably, from the historiacal examples in Russian and other similar "worker" states. But that might be what seperates anti-authoritarians from anti-capitalists/socialists. I wish I didn't know that many socialists find it justifiable the killing of people who disagree with them and don't favor the type of "progress" that they expound apon, but history proves the point.
I sort of like Cuba, but in the same way I sort of like Nader. They both are lame for various reasons, but out of all the examples of both states and politicians, they are generally alright within the current options.
by Dawud
Interesting that you'd cite "Sunni criticisms" and use the single most violent and facist "sunnis" as your example. The proprietors of ansar.org are Wahhabi/Salafis, it is they who are in control of the religious institutions of Saudi Arabia... which is a far more repressive state than Iran.

I find it quite hilarious that you accuse the Taliyah al-Mahdi of terrorism and then use "you train in martial arts and tell your members to arm themselves" as your justification for such an attack. I suppose you consider MOVE and the BPP terrorist? The BPP DID pull guns on the african nationalist "Black Panthers" when they realized that those guys were NOT true revolutionaries. You consider NOI and Malcolm X terrorist? They trained in martial art and armed themselves.

The Taliyah al-Mahdi is currently engaged in ideological warfare, period. We propogate our messages to those whom we think might be interested. Many have a violent reactionary attitude to us, true, but that does not invalidate what we are saying or doing. NOI and Malcolm X faced the same thing. MOVE did, the BPP did. We are currently working on allocating funding for various projects to be done in various communities. Building of mosques and other such things.

I also find it quite hilarious that some one suggests we are "trust-fundies playing fundamentalist," and yet this person is from the usually affluent left-wing. Quite funny.

It's also interesting to note that you lefties consider Hizbullah to be "terrorist" as only the U$ and Israel propogate, all other gov'ts recognize the legitimacy of Hizbullah's Islamic Resistance to the Israeli occupation of southern Lebanon. They are also one of the most popular political parties in Lebanon, amongst Shi'a, Sunni and Christian. They have only ever attacked ARMED Israeli usurpers of Lebanese land. Perhaps you should endeavor to study the situation more.

The terrorist threats were originally issued by pro-gay advocates on the now defunct Total Liberation tour message board. All over a single line in the Taliyah FAQs saying only that "we could probably gain more members by allowing homosexuals, but that is not what Islam allows." Prior to that the "Redifining Balance" article was not there, nor was the "Case against special rights for gays" article, OR "myth of their oppression" article. In reality, it was the PC thought police who caused these articles to exist. It was the PC thought police who decided that they have the authority to tell us how to think, who brought such solid opposition to them. Prior to that, we just simply did not care. Content to let you be and do your own thing and think how you want to. We are content to do that again, yet continually the PC thought police bring us up. I was threatened with stabbing because I publicly stated that I do not consider the queer "liberation" struggle to be part and parcel of the overall Struggle for True Liberation, that of the soul from the chains of nafsi slavery.

Stop slandering us, and we will not have to defend ourselves against your attacks. Stop threatening us with violence, and we will not have to tell you what will happen if you are so misguided as to attack us. It's as simple as that.

"That is the marja taqlid of the Lebanese Hezbollah Movement is it not?"

Actually the marja taqlid of Hizbullah is Ayatullah al-Uzama Sayyid Ali Khamenei, not Ayatullah al-Uzama Sayyid Muhammad Husayn Fadl'ullah.

"There have been dozens of false Mahdi movements in Islam and yours is just another of many competing for the mantel of leadership in that department today"

True, but we are not asking for leadership. We are not asking others to follow us as leaders. We are asking them to follow the Leaders(Imams) as their leaders. Thus, we present the relevant ahadith to the era of Mahdi's rise and call attention to the FACT that Imam Jafar ibn Muhammad as-Sadiq(as) told his Shi'a that they were required to prepare for the rise of al-Mahdi even if it meant gathering arrows. And also that Muhammad Rasulullah (sal) said that everything a man amuses himself is vain except three things: training his horse for war, playing with his wife and his martial practice.

"Your members have made threats against others in this open forum, you espouse a violent ideology, your criminals espousing a criminal ideology, you train in martial arts and tell your adherents to arm themselves."

It is completely legal to encourage people to arm themselves for self-defense, it is completely legal to train in martial arts. If it is not, then there are millions more than the Taliyah al-Mahdi who should be jailed. Then again, perhaps that is your particular brand of fascism... where only the gov't can be armed and trained for combat, so the peasantry are more easily pacified...

I have not threatened anyone, Naziri did not threaten anyone. How can you even varify that the person who made the "your throat needs to be slit" comment is actually a representative of the Taliyah or even a supporter? Aside from that... "your throat needs to be slit" would be the expression of an opinion and could be taken as an IMPLIED threat, but an actual threat would be more like "I AM going to slit your throat."

"You say you are followers of Imam `Ali and the other Infallible ones, yet you break with those traditions when it is convenient for you. All these are symptoms of totalitarianism and extremism, you are ghulati (extremist deviants)."

Where have we deviated from the traditions of the Ahl ul-Bayt(as)? Have we begun, or even encouraged, open rebellion in the United States or elsewhere? Are we currently engaging in illegal activities, or even encouraging illegal activity? Or are we patiently awaiting, and preparing ourselves for, the eventual and inevitable Rise of al-Qa'im(as)???? What was the tradition of the A'immah(as)? Imam 'Ali(as) fought his most bitter enemies by the sword(ie the Quraysh and the enemies of Muhammad, then Muawiyah). Imam Hassan fought until it was apparent that war would cause an irrepairible split between Muslims and cause much death, so he made a treaty with Muawiyah and contented himself with preparing the Muslims ideologically for the Rise. Imam Husayn(as) was backed into a corner by the son of Muawiyah, Yazid, and had to fight against overwhelming odds on the plain of Karbala... which lead to his martyrdom. Yet this served only as a tool for propagation of Pure Islam and made plain the deviancy of the tyrannical ruling elite. Imam Sajjad, Baqir, Sadiq, Kazim, Rida, Hadi, Naqi and Askari spread the Pure Islam taught to Muhammad(sal) and prepared the Ummah ideologically for the Rise of Mahdi while telling them to prepare for the Rise militarily by at least gathering arrows. Mahdi is currently awaiting the preparation by the Ummah for his Rise. The Shi'a have delayed the Rise through not following the Sunnah of the Ahl ul-Bayt(as). So your accusation of us not following their Sunnah by preparing martially and then awaiting the time of Mahdi's Rise is simply untrue. How could it ever be convenient for us to break from such a tradition of pragmatism?

"You ignore legitimate Shi'a scholars when it is convenient and provide your own interpretations based on your political ideology."

Interpretations of WHAT exactly? Our 'aqida is exactly the same as that of all Ithna Ashariyya Shi'a. The definition of ghulat are ones who are extremist in their 'aqida... ie. declaring 'Ali to be "god," or that Jibril(as) mistakenly gave Muhammad(sal) the Revelation instead of 'Ali(as).

Political views amongst the 'ulama differ, our political outlook happens to agree with that of Khumayni(ra) and Shariati(ra). Hizbullah and Muqtada as-Sadr. At least when it comes to Islam. I strongly suggest you read a nice little book called "Hizbullah Politics and Religion." I know it is kept in stock in anarchist bookstores, so go look for it. I'm sure you'll find it eye opening.
by Slowly and Deeply
Why Why WHY do any critical thinkers bother to waste any time on trying to argue with persons whose positions are based in dogmatic faith?

Do you try to argue logic with a toddler, or with someone who has had a lobotomy?

Would you seriously engage in arguing the subtlties of puctuated equilibria with Jerry Falwell?

What's the point?

Logic is simply not in the picture for these folks.

And in this particular case, neither is compassion.

I hope that in time they will come to see that their beliefs are based upon intolerance and hatred, which are not found on any of the innumerable paths to peace.
by God hates figs
They're not the only ones:

http://makeashorterlink.com/?V21042FD8



by Disparaging the Groups Not the Issues
Dawud,
You disparage the Wahhabis as though they are one bloc of people, but do not address their criticisms of the concept of the Shi'a Mahdi. Nizari and Taliyah Muslim both posted violence "Death to Munafiqun Sunnis", plus the tid bit about slitting a Muslims throat for holding a different opinion. These are not simply things you can right off, and you yourself preach about a violent Messiah. Your groups members manifest violence to those that disagree with them. It is all in black and white for all to see. Do you really believe that a movement that has as it's prime backing the Iranian Intelligence service, such as Hezbollah is, is a liberator. The Druze fought against the Israelis, the Sunnis fought against the Israelis many groups fight against the Israelis including Leftists. You try to dissuade the arguments by calling those that don't agree with your totalitarian viewpoints "PC" police. When you belong to a group whic is ideologicaly undifferentiated from the same Mullahs in Iran which are responsible for the imprisonment and torture of fellow Muslims based solely on their differing interpretation sof the Shari'ah. Maybe you have never known anyone that was tortured in Iran by your pious Muslim brothers? I have loved people that have survived torture in those Prisons, they were shari'ah abiding believers. I am very familiar with Hezbollah as a movement, there is a difference between supporting those struggling against occupation of their homeland by foriegn invaders and having an unquestioning attitude toward their political program, there is a reason Hezbollah is not the ruling force in Lebanon.
The use of the term gulati is not refined to those that deify Imam `Ali. It is also used as a adjective for extremism. You want to establish an extremist Islamic state, not unlike the theocracy of Iran, ruled by a divine king, the Qa'im. I see no difference between you and what Hizba Tahrir are seeking with the Caliphate both are based on an authoritarian interpretation of Islam and reserve opinions to the minority of the believers to rule of the majority of believers that do not agree with you. You have pictures of Muslims, Muqtada al-Sadr, whose forces have intimidated, attacked and probably killed other Ayatollah in Iraq, again their crime is that they did not endorse a theocratic state, a state based on Vilayat Faqih.
The primary sin I find that Taliyah commits is that of threatening violence against other believers. That I find deeply hypocritical. As well as claiming authority to interpret Islam for others. There is no way, writing such things as "Killing Munafiqin Sunnies" or Killing Munafiqin Saudis" can be construed as being in the spirit of the teaching of the Infallible 12 Imams. Wilayat is in occultation, there is no franchise on piety in this world. There have been many different ideas within Shi'ism itself as regards eschatology, some even see eschatology, you and your group do not hold proprietary knowledge over it.
by Talib
Violence or Non-Violence, perhaps you will listen to Ayatollah Shirazi on this?

http://www.shirazi.org.uk/non.htm
by Dawud
Qital is enjoined upon us, though we may not like it. It may be that we dislike a thing that is good for us, and love a thing that is bad for us.

To paraphrase al-Qur'an.

Please, show me where the Taliyah al-Mahdi has called for violence in any situation but self-defense. I challenge you to do so.

I've only told people who threaten me with violence that they will get the like of what they give me. Period. And I have NEVER done that on this board.

The throat slitting thing is not a product of me, nor is it a product of the Taliyah al-Mahdi as a whole... rather it was the opinion of a Mu'mina regarding those who twist the Qur'an to suit their own nafs. I understand the sentiment, but I do not condone it.

You cannot find an instance of me posting on this site, or any other for that matter, and "threat" that was not a response to someone threatening me or mine. I do have the means to protect my person and my family, and I do have the right to do so. It is fully legal.

There is a time and a place for revolutionary violence. The Taliyah al-Mahdi has never called for a violent uprising, rather it has said(as I have already explained to you half-wits) that the Mu'mineen are to prepare for the Mahdi's rise by accumulating knowledge of the martial sciences. This is not something of our own making, but the words of Imam Jafar Sadiq(as). It is also the words of Muhammad(sal). And of course al-Qur'an.

I do not particularly care if you hold certain figures, who are resisting the illegal occupation of their country, in low regard. I do not hold such an opinion. You cannot, and no one has been able to, prove that Muqtada as-Sadr had anything to do with al-Khui's murder. Yet it should be well noted that al-Khui conspired with the enemies of Islam to invade Iraq. There are MANY in Iraq who hated him.

Islam is not for Gandhi. We fight oppressors when need be.

Tell Imam Husayn(as) to be a pacifist. Tell that to all the A'immah(as) who clearly state in ahadith that Imam Mahdi will fight the enemies of Justice and kill them. I'm sorry if you do not want this to happen, but it's real.

Wahhabis are a unified whole in their obstinant hatred of the Shi'a and the Sufis, and their categorical chauvinism towards women.

I have never said I place full confidence in the Irani regime. The truth is that I am very critical of it. I don't fool myself into believing that there is no corruption even amongst the 'ulama... for in truth the Mahdi will kill 40,000 'ulama according to ahadith. I believe that Ayatullah Khumayni(ra) was a righteous and saintly Friend of Allah, but I do not believe him to have been infallible. Thus I believe he made some mistakes. Furthermore, I believe Ayatullah Khamenei to lack qualifications to lead a nation... and more importantly I believe that he lacks public approval(something which Khumayni had).

It is truly amazing that you're telling me what I stand for and believe in, when you can't present one scrap of evidence to support your opinion. Certainly I believe that the Shariah is the most JUST law for mankind to follow, all Muslims should believe that. Thus I would love for a Just government to be established by the Sultan al-Adl Imam Mahdi(as)! Imam Mahdi is the very same Khalif that the Sunnis are looking for, as their ahadith mention the very same name.

Personally I do not believe that Mahdi's government will be like the centralized governments we see today. Those that follow him will rever him like a tribal leader, recognizing his charisma and his wisdom. It will be organic, much like the Madinan government of Rasulullah(sal). I don't really see it being anything like Iran or any other government on this planet for that matter. Mahdi will rule with the judgement of Dawud(as), as the ahadith say.

Beyond that, I'm not even completely convinced that the Rise will occur in the dunya(this world), but that it might also occur in the intermediary world(barzakh). And there are many others in the Taliyah al-Mahdi that will say the very same thing. All the Taliyah has does is transmit the ahadith from the most reknowned of Shi'a collections. Particularly the 52nd volume of Bihar al-Anwar.

Agree to disagree. We pose no danger to you. The only danger lies in attacking us with physical force, we do have the power and means to repell attack.

We will do our dawah, you continue leading people astray from the Path that is Straight. Those who seek Truth will come to us, or another group of Muslims who are not leading them astray.

I can garauntee you that the late Ayatullah Shirazi would oppose your claims of homosexuality being permissible in Islam, by the way.

Salaam to the Mu'mineen wa Mu'minaat.
by Talib
Homosexuality was used by Iranian authorities to kill several sufi leaders in Iran. None of them where homosexuals but that did not stop the government from using it as a cover to kill these mystics off.

A Report on Human Rights Violations Against Sufis in Iran
http://www.mindspring.com/~altafb/sufipers.html
by Dawud
Unfortunately the author of this article seems to neglect to mention that Khumayni(ra) himself was a student of Irfan(gnosis) and tasawuff(sufism). He often got in arguments with the anti-irfani ulama over this issue.

I highly recommend you read Light Within Me by Allama Tabataba'i Ayatullah Mutahari and Ayatullah al-Uzama Khumayni... it is a great read. As well as Adabus Salat by Khumayni. and Forty Hadith by Khumayni.

The man was not exactly a "traditionalist."

He wrote an extensive commentary of Ibn Arabi's Fusus al-Hikam.

It is tragic that there is oppression of Sufis and Arifeen by munafiq "ulama" in Iran. It's a shame what many of these munafiqeen stoop to. Unfortunately, Khamene'i is not strong-willed enough to reign in these rogues. Khumayni, on the other hand, would have been able to do so.

Odd, though, there's a chain called SufiBurger in Iran is there not?

Salaam to the Mu'mineen wa Mu'minaat
by Talib
Salaams Dawud,
I am actually an adherent of Mulla Sadra (http://www.mullasadra.org), the irfani philosopher. I have actually put some effort into studying Islam with real and valid intentions.

Thanks,

Talib
by Talib


The reason I personally feel that Muslims can be homosexual, bisexuals or transexual is primarily based not on a harfi or textual argument it is really based on intuition (hikmat). I believe the Qur'an is correct in terms of the prohibition against homosexual behaviour, for example the story of Lut (s.a.s.). For that homosexuality was exercised as a form of degradation rather then love. I believe the homosexuality of the Prophets day was based on debasing others. Modern homosexuality is based not on degradation or abusing others it is based on mutual love, attraction or whatever you want to term it. There are morally correct and ethical LGBTQ people. That is a intuition it is not based on a textual argument, there is no dalil to my beliefs in this regard. It is based on the recognition of the Divine Love (Hubb) that exists in all people. It is based on the dealing with each individual as a unique person that is to be respected and understood and not to be dominated or oppressed. I also have this intuition in regards to vegeterianism, being against abortion, against the state and for radical environmentalism. It is also the same intution that has made me a Muslim. Perhaps my reasons do not fit into the ijtihad system or any scholarly works of the fuquha, my reasons are based on an intuition thats source is in the alam al-mithal, the barzakh. May we all be guided by the Anwar al-Lahut. I actually believe that all that seek guidance from the Unseen, that we will be guided, That change is guided by the Infallible ones from the Alam al-Malakut. That we in fact, collectively, are the Raja (Return), when we seek connection to the lights of guidance. That is mysticism for you.

Adhu bi Allah min ash-shaytan ar-rajim



by ...or for that matter, homo-hatred.
...an interesting article, perhaps of some ironic relevance to this thread. A taste:

"Indeed, Islamophobia is the only form of prejudice to which the middle class can readily admit: a religion which is perceived as advocating repression of women and hatred of gays renders acceptable forms of prejudice that would be unthinkable if directed against any other social group."

* * *

I do wonder if our little mujahedeen here are (as they hint) African-Americans, doing to gays in turn what white supremacists have done to them, "healing the hurt with hate" as it were-- finding someone they can put down in order to build themselves up.

It would explain an awful lot.
by in case comments are removed . . .
Ghadab



Jul 23, 2004 04:05 AM

Killin Meat-eating Sissies: i.e. Timid and Stinky
Ghadab



Jul 21, 2004 06:22 PM

Stinky Evan and Timid Tyler from the TL Tour are cowardly bitches who clam up face to face, then talk shit on the internet.
Ghadab



Jul 21, 2004 01:44 AM

Killing Matthew Shepard
Ghadab



Jul 19, 2004 12:38 PM

Killin' Munafiqaat Sluts
§?
by KMS UNIT
What is the point of the two previous posts?

The persons profile that you posted the link to has never even posted on this site!

Are you just jealous that you are not in our KMS Unit?
. . .but if anyone is, & wants to discuss the massive problems with this tour (esp. Taliyah) & how to avoid shit like this in the future, e-mail me.
by JD
index.gif

Domain Name: hardlinemovement.com

Registrant:
Micah Collins naziri@taliyah.org

Administrative Contact:
Micah Collins naziri@taliyah.org

Billing Contact:
Micah Collins naziri@taliyah.org

by Anti-Mason (dajjasantimason [at] hotmail.com)
I am the biggest enemy of taliyah and naziri..

But i'll support him over the anti-fagness of islam... the system of G-d... the system that you fags (muslims or not) don't believe in..

All the major religions of the world are against gayhood, i.e. Islam ( sunnis & shia ), judaism, christianity ( those fag popes are not representatives of true christians ), et cetera..

ya dig?


Anti-Mason the Brown Sayyid - Paki by design
by Anti-Mason
For them to have a possibility of having babies through "un-natural sex" after getting married..


We are 100% volunteer and depend on your participation to sustain our efforts!

Donate

$110.00 donated
in the past month

Get Involved

If you'd like to help with maintaining or developing the website, contact us.

Publish

Publish your stories and upcoming events on Indybay.

IMC Network