jump to navigation

Update to “Sodomites” essay May 4, 2010

Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Uncategorized.
add a comment

Why were the Sodomites destroyed?

The above essay is one of the key researches done for this blog, and I often refer readers to it in order to grasp the essential argument for the prohibition of homosexual acts based on the Qur’anic narrative concerning the punished people of Lut (peace be on him), also known as the Sodomites.

Of course, the prohibition does not rest on that story (mentioned in eight passages of the Qur’an) alone, but extends from the general Qur’anic prohibition of any sexual relations outside marriage, as well as specific hadith texts condemning homosexual activity. Even so, this story provides a core upon which a broader understanding can be built.

I have cast a fresh eye over the essay and added a few paragraphs in reference to common claims based purely on wishful thinking, especially the idea that the Sodomites were guilty of male-male rape as opposed to consensual relations.

I’ve also made the Qur’anic passages more easily searchable thanks to the folks at Quran.com!


IslamOnline.net Special Coverage January 26, 2010

Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Media, Relevant.

Islam Online, probably the biggest Islamic website out there, has a special page discussing issues relevant to this blog, under the title:

Unveiling Homosexuality

While we don’t necessarily agree with all the content, it is a good thing to see the issue taken seriously, and we hope it will lead to further in-depth analysis of this pressing issue, which affects society as a whole, in addition to the people affected by same-sex attractions.

Update: Also see this page at their subsite, Reading Islam:

All About Homosexuality

Quite a few people have left comments, and it is a shame there is no mechanism for constructive debate at the site.

Georgetown symposium ’08 January 4, 2010

Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Queer Muslims.

Here’s a slightly old post from “Muslim Apple” [linked fixed August 2011] that’s worth drawing attention to, as the sister has made a good summary of a symposium featuring mainstream scholars as well as the charlatan Daayiee Abdullah aka Sid Thompson.

The words of Imam Johari Abdul-Malik seem to have been particularly wise, in that he defended the correct Islamic view while emphasising understanding and compassion, and condemning violence and persecution. The following point is a particularly unusual one to hear from a Muslim scholar:

Imam Johari used the analogy of pork and how he knew from the days before his Islam that pork “tastes sweet” and that no one raised as a Muslim that has never eaten it can tell you that “pork is nasty” and in a similar fashion, if a someone says, “gay sex is nasty,”  just ask them, “how do you know?” Otherwise, they are speaking without knowledge.

Yes, as Muslims we are disgusted by sin, and human nature does make certain things disgusting to ordinary tastes, but that cannot act as a proof against those who feel differently. Our reference should be to the essential methods of establishing law in Islam, namely the abundant proofs of the Qur’an and Sunnah.

The caller to Allah is not an oppressor December 19, 2009

Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Concepts, Islam.

In striving to clarify the teachings of Islam regarding sexuality, and inviting the creation to obey their Creator in what He commanded them and prohibited them from, while responding to false claims and misconceptions, we hope to be counted among the callers to Allah, of whom the Qur’an says:

And who is better in speech than one who invites to Allah, works righteousness, and says: “I am of the Muslims”?

Name-calling does not hurt us, but it is sad to see how readily the people towards whom this sincere advice and invitation is directed turn against those who – from their hearts – wish the best for them. Sometimes medicine is bitter. The Qur’an provides many examples of the people’s rejection of their prophets and other reformers, which we may exemplify here with the case of the People of Lut (peace be on him):

But his people’s response was only that they said: “Eject them from your town. They are a people who want to be pure!”

When we tell people (Muslims!) that homosexual acts are forbidden in the Qur’an and Sunnah in the strictest terms, and that the person who engages in them will receive severe divine punishments if he does not repent, some people call us oppressors (“homophobes”). Well what should we be, “haramophiles”? If the person who is forbidden from following his desires considers himself oppressed, or – as they say – a victim of discrimination, then who is the guilty party?

When I tell someone to abstain from a sin he is attracted to (and claims to be created desiring it!) I am not his oppressor, because: (1) I did not create him; (2) I did not legislate the prohibition of that act. So if either of these things is the “crime”, then would someone accuse Almighty God!! Glory be to Him, Who does not oppress anyone in the least.

{…And your Lord does not wrong anyone.} [18:49]

In fact, if someone were walking to a place to commit a sin, and he happened to fall and break his leg, this would be the greatest divine mercy upon him. How much better that we receive admonition and heed it, seeking the pleasure of Allah and safety from His wrath.

Finally, as I said to someone who was seeking to justify homosexual acts in the name of mercy: “Our approach says that anyone can be a Companion of Paradise, while yours seeks to give people vain hopes then send them to Hell.”

Faisal Alam fighting Islam December 17, 2009

Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Media, Queer Muslims, Responses.
1 comment so far

Islamic etiquettes of debate dictate that you should think the best of the intentions of those with whom you disagree, but sometimes they have no redeeming qualities. Such is the case with Faisal Alam, founder of Al-Fahisha and therefore one on whom the hadith of our Prophet (peace be on him) applies: “Whoever establishes an evil pattern of conduct (sunnah sayyi’ah), then upon him is the sin of it and everyone who acts upon it until the Day of Judgement.” If the People of Lut (peace be on him) were the first humans to indulge in the base sin of sodomy, then Alam and his friends like Sid Thompson aka “Daayiee Abdullah” have (mis)led the way for modern Muslims who have sought to justify their sinful choices in Islam.

Let’s be clear that what they hate is not some Muslims’ “homophobia”, but Islam itself. In his latest interview entitled “Closet Jihad“, we find these telling statements:

With growing evidence that he’s no longer alone with his struggle, Alam says he has not fully reconciled his sexuality with his own faith. He doesn’t attend mosque, and considers himself more spiritual than religious.

“At the end of the day, we’re fighting 1,400 years of theology that in many ways is against us,” he says.

Listen well, O you who are “proud to be gay Muslims” (who comment here from time to time!), is this the sort of person you want to follow? He and his bedfellows are hurtling to their destruction, yet it is never too late for them to save themselves by turning back to God’s guidance.

As I said in response to another fool misusing the word jihad…

Your Jihad is to resist your urges to do things that Allah Most High has prohibited.
Your Jihad is to stay patient through these temptations.
Your Jihad is to overcome these unwanted desires.
Your Jihad is to please Allah every day and draw closer to Him.
Your Jihad is to turn to Him, trust in Him and ask His help in life.

Meanwhile people like Alam who  have no faith left in their own hearts are trying to build a “coalition” to challenge the Muslim community and its leaders. A bit of humility and sincerity to Allah would be a much better solution to their problems. If they want a sympathetic ear to help them in obedience to the Creator, then that is their absolute right. If they want to shake things up in the name of “gay rights”, then they will meet with justified failure.

Support “gay Muslims” with proper concepts! December 1, 2009

Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Concepts, Media, Responses.

Inayat Bunglawala is a British activist who is not afraid to express opinions that upset enemies of Islam and Muslims, or sometimes fellow Muslims. I appreciate his efforts, even if I disagree with some things he says. Recently he has supposedly opened debates on the place of “homosexuals” (by which we mean here: people who identify as such, or same-sex attracted people who don’t) among the Muslim community – debates we have been advocating on this blog for a long time, alhamdu lillah.

The title of his recent Guardian blog post (probably added by an editor) was: Gay Muslims need support.

But what sort of support? I think anything that could be done to jeopardise a human being’s standing before his Lord does not deserve to be dubbed “support”. As religious people, we should only advocate support that entails guiding people to goodness in this life and satisfaction in the Hereafter.

Bunglawala mixes a few issues that really ought to be addressed individually. First, he praises the Muslim Council of Britain’s support for the Equality Act a few years ago:


Islamophobic blindness August 6, 2009

Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Homosexualists, Responses, StraightWay.

A little note for the anti-Muslim bigots of Harry’s Place and the Spittoon, who have recently taken to linking to some of our blog posts. Welcome, and feel free to read: it could be a cure for your ignorance.

But every time you repeat your own invented terms, like “curing gays” and “ex-gays”, and put them in quote marks to imply that you read them here, you just prove how dishonest you are. You can’t even read a few articles and get the correct gist. Sure, you’re going to disagree, but at least disagree with what we actually say, not your pathetic strawmen. One of you couldn’t even spell my name right in his article!

Or go ahead, roll around in your own filth if you want. It’s your right.

Al-Fatiha survey: your voice? July 31, 2009

Posted by Mujahid Mustaqim in Queer Muslims, StraightWay.
1 comment so far

The queen of ‘Queer Muslim’ organisations, Al-Fatiha USA, is conducting a survey of what they now term “LGBTIQQ” Muslims – “including Muslims who use other cultural and ethnic terms to refer to their own experience”. Or religious and common-sense terms too, we presume?

This is the first survey of its kind. The results of this survey will tell us all about our community, our experiences and our concerns. The results will guide Al-Fatiha’s educational and advocacy work on behalf of LGBTIQQ Muslims, and will be shared with the entire community …

It is vital to have the largest survey participation possible so that the results represent our entire community.

If you think that, for a change, they should also pay attention to the views of mainstream observant Muslims who have same-sex attractions and choose the path of striving (jihad) to resist and overcome them, then please take part so they cannot truthfully say they didn’t hear from you.

Go to it here: 2009 Al-Fatiha Survey

‘Gay Muslims’ comment on Eastenders July 30, 2009

Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Queer Muslims, Responses, Shari'ah.

Remember Pav Akhtar, the one whom Muslim students were asked to support in NUS elections? That same sore loser who went crying to the Muslim Weekly with the following lies after most Muslims didn’t back him?

Pav said that his sexuality was something he was personally “contending with” and insisted he has never recognised homosexuality as permissible in Islam.

I posted written and pictorial evidence back then that he was in fact fully “out and proud” (his words), and now he is the Chair of Imaan, a London-based pro-homosexuality group who have obviously featured on our blog before. According to today’s Guardian:

Pav Akhtar is not usually a fan of soaps. But the 30-year-old local councillor and Unison worker has been paying special attention since EastEnders introduced its first gay Muslim character. Akhtar, the chair of Imaan, an organisation for lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender Muslims, advised the BBC on the storyline in the hope that the character of Syed Masood would help tackle the double discrimination of homophobia and Islamophobia that many gay Muslims face.

The Guardian article – What’s it like being a gay Muslim? – features various voices, none of whom are Muslims who choose to resist their same-sex attractions, as Syed is presently doing on the show. That course of action is what mainstream Muslims would advise any person in that situation. Yet the implication of the article, probably constructed with the advice of Pav and Imaan, is that those people are not “true to themselves”, which I suspect will also be the eventual message of Eastenders.

It also states that “The Muslim theologian Amanullah De Sondy said recently that the vast majority of Muslims were ‘deeply homophobic'” – massaging his ego by making him a “theologian” when he’s just a recent PhD in Sufi poetry with vanishingly meagre credentials in Islam. Oh, and mightn’t he have just a bit of bias in this question? Also, given that he’s not a sociologist or anthropologist, how did he gather this “vast majority” data? Ah, doesn’t matter does it, it’s only journalism.

Let’s take a look at a few of their comments…


Eastenders and the troubled Muslim July 29, 2009

Posted by Rasheed Eldin in Media.

I’m not an Eastenders viewer, but lots of people have asked us to share some comment about the ongoing storyline involving Syed Masood, the engaged Muslim man who has a homosexual encounter with an openly gay man called Christian, and has tortured decisions to make over many subsequent episodes.

I tend to concur with those who have suggested the portrayal of this Asian family is unrealistic, and would add that it’s not the first time that homosexuality was used as an accompaniment to Muslim-ness, because the latter is obviously not enough. Maybe it’s better than making it about terrorism! I previously commented on Channel 4’s apparent obsession, as evidenced by Shariah TV. I also recall an episode of US drama Numb3rs in which the Muslim murder victim seemed to be a character providing a spotlight on Islamophobic violence, but it turned out he was killed by his secret boyfriend(!)

Allow me to share a couple of interesting comments from the MPACUK forum: