Obama bows before Gays

What a way to celebrate Nobel! Obama bows before Gays

The very next day after he got the Nobel for Peace, Obama was delivering a “historical” speech to an organization of gays telling them that they would no longer need to hide their sexual preferences in order to serve the US military. No statement on redoubling the efforts to take its armies out of Muslim countries. No pledge never to invade other countries again. But gays must be reassured of his total unconditional support. What a way to celebrate the coveted honour: Do something which despite the growing corporate and political support to homosexuality still shames and worries the overwhelming majority not only of the world but also of America. (Democratic norms don’t work here.)What an ideology of freedom! Prostitutes and wives must be equal, straights and gays must be equal, and criminals and law-abiding must be equal.

But the rights of those denying and accepting Holocaust, those criticizing and supporting America, those entering America with Muslim and non Muslim names cannot be equal. Visas have been denied to people (like Prof. Tariq Ramadhan) on the grounds of their views, their religion and political alignments. What a sad commentary on the modernity that human rights today have come to be equated with the rights of gays. This despite the fact that homosexuality has proved to be the most dangerous of all forms of sexual relationships, and the life expectancy among gays has been found to be at least 25 years less than the average. This despite the fact that homosexuality has been proved to be one of the biggest factors (along with promiscuity and prostitution) in the spread of AIDS that has already consumed more than 45 million lives. Interestingly, you are not supposed to make public your religious and cultural preferences; but you are egged on not to hide your sexual preferences. Go ahead Obama, your concession of greater rights to gays will perhaps be a fitting tribute to the ideology of those who have chosen you for Nobel.

Dr Javed Jamil
_____________________________________

Dr. Jameel, your comments are appreciated. Indeed, Dr. Manmohan Singh is
visiting the USA now, his three Muslims on the press entourage were denied the
visa, and one of them is still left behind because he was a Muslim. It is a
shame on the US and India. The Tariq Ramadan case is also shameful.

Full story at:
http://mikeghouseforindia.blogspot.com/2009/10/manmohans-team-subjected-to-american.html

If you were given 15 minutes and asked to speak about Prophet Muhammad's Hujarat
from Mecca to Madinah, would you speak about Bibi Khadija,Bibi Ayesha, Hazrat
Umar and others? Or would you focus on what you were asked to speak? Obama just
did that, he was there to speak about one topic and not other issues. Focus
should be one item at a time.

Obama represents the interests of every American, that is 301 Million of us, he
is elected to protect the rights and ensure safety of every citizen, that
includes Gays and Lesbians. Many of us disagree with their sexual orientation
and even hate them, but that is not the role of the president, to hate.

I would not want Manmohan Singh of India to mistreat India's minorities even if
80% of the majority want otherwise. As we live in civil societies, we may not
agree with some one's practices, but we have to defend the civil rights of every
member of the society who are minding their own business.

Discrimination has no end, today it is them and some day it is us. The
Christians, Muslims, Jews and others whose scripture have been interpreted to
condemn the gays and lesbians, need to verify if those interpretations were
short-sighted and time-suited. As God has gifted as with the ability to think,we
need to employ it.

Thanks to the variations in translations, it shows us the limitations of human
understanding, and challenges us to strive to grasp the whole truth. What was
hitherto cut and dry is no more. May be it is Allah's hint to us to get closer
to understanding the truth. The focus ought be on the essence rather than
literal meaning. Presently there are 21 translations of Quraan available.

Religion is about justice, inclusiveness and common goodness. Islam is for
Aalameen.

Jazak Allah Khair
Mike Ghouse
_____________________________________

Re: [indianmuslims # 38246] Re: What a way to celebrate Nobel! Obama bows before Gays

Warning: This email is mostly off-topic and relates to the broader argument that took place a couple of weeks ago on this forum. I think this email addresses core issues without getting into many of the tangents of the earlier discussion.

The Christians, Muslims, Jews and others whose scripture have been interpreted to condemn the gays and lesbians, need to verify if those interpretations were short-sighted and time-suited.
Why verify it? Why not discard it outright? Why be half-hearted? Why not take this argument to its logical conclusion? Why be bound by something you don't agree with?

The dichotomy is clear: either you believe the Qur'an is the uncorrupted final Word of the Lord and Creator of mankind and everything else, or you don't. Why dilly and dally in the middle? If you believe in the first, you will realize that some things are open to interpretation, and some basic things aren't (O you who believe, enter into Islam wholeheartedly, O you who believe do not be like those before you who took parts of the Book and discarded other parts, and many other such verses). And if you don't, well, you're free to do that. It's the inconsistency that is bothersome.

You will reply, ah but there are different interpretations! There is no clergy in Islam! And Allah is the only Judge! Let's take these piece by piece.

Different interpretations: Yes, but on many many issues, the entire body of scholars has come to a single conclusion (homosexuality is one such issue, by the way). This is called 'ijma, and it is binding upon the Muslim community.
Your argument that we cannot know if an interpretation is better than any other is flawed: the criterion is the Qur'an and the authentic sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (saws). We can't be definitive about everything, but scholars can judge relative merit based on this.
This idea that everything is relative and we can't say one is better than the other and everything is equal is an element of dangerous post-modern thought that Muslims are well-advised to avoid.
You are welcome to think freely and come forward with an opinion, but if you want to put a Muslim label on that thought, you will have to abide by the rules: back it up with proof from Qur'an and Sunnah (which also takes a good amount of thinking by the way), and people of knowledge will judge that opinion based on its merit.
If you want to take on the scholars, you have to be scholarly.

No clergy: There is no theocracy in Islam in the sense that a priest doesn't necessarily wield political or absolute power. But there are degrees of knowledge and degrees of understanding. Deciding legitimacy of opinions is the task of trained scholars who are familiar with the corpus of texts and the opinions of those before us. Do you have the audacity to dismiss all of that without having even a fraction of their knowledge?

Actually, I suppose it is theoretically conceivable that someone can have the audacity to dismiss all of it. But again, they will have to buttress their claims with sound arguments from the texts.

Allah is the final Judge: True, but this doesn't mean we say every opinion is equal. And this doesn't mean we say every person's belief is as legitimate as everyone else's (why do we have the Qur'an in that case?). The Qur'an, in clear unambiguous language, defines correct belief and incorrect belief. You can't interpret up to mean down, nor black to mean white, nor tawheed to mean permissible shirk.

As God has gifted as with the ability to think,we need to employ it.

Are we necessarily wrong and/or of subpar intelligence if after applying our mind we don't agree with you?

I get the feeling you use the word "think" as a euphemism for "interpreting away" or "excising" those bits of Islam that are uncomfortable in today's context. As Muslims we apply our full intelligence to make sense of what Allah wants for us, without questioning His Wisdom. If this is not the case, I apologize for suggesting it might be.

If our minds were enough to decide everything, we wouldn't need any revelation. Without getting into aqeedah issues, in a nutshell, Muslims are meant to apply their intelligence in the paradigm created by revelation.

I realize there has been a huge discussion in recent weeks, and I apologize for inflaming it further, but I think subtle flaws in our belief can lead to great losses in the Hereafter.
I don't have the energy to get drawn into a debate. I'm trying to put forward the Ahlus-sunnah wal-jama'ah position, and I'm trying to show how your ideas contradict it (your ideas are not new by the way; they have been discussed in some form or the other for almost the entire history of Islam). You're free to label me however you like; I most likely won't respond unless something I said is unclear or something beneficial can come of it.

Religion is about justice, inclusiveness and common goodness. Islam is for Aalameen.

Islam is about the recognition and worship of our Lord. Justice, inclusiveness and common goodness is delineated by Him.

Wassalam

Hidayath

_____________________________________

I am pleased to read your comments, and indeed this is how a discussion ought to be carried; objectively. Thank you; it is a breath of fresh air.

My obligation is to respond in the areas where we have a different understanding and my focus would be precisely that.

Hidayath: The dichotomy is clear: either you believe the Qur'an is the uncorrupted final Word of the Lord and Creator of mankind and everything else, or you don't. Why dilly and dally in the middle?

Mike: Qur’aan is the uncorrupted final word of the Lord. There is no dilly dallying there. Thanks to the variations in translations (about 20 of them now), it shows us the limitations of human understanding, and challenges us to strive to grasp the whole truth. What was hitherto cut and dry is no more.

Three examples to consider:

Wife Beating

Dr. Laleh Bakhtiar offers another meaning to the translation of the Arabic word "Idrib," traditionally translated as "beat," which has been mis-understood and abused over the centuries by men who would be abusive any way, whether they are Muslim or not. "Why choose to interpret the word as 'to beat' when it can also mean 'to go away' - either one from the other, may be it meant separation as a process of re-evaluation. – Details at: http://quraan-today.blogspot.com/2009/05/wife-beating-quraan-434.html

Apostasy

There is no punishment for some one leaving Islam, yet, for centuries the scholars of yesteryears believed in the death penalty. No one imagined that they could be wrong, there is enough information to see that they made mistakes or may not have made, but finding the truth is human endeavor.

" ... Let there be no compulsion in religion: Truth stands out clear from Error ..." [2:256]
This is Islam's unambiguous affirmation of freedom of faith, which also applies to changing of faith. The Qur'an illuminates before the humanity the two highways [90:10], one of which leads to salvation. Islam is an invitation to the highway toward salvation, but it is based on FREEDOM OF CHOICE. Details at: www.ApostasyandIslam.com

Fateha 1:7

There are about 20 million copies of free Qur’aan given out, translated by Hilali Khan, printed in Madinah, that is an overwhelming number. The translations of Yusuf Ali, Pickthall, Asad and few others remain standard consistent translations, but the Hilali one is hate inciting. He has deliberately mistranslated it to appease his time; fall of the Ottomon Empire – There are sixty verses in Qur’aan that have been mistranslated - http://quraan-today.blogspot.com/2008/01/unlike-jews-or-christians-17.html

Hidayath - Are we necessarily wrong and/or of subpar intelligence if after applying our mind we don't agree with you?

Mike – This is not the scholar in you. Mine is an opinion to verify and double check and not a firm statement of belief.

Hidayath - I realize there has been a huge discussion in recent weeks, and I apologize for inflaming it further, but I think subtle flaws in our belief can lead to great losses in the Hereafter.

Mike – You are not inflaming it at all, you are adding to a healthy discussion. Those who come out of a set mould become intolerant, as they cannot weather a different point of view. I don’t take it personally; it is the issue we are trying to understand in its full complexity. It is not about you or me to be offended.

Hidayath - your ideas are not new by the way; they have been discussed in some form or the other for almost the entire history of Islam

Mike – I never claimed them to be new, nor are they, my ideas.

From a simple Quran of 114 Sura’s at the completion of the revelation, we have added volumes of material from innumerable hadiths to reducing them to what Imam Bukhari thought were authentic; the four schools of thought, Sharia Laws the Tafseer and interpretations… and the interpretations continue…

All we need to do is to have an open mind to understanding the Qur’aan, it is packed with wisdom that we will be learning for centuries to come and adding volumes of our understanding to it. We need to welcome critiques and ideas and develop a better understanding of it.

Finding the truth is our own responsibility.

Jazak Allah Khair

Mike Ghouse
_____________________________________

Message # 38251

Wa'alaikum ussalam

1) Your example of the word "waDribuhunna" in 4:34 : This is an area where there is difference of opinion among the scholars, one of the few I alluded to. However, the fact that there is some difference of opinion here doesn't mean that there is an equal amount of difference in other parts of the Qur'an (tawheed for example). Like I said, in other parts of the Qur'an you can't say that up really means down, and that white really means black.

Same with apostasy: Great scholars have differed on this (read Dr. J. Badawi for example).

These things have to be tackled issue by issue. One gray area in one issue doesn't mean that everything is gray.

2) 20 translations: There are more than 20 translations. Again, each one is judged by how much it sticks to the Qur'an itself, the circumstances of revelation, the understanding of the Prophet (saws), and the understanding of His Companions. The fact that over 20 translations exist doesn't mean all of them are right, and it doesn't mean that Islam isn't definitive on certain issues.

3) Hilali and Khan translation: Not all translations of the Qur'an are meant for da'wah. What Hilali and Khan use for footnotes is in fact an authentic hadith, and can't be denied by you nor I. It may be unpleasant for non-Muslims to read, but the fact remains that the Prophet (saws) said it. Granted this particular approach may not win the hearts of non-Muslims, but that is not a problem.

4) Thinking and intelligence: The reason I asked if we were of subpar intelligence if we don't agree with you is because you keep saying we should think, but when someone does think and get back to you, you basically tell them they need to think more because they haven't agreed with you yet.

5) Increasing our understanding: Yes we need to increase our understanding of Islam and what Allah wants of us, and sometimes this takes a lot of research, but that research is solidly grounded in the Qur'an, authentic hadith, opinions of the Companions and scholars who followed them. We cannot use anything else as sources of guidance and criteria for legitimacy. We can use techniques of analysis and everything else that has been developed later, but not those axioms and principles that contradict basic understanding of the Qur'an and sunnah.

I will say it clearly: The Qur'an and sunnah exist for a purpose: to be understood. They don't exist for us to say that oh it's all open to interpretation so everything is OK, that any opinion is OK. That's the same as not having divine guidance at all. There are guidelines for interpreting (the Qur'an describes itself as being clear Arabic), the Companions and later scholars developed this further. If you want to advance a particular way of interpretation (and it sounds like you do) then please make a case for it, backed up with the regular sources: Qur'an and sunnah. Prove to everyone how your approach is superior to current understanding (every other scholar has done exactly so for whatever opinion he wished to advance). The trouble is, you can't because much of what you promulgate flies in the face of Qur'an and Sunnah. If one understanding of one ambiguous or general verse is contradicted by ten other clearer verses, which opinion is stronger? The sciences of tafseer have a number of agreed upon basic axioms. Before you quote Surah Kafiroon and 2:256, take a look at the tafaseer of the scholars before us on what that verse meant. You have to analyze those verses in context of the rest of the Qur'an (can you study the normal behavior of a fish outside water?).

Wassalam

Hidayath

_____________________________________

Hidayath,

Indeed, all understanding should be resourced
from Qur'aan and Sahih Hadith.

Thank you
Mike Ghouse