Co-founder, American Learning Institute for Muslims
Sherman A. Jackson is a professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies, a visiting professor of law, and a professor of Afro-American Studies at the University of Michigan , Ann Arbor . He has served as Executive Director for the Center of Arabic Study Abroad (CASA) in Cairo , Egypt , is a member of the U.S.-Muslim World Advisory Committee of the U.S. Institute of Peace , and a co-founder of the American Learning Institute for Muslims (ALIM). The “On Faith” panelist is also a former member of the Fiqh Council of North America , past president of the Sharî‘ah Scholars' Association of North America (SSANA) and a past trustee of the North American Islamic Trust (NAIT).
In addition to numerous articles on Islamic law, theology and history, Jackson is the author of Islamic Law and the State: The Constitutional Jurisprudence of Shihâb al-Dîn al-Qarâfî , On the Boundaries of Theological Tolerance in Islam: Abû Hâmid al-Ghazâlî's Faysal al-Tafriqa and, most recently, the controversial Islam and Blackamerican: Looking Towards the Third Resurrection . Jackson has lectured throughout the US and in numerous countries abroad. He has also taught at the University of Texas at Austin , Indiana University, Wayne State University and was recently offered a full-professorship at Stanford University , which he declined.
Close.
Sherman Jackson
Co-founder, American Learning Institute for Muslims
Sherman A. Jackson is a professor of Arabic and Islamic Studies, a visiting professor of law, and a professor of Afro-American Studies at the University of Michigan , Ann Arbor . He has served as Executive Director for the Center of Arabic Study Abroad (CASA) in Cairo , Egypt , is a member of the U.S.-Muslim World Advisory Committee of the U.S. Institute of Peace , and a co-founder of the American Learning Institute for Muslims (ALIM).
more »
I love it when religious moralists hypocritically add "And God knows best" to the end of whatever naive tirade they're spouting. Really? God knows best? Do you really believe that? If you had the humility to believe that, you would lose your lust -- yes, LUST -- for moral certainties and stop interfering in other people's lives.
"However, within the public sphere of life, homosexuality should be outlawed. Those who practice homosexuality in display should be punished so that this immoral and disgusting act is not something which people consider to be acceptable." -- Ashfaq
There are already laws against lewd behavior in the US, regardless of sexual orientation. Why do we need to single out gays and lesbians for special punishment? Or is that not your position?
"However, within the public sphere of life, homosexuality should be outlawed. Those who practice homosexuality in display should be punished so that this immoral and disgusting act is not something which people consider to be acceptable." -- Ashfaq
There are already laws against lewd behavior in the US, regardless of sexual orientation. Why do we need to single out gays and lesbians?
Ba'al:
It's unfortunate that someone who deals in the biological sciences cannot accept that what surrounds him/her is created by a higher power. Allah guides whom He wills to Him. If you can't perceive Him behind all the works in this universe, then there is nothing which I can say to you further to convince you of it. Insha Allah (God-willing) one day perhaps you will become God conscious.
People who advocate Intelligent Design in any form, be they Christian or Muslim, are propagating a medieval world view.
But don't just take my word for it. This website http://www.csicop.org/intelligentdesignwatch/teach-controversy.html
has the results of a survey of the opinions of the Chair/Dean etc. of a College or Department of Biological Sciences at major research universities across the United States. Every one of us rejected Intelligent Design in all of its forms. I was one of the Chairs surveyed and one of the quotes is mine (I am a biologist and a department chair and I think about these kinds of problems all day long).
I am not an expert on Islam, but I would be surprised if there was a verse in the Quran or a hadith that addressed evolution directly. Muslim colleagues have told me that your religion does not demand that you maintain this willful ignorance any more than it demands that you believe that the earth is flat or that the sun circles the earth. In short, I am not trying to slander your religion; just you and other advocates of Intelligent Design. As for Christians who ascribe to the creation story in Genesis and the Hebrew bible, I ask them which one? There are at least two, as well as a remnant of a third different story there about how God created the universe and the people and animals in it, and they are not internally consistent.
To those who point to "irreducible complexity" as proof of a creator:
Nothing can be designed by anything that is not more complex than the thing designed. This means that god must be more complex than what he created, and that he, in turn, would have had to have been created by a being even more complex than he is. Thus, an infinite regress.
Ba'al:
I guess you didn't read the whole post. Also, for further reference on the refutation of the theory of darwinism and all its current manifestations, visit the site www.harunyahya.com. Ofcourse he uses science and the Quran (there is no conflict in Islam between these two) to derive his analysis and conclusions. I think you need to also go find out the truth for yourself. Don't try to hide the truth by slandering me and my fellow Muslim believers.
Ashfaq writes "Actually achievements in the field of science has proven the existence of a creator."
Actually, they do nothing of the kind. In fact, this sentence proves only one thing, namely that Ashfaq and his ilk do not understand the meaning of the word 'prove'. They are ignorant and dangerous.
You implied you dont live in the US. I'm just curious, where do you reside.
Anyway, you wont get a rise out of me, I'm not a debator, I'm a spectator here learning from people. And by observing I see a lot of people here appear to be intelligent and full of integrity, then there are people like Mark who appear as monkeys jumping up and down trying to get attention.
Your take on American Muslims post 911 is partially correct. There are people who have looked into orthodoxy for self-assertion, but there are also people who have looked to other things for that same reason, and thats really where the American Muslim Progressive movements originated from. I have a lot of respect for progressive muslims but nowadays the trend in American Islam is that, there's a move towards an evolving Traditional Islam and thats the competing ideology for Progressive American Islam and the Progressive Islam is not doing very well. I think thats because progressive islam doesnt have much Islam to offer in the first place. At least thats the reason I didnt choose progressive islam. Although progressive islam pushes the higher ideals social justice, but it doesnt do it in the spectrum of islamic spirituality, societal equilibrium, sacred law and natural order.
I mention natural order especially because we're on the topic of homosexuality. In islamic spirituality, one of the core principals is jihad of the nafs. Internal struggle. Allah says that he has created mankind in turmoil and struggle. And one of the things that mankind is made to struggle against to maintain natural order is sexual transgression. People are required to abstain from sexual transgressions be it fornication, pedophilia, incest, sodomy or infidelity. And by the way, the act of sodomy can also occur between a man and a woman and that is also forbidden in islam.
Again, I'm an observer and these are things I've observed and I seek correction in anything wrong I've said.
After reading your comments, which are so opposed to the way we think here in the northeastern United States, I'm interested to know where you live - your country of residence.
Actually, I must tell you, my inner voice is saying to me, "What planet is he from?"
Best wishes.
Posted March 5, 2007 11:23 AM
I was simply curious about where you live for the reason stated.
It's just a case of a parochial resident of one region wondering where you lived because what you were posting didn't comport with his view of what was usual in his region. Simple curiosity.
I was surprised by your reply because it was so simple and American colloquial. I guess I was expecting an elaborate reply from some exotic location (Zanzibar?). No reason I should have thought that.
Brett:
Actually achievements in the field of science has proven the existence of a creator. During the days of Charles Darwin the technology that existed was no where compared to what is available now. The technology which we have now has discovered that even within a human cell there is such complexity that it's amazing. Also, this complexity is not such that it is random. Everything is so structured that a person would be a fool not to realize the "hands" of our Creator behind it. You would be a fool to think that this universe which is so perfect came about by chance. The order which you see around you. The way the day changes into the night and so forth and so on. By looking at these things, you would be a fool to say that there is nothing and no one behind it. There is someone and that someone is Allah (God). The One and Only who created humans from the earth and Who created everything in the universe and Who has the power to recreate us. Remember your creation. You were created from the intermingling of fluids. From there you became the man/woman you are. Aren't you aware of the science today which is trying to create beings from certain cells of the body? Do you think Allah does not have that ability to recreate us from the remains of our bodies?
I apologize to anyone whom I may have offended intentionally or unintentionally.
Norrie:
The way you asked me regarding where I live was somewhat peculiar. From what I could understand from your post asking me where I live, it seems you thought my opinions were somewhat odd. Therefore, I kept my response short and simple. I am not sure exactly why you would ask where I resided. Please do respond.
The usual phrasing from American Christian fundamentalists is: "God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve."
I thought Ashfaq's reply to my asking him where he lived was odd. It sounded too much like the informal reply a native non-Muslim American would have made.
Of course the likes of you. People sceptical and sick of organized and disorganized religion, blind faith and invoking God for every good and evil that they had done:).
It's Steve and Bruce, so the Americans like to say, not Steve and David. Low on my list of priorities too, except if I know them and they don't invite me to their wedding. Spouse and child abuse are more widespread and urgent to be addressed, but it is not as "sexy" and "spicy" an issue as Steve and Bruce for those obsessed about sex and what people do in their bedrooms and with whom.
And no, love and tolerance is not universal.
Have you not been reading On Faith threads? Muslims are intolerant of other Muslims. Christians are intolerant of Christians within and outside their denominations. Muslims, Christians and Jews are intolerant of each other. Atheists are intolerant of believers and vice-versa. Men are intolerant of women and vice versa and on, and on and so on.....
As for love, well, that is subjective too. Even a parent can love one child more than the other. Love comes and go, or we won't have divorces. If one can fall out of love with one's spouse and sometimes even hate one's parents, sibling and family, what more others.
Tolerance means just that - to tolerate. It does not call for respect, accomodation, much less love. I can't teach you love and tolerance but to start with acceptance. To accept that nothing is perfect. To accomodate the imperfections. Then, perhaps, you may be on your way to love yourself, then your spouse, your family, friends and the "rest".
And be sceptical. It is healthy. Just don't be cynical. Now, that is bitter. Do I sound chicken soupy enough :)
If by the likes of me you mean honest people with a low tolerance for BS, well, then I guess you got me. I showed up here.
Sorry if I seem a bit flip but in light of world history and current events I find this fixation and intolerance of homosexuals more than a bit sad. If not irrelevant.
Sorry but Steve and David getting hitched ranks pretty low on my list of issues.
Then again I thought God loved everybody equally.
I guess I have a lot to learn. Please enlighten me on love and tolerance my dear Muslim friends. Your track record is stunning.
I was just wondering when the likes of Hmmm will finally turn up here:)
Ashfaq
Come on out.... Sherman Jackson and Ali are real Muslims. Who are you? Another Sayeed and Ahmed? Nice try. As I've said before, Muslims can recogize the tone and approach of another Muslim. Even the Taliban would give additional points to reiterate their contentions.
Besides, a Muslim man would seek to soothe, mollify, console, appease a Muslim woman rampaging and raging about her rights in Islam with couterpoints.
Maybe we could just marry a 9 year old and strap a bomb to my car and drive through a market. Apparantly that is just fine with you...or is that a morality that I can just not accept?
"And God knows best..."
P.S.: Frankly I don't like your chances. Catholics, you better do some soul searching too. (Hint, the soul is not down the alter boy's pants)
From a movie on Chicago Socks, Black Socks and them throwing the game away. A boy said that to one of the players.
Ashfaq
Come on! Is that the best you can come up with? A slur, a slander? Instead of coming out with counter reasons?
No, I have no non Muslim masters. I live in an independent and sovereign country. I am master of my own choices in life as a Muslim.
And stop blaming the west for all our problems. You may part of the problem not the solution. Go ahead, waste your energies on hate and blame instead of channeling it positively towards the betterment of your fellow Muslims, especially those in developing countries and women.
And do read up what is happening in the wider Muslim world. News for you - Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey etc are relying less and less on Middle Eastern thinkers and writers on Islam. Thank Allah that Muslim men in Indonesia, Malaysia and Turkey are positive towards women's rights under Islam.
Afraid of uppity Muslim women? The Prophet Muhammad PBUH never was and listen to women. Surely you remember this, the first Muslim who believed the Prophet was a woman, Khatijah.
You :"Muslims unanimously condemned pork and wine consumption as immoral"
The pigs and grapes may not feel the wrath of a people that yammer away at nothing 6 times a day, but I'd feel a lot better if Muslims unamimously condemned gun powder and tnt.
Me : Ahh... the grapes of wrath from you. There was a Japanese translation of John Steinbeck's book that was titled "The Angry Grape", now out of print.
As for your angy gripe, pigs are supposedly smart and can still make you ill if not properly raised or cooked. Hindus don't eat beef, as cows are sacred, so why the fuss if Muslims consider pigs unclean? And you don't eat dolphins and whales, but the Japanese do, so, why not take up on that too?
Alcohol is addictive and mind altering. Are you sure you had not downed a sixpack before writing the above? Muslims condemn and oppose unjust wars and weapons of mass detruction. All Muslim states are state party to the NPT. Only one Muslim state with nukes, Pakistan. And no, we don't do cluster bombs, landmines, stealth bombers and other innovations in inhumane warfare. We just buy them from over-eager western arms manufaturers keen on profits.
By the way, Muslims are supposed to pray five (5) times a day, not six (6) as you always put in the On Faith threads.
Joe Campbell:
You: Just to be fair, belief in a muslim god is as dumb, useless, and dangerous as belief in a christian god.
You're all puppets. Be gone.
Me: That is ambitious Joe. A wish to that some 4 billion adherents, at least, of Christianity and Islam to be gone? Bgone has been wishing that for a long time with his persistent promotion of Hoaxbuster to open up the minds of believers re their delusions in believing in God. And why are Hindus exempted from being characterized as delusionals for believing in a deity/deities? So what if anyone believe in the flying spaghetti monster?
Say it ain't so Joe.
Had enough fun for today. Got to get to work. Different time zone for me chaps.
I was trying to get a rise out of Ali and Ashfaq.
Muslim men like them are never around to talk on women and polygamy etc, but turns up to condemn gays. It seems easy for everyone to take on gays.
Don't worry about it. Muslim men must be more honest that it was men's interpretation, formulation and enforcement of Shariah laws that are flawed and biased in many instances with regard to the promotion and protection of women's rights under Islam among others.
So, let me take on my fellow Muslims I disagee with here as I do in my own country. A few verbal or written grenades is what some of them needed to look honestly at what we think we believe in, what we think we know and what we are doing in the name of God and for God towards fellow believers and others.
You are a reminder that I need to be careful that my condemnations of repressive fundamentalists of all stripes do not edge over the line into a blanket that covers everything and everybody that is religious. I always appreciate your open and seeking tone.
With careful reading of Mr. Jackson's essay again, it is more tolerant than it seemed at first.
"Muslims unanimously condemned pork and wine consumption as immoral"
The pigs and grapes may not feel the wrath of a people that yammer away at nothing 6 times a day, but I'd feel a lot better if Muslims unamimously condemned gun powder and tnt.
.....and I am really, really getting ticked off at Muslim men who sought to oppress the "weaker and less powerful" among them, be they women or gays, in invoking God and the Qur'an when they feel oppressed by others, from the Taliban, to some Iranian mullahs to men like Ali and Ashfaq. Sorry chaps, we are not indulging in your security blankets of the known knowns.
The Prophet Muhammad PBUH said in a Hadith, "Half your religion is from women", and "Heaven is under your mother's feet". Muslim women are reading and studying the Qur'an, Hadiths, fiqh, kalam and Shariah laws too. We will make it so Mr Jackson, Ali and Ashfaq. In the name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful, we will make it so and take away interpretations that suits your personal interests, biases and prejudices, not the umma as a whole. Men like you hold back women, hold back Muslims.
Mr. Jackson, Ashfaq and Ali are all men who subscribe to Muslim orthodoxy.
Must be hell to be a Muslim in the US after 9/11, forcing many American Muslims to dig deeper into orthodoxy for self-assertion and identification as a sort of defence mechanism. It seems that US Muslims have to answer for all the "sins" of Muslims outside the US.
Yes well, it is not fair for me to say so, being a Muslim in a Muslim majority country where we are freer and be more open to question Muslim orthodoxy without feeling threatened, misunderstood or marginalised by the majority of another faith.
I should cut American Muslims some slack, they being everyone from Bosnians to Arabs to Iranians to Indians (Sunnis and Shiites), all with different traditions of Muslim practices and beliefs.
I pay more attention to Muslim converts. They are "purer" Muslims in many ways. Of course there are Muslim converts like the American Taliban and the British Shoe Bomber. Sigh...
And yes, I am with you against Taliban-minded believers. And against the Salafists too, the godfather of the Taliban take on Islam.
"Just a thought - I'm assuming that the 'it victimizes no one' crowd would also support any measure to make a marriage between a brother and a sister legal? Or an Uncle and his niece? As long as the incestuous relationship is consensual, I see no need for you to object. Agreed?"
No. There are most definitely victims in incest. They are the people who are abused and exploited for family members' lusts, as well as the offspring who are born with genetic defects. Those are very valid reasons to outlaw incest. In my view, the issues of incest and pedophilia and bestiality are red herrings in the discussion on this site.
Ashfaq, You wrote "within the public sphere of life, homosexuality should be outlawed". If I were to replace the word homosexuality with Islam in that sentence I suspect you would be outraged. Rightly so -- at least in part because you are probably aware that there are people in the USA who feel that way.
If two people enter into a relationship by mutual consent, it is their own business, and not yours. Just as it is their own business whether they are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, or atheist. None of those decisions when made by other people affect you. This is very different from killing, stealing, defrauding, etc. etc.
The Taliban is an abomination --whether it be Christian or Muslim or any other kind. And you are a hate-filled bigot.
As for the comment by Mr. Jackson, I still wonder what he means by Islam "being forced" to work within a certain moral and political framework. It seems that the professor regrets this framework, not surprising because the point of view expressed in his essay and by his apologists would run roughshod over major swathes of the Constitution.
You said : "Only when religion has died will civilization be able to confront the issues which plague us."
You are absolutely certain of that? Come to think of it, religion causes conflicts and wars in the name of God, but beliefs also created great monuments, structures and art - see all the magnificent churches, sublime music and great art of Europe in the name of religion, from Greeks to the Renaissance. And the Mayans, and the Egyptians, and the Babylonians and the Persians.
Pol Pot does not believe in religion. Castro too.
Religion bled and purged the communist tyranny, from Catholic Poles to, if you can stand it, Afghan Mujahideen.
Brett,
You said : "Islam, along with Christianity, is faced with a dilemma from science both are incapable of resolving."
Of course. It was the monasteries in the semi-dark ages and Middle Ages as well as Al-Andalus where Greek philosophy was preserved, translated and studied, and the sciences got their start. Including medicine. Anyone heard of, say, Ibn Khaldun, the first sociologist.
By the way, no Muslim has gone on a rampage on evolution and creationism. Bloody Muslims, coopting the Indian zero into Arabic numerals and passed it on to the west giving everyone hell on math.
Ali and Ashfaq
You must be living in the US. There is a progressive Muslim movement outside the US in some 50 Muslim countries. Surely you are not presuming to speak for all of the other 1.3 billion Muslims outside the US with their own Muftis and ulemas.
And what is wrong with being a progressive Muslim to push forward the Muslim world in line with the core Islamic principles of social justice, justice, individual dignity and peace?
Since you are both living in the US, I thank Almighty Allah that you both will never have the oppurtunity to discuss, revise and formulate Shariah laws in Muslim countries.
Religion is an ideology, a set of beliefs. If we cannot criticize someone's beliefs then you have effectively silenced all dialogue. Accusing me of "hate speech" because I criticize Islam (along with all other religions) isn't doing theism any favors. Theism must be rooted out from our societies and recognized as the great evil it truly is. Only when religion has died will civilization be able to confront the issues which plague us.
Islam, along with Christianity, is faced with a dilemma from science both are incapable of resolving. Science has clearly, and definitely, shown the absurdity of theism. We should discourage religious thought where ever we encounter it. Only when Christianity and Islam are both dead will civilization be able to truly confront the problems we contend with.
Just a thought - I'm assuming that the "it victimizes no one" crowd would also support any measure to make a marriage between a brother and a sister legal? Or an Uncle and his niece? As long as the incestuous relationship is consensual, I see no need for you to object. Agreed?
You said
" However, within the public sphere of life, homosexuality should be outlawed. Those who practice homosexuality in display should be punished so that this immoral and disgusting act is not something which people consider to be acceptable."
To re-emphasize Dr. Jackson's point, Islamic law applies to muslims only, even in a majority muslim place.
But in a majority non-muslim place, its the other religions or the secular law that have the burden of deciding what to do about this issue.
For muslims, its enough to know that homosexuality has no legitimacy in islam. Even with this progressive-islamic agenda that a lot of people are pushing, because the truth is, progressive islam has no merits itself.
After reading your comments, which are so opposed to the way we think here in the northeastern United States, I'm interested to know where you live - your country of residence.
Actually, I must tell you, my inner voice is saying to me, "What planet is he from?"
"I should not have to accept the morality of homosexuality."
While I don't know much about Muslim doctrine, I agree with Phaedrus. No one is required to accept the morality of homosexuality. Any personal conduct that victimizes no one shouldn't be up for approval or disapproval by others or by society. You don't have to like homosexuality, but whether people should be gay or straight is not up to you.
Homosexual acts is illegal under civil law inherited from the British in my country. And we have a parellel Shariah court system too.
To date, no one has been charged and punished for homosexuality either under civil law or Shariah law. As you said, it is all based on evidence.
So, now, let me say again to you, homosexuals are the least of our problems, but divorces, remarraiges, alimony, child support etc are the primary concerns of the Shariah courts.
Phaedrus:
As you are aware, even within a secular society, there are certain laws and regulations which people are expected to follow. If these regulations are not followed, there are consequences attached. For example, when an individual steals and is caught by the secular law authorities. This individual is processed through the judicial system and then based on the evidence he is either punished or set free. Similarly in a system based on submission to the will of God; i.e. Islam, there are certain laws and the inadherence to these laws lead to certain repercussions (based on the evidence). It's not arbitrary justice.
So, should we Muslims not leave God to decide on people whose sexual orientation are different from 'straights'?
Should not God be the final decider to forgive what is sinful?
As a Muslim, I am shocked and dismayed that you forgot that every Sura in the Qu'ran, and before doing anything, a devout Muslim would precede them with, "In the name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful".
The Taliban said those very words in their most horrific transvesty of Shariah laws and interpretations of the Qur'an - judging and punishing victims on the flimsiest of allegations and slanders. Where is the justice called for by God? Is this not tyranny and oppression that God ask every Muslim to fight against?
And surely you do remember that the worst sin in the "eyes" of God is hypocrisy, and hypocrites would spend the most time in hell of all sinners.
"Within the public sphere of life, homosexuality should be outlawed. Those who practice homosexuality in display should be punished so that this immoral and disgusting act is not something which people consider to be acceptable. "
Another promoouncement from a practitioner of the "religion of peace."
Assalam Alaikum Mr. Jackson,
I agree with most of what you have written. I also agree with the fact that within the personal realm of non-Muslims there should be no interference in their moral affairs. However, within the public sphere of life, homosexuality should be outlawed. Those who practice homosexuality in display should be punished so that this immoral and disgusting act is not something which people consider to be acceptable. God created Adam and then he created Eve (Peace be upon them). The natural order which God created is that men should have a relationship with a woman. Those Jews or Christians or Muslims who say otherwise or accept otherwise are sinning.
I don't think you'll find many people trying to deny your right to hold whatever repugnant prejudices you wish. That's part of living in a free society. Of course, that you derive your hatred of gays from medieval fairy tales does not change the fact that you are a bigot.
The only point of contention I have is your claim that marriage is primarily a religious institution. That is certainly not true in the United States or any other country I am familiar with, as marriage confers numerous legal and financial rights.
There is no god, thus there can be no prophets upon whom to wish peace. Get over it, grow up, look around, it is 2007. Stop blowing your selves and everyone else up over false claims and ridiculous beliefs.
Muhammed may not have been a pedophile, as mores were different then, but he ceratinly was a fraud. IF it were possible on this site I would draw you some cartoons. I would include yahweh and jesus too, just to convey egalitarianism.
Mark, I hope that you read about Islam from its original and authentic sources. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was a Prophet of God and to speak ill about any Prophet is not a good thing. Prophets peace be upon them all have brought nothing but good to humanity.
If there was any truth to the statement you have made I would have been the first person to leave this religion. Prophet Muhammad had fierce enemies in Arabia who wanted to kill him or defame him or harm him in any way possible but they fully aware of his life and history never accused him of what you have said above. So just think about it why was that? They accused him for a whole lot of other things but they never accused him of what you have said because it wasn't true and it was absolutely within the norms of that society to marry someone of a younger age.
You can study any culture from that era and you will find that in Europe girls would get married around that age. The age of physical maturity of any rural culture which does not enjoy the comforts of the 21st century living standards is very different.
I sincerely hope that you will reconsider your opinion about any Prophet of God or for that matter anyone or anything which other people revere and if its too difficult for you then the least you can do is to keep your opinions in private sphere so that you might not harm other people's feelings.
Mr. Jackson writes "The moral and political framework within which Islam is forced to express itself – especially in the modern West – tends to distort its voice and force it into apology and misrepresentation."
I wish he would elaborate on this because I have the vague sense that the underlying meaning is pretty unpleasant.
the problem here is that accepting gay unions isn't just a religious issue. Once gay couples can be legally married, it affects me monitarily, educationally, politically, etc. If I could simply say "go ahead and be gay, I just don't have to agree with you," that would be fine. But in actuality, I will be forced to accept teaching in public schools about homosexuality being "right", among other things. And that affects me personally. So, go ahead and be gay if you want, but don't tell me I have to accept it as good and right.
good comments- I disagree in that marriage is more than religious preference but a societal institution that has significant ramifications on social order and the raising of children.
I also find it interesting that there are no comments on your page when you say that in the practice of your faith, you do not condone homosexual activities. I wonder if your Muslim faith is protecting you from being villified by those who so readily bash Colson and Thomas and other Christian postings.
All Comments (60)
I love it when religious moralists hypocritically add "And God knows best" to the end of whatever naive tirade they're spouting. Really? God knows best? Do you really believe that? If you had the humility to believe that, you would lose your lust -- yes, LUST -- for moral certainties and stop interfering in other people's lives.
February 9, 2008 5:25 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on February 9, 2008 17:25
"However, within the public sphere of life, homosexuality should be outlawed. Those who practice homosexuality in display should be punished so that this immoral and disgusting act is not something which people consider to be acceptable." -- Ashfaq
There are already laws against lewd behavior in the US, regardless of sexual orientation. Why do we need to single out gays and lesbians for special punishment? Or is that not your position?
April 22, 2007 1:11 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on April 22, 2007 13:11
"However, within the public sphere of life, homosexuality should be outlawed. Those who practice homosexuality in display should be punished so that this immoral and disgusting act is not something which people consider to be acceptable." -- Ashfaq
There are already laws against lewd behavior in the US, regardless of sexual orientation. Why do we need to single out gays and lesbians?
April 22, 2007 1:01 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on April 22, 2007 13:01
Which one do you mean? The one that created the 14,000th version of god, the 1 millionth, the 4th..........?
March 7, 2007 5:30 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 7, 2007 17:30
Phaedrus:
"Thus, an infinite regress. "
And God cannot be infinite because...?
March 7, 2007 12:22 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 7, 2007 12:22
Ba'al:
It's unfortunate that someone who deals in the biological sciences cannot accept that what surrounds him/her is created by a higher power. Allah guides whom He wills to Him. If you can't perceive Him behind all the works in this universe, then there is nothing which I can say to you further to convince you of it. Insha Allah (God-willing) one day perhaps you will become God conscious.
March 7, 2007 10:18 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 7, 2007 10:18
Ashfaq
People who advocate Intelligent Design in any form, be they Christian or Muslim, are propagating a medieval world view.
But don't just take my word for it. This website http://www.csicop.org/intelligentdesignwatch/teach-controversy.html
has the results of a survey of the opinions of the Chair/Dean etc. of a College or Department of Biological Sciences at major research universities across the United States. Every one of us rejected Intelligent Design in all of its forms. I was one of the Chairs surveyed and one of the quotes is mine (I am a biologist and a department chair and I think about these kinds of problems all day long).
I am not an expert on Islam, but I would be surprised if there was a verse in the Quran or a hadith that addressed evolution directly. Muslim colleagues have told me that your religion does not demand that you maintain this willful ignorance any more than it demands that you believe that the earth is flat or that the sun circles the earth. In short, I am not trying to slander your religion; just you and other advocates of Intelligent Design. As for Christians who ascribe to the creation story in Genesis and the Hebrew bible, I ask them which one? There are at least two, as well as a remnant of a third different story there about how God created the universe and the people and animals in it, and they are not internally consistent.
March 7, 2007 7:06 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 7, 2007 07:06
To those who point to "irreducible complexity" as proof of a creator:
Nothing can be designed by anything that is not more complex than the thing designed. This means that god must be more complex than what he created, and that he, in turn, would have had to have been created by a being even more complex than he is. Thus, an infinite regress.
March 6, 2007 9:02 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 6, 2007 21:02
Ba'al:
I guess you didn't read the whole post. Also, for further reference on the refutation of the theory of darwinism and all its current manifestations, visit the site www.harunyahya.com. Ofcourse he uses science and the Quran (there is no conflict in Islam between these two) to derive his analysis and conclusions. I think you need to also go find out the truth for yourself. Don't try to hide the truth by slandering me and my fellow Muslim believers.
March 6, 2007 8:33 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 6, 2007 20:33
Ashfaq writes "Actually achievements in the field of science has proven the existence of a creator."
Actually, they do nothing of the kind. In fact, this sentence proves only one thing, namely that Ashfaq and his ilk do not understand the meaning of the word 'prove'. They are ignorant and dangerous.
March 6, 2007 6:39 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 6, 2007 18:39
Jihadist
You implied you dont live in the US. I'm just curious, where do you reside.
Anyway, you wont get a rise out of me, I'm not a debator, I'm a spectator here learning from people. And by observing I see a lot of people here appear to be intelligent and full of integrity, then there are people like Mark who appear as monkeys jumping up and down trying to get attention.
Your take on American Muslims post 911 is partially correct. There are people who have looked into orthodoxy for self-assertion, but there are also people who have looked to other things for that same reason, and thats really where the American Muslim Progressive movements originated from. I have a lot of respect for progressive muslims but nowadays the trend in American Islam is that, there's a move towards an evolving Traditional Islam and thats the competing ideology for Progressive American Islam and the Progressive Islam is not doing very well. I think thats because progressive islam doesnt have much Islam to offer in the first place. At least thats the reason I didnt choose progressive islam. Although progressive islam pushes the higher ideals social justice, but it doesnt do it in the spectrum of islamic spirituality, societal equilibrium, sacred law and natural order.
I mention natural order especially because we're on the topic of homosexuality. In islamic spirituality, one of the core principals is jihad of the nafs. Internal struggle. Allah says that he has created mankind in turmoil and struggle. And one of the things that mankind is made to struggle against to maintain natural order is sexual transgression. People are required to abstain from sexual transgressions be it fornication, pedophilia, incest, sodomy or infidelity. And by the way, the act of sodomy can also occur between a man and a woman and that is also forbidden in islam.
Again, I'm an observer and these are things I've observed and I seek correction in anything wrong I've said.
March 6, 2007 1:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 6, 2007 13:21
Ashfaq,
Here's what I posted to you:
Ashfaq,
After reading your comments, which are so opposed to the way we think here in the northeastern United States, I'm interested to know where you live - your country of residence.
Actually, I must tell you, my inner voice is saying to me, "What planet is he from?"
Best wishes.
Posted March 5, 2007 11:23 AM
I was simply curious about where you live for the reason stated.
It's just a case of a parochial resident of one region wondering where you lived because what you were posting didn't comport with his view of what was usual in his region. Simple curiosity.
I was surprised by your reply because it was so simple and American colloquial. I guess I was expecting an elaborate reply from some exotic location (Zanzibar?). No reason I should have thought that.
Best wishes to you.
March 6, 2007 11:01 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 6, 2007 11:01
Brett:
Actually achievements in the field of science has proven the existence of a creator. During the days of Charles Darwin the technology that existed was no where compared to what is available now. The technology which we have now has discovered that even within a human cell there is such complexity that it's amazing. Also, this complexity is not such that it is random. Everything is so structured that a person would be a fool not to realize the "hands" of our Creator behind it. You would be a fool to think that this universe which is so perfect came about by chance. The order which you see around you. The way the day changes into the night and so forth and so on. By looking at these things, you would be a fool to say that there is nothing and no one behind it. There is someone and that someone is Allah (God). The One and Only who created humans from the earth and Who created everything in the universe and Who has the power to recreate us. Remember your creation. You were created from the intermingling of fluids. From there you became the man/woman you are. Aren't you aware of the science today which is trying to create beings from certain cells of the body? Do you think Allah does not have that ability to recreate us from the remains of our bodies?
March 6, 2007 10:18 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 6, 2007 10:18
I apologize to anyone whom I may have offended intentionally or unintentionally.
Norrie:
The way you asked me regarding where I live was somewhat peculiar. From what I could understand from your post asking me where I live, it seems you thought my opinions were somewhat odd. Therefore, I kept my response short and simple. I am not sure exactly why you would ask where I resided. Please do respond.
March 6, 2007 10:07 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 6, 2007 10:07
Jihadist,
The usual phrasing from American Christian fundamentalists is: "God made Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve."
I thought Ashfaq's reply to my asking him where he lived was odd. It sounded too much like the informal reply a native non-Muslim American would have made.
March 6, 2007 9:28 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 6, 2007 09:28
Hi Jihadist,
Good to hear from you, what a well reasoned post. Upon further review, I was a bit cranky last night and it showed.
Yes, being skeptical is a wonderful thing, being cynical and bitter is not.
BTW, there are a lot of gay guys named David here in the US. Snappy dressers too.
March 6, 2007 9:17 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 6, 2007 09:17
Hmmm
Of course the likes of you. People sceptical and sick of organized and disorganized religion, blind faith and invoking God for every good and evil that they had done:).
It's Steve and Bruce, so the Americans like to say, not Steve and David. Low on my list of priorities too, except if I know them and they don't invite me to their wedding. Spouse and child abuse are more widespread and urgent to be addressed, but it is not as "sexy" and "spicy" an issue as Steve and Bruce for those obsessed about sex and what people do in their bedrooms and with whom.
And no, love and tolerance is not universal.
Have you not been reading On Faith threads? Muslims are intolerant of other Muslims. Christians are intolerant of Christians within and outside their denominations. Muslims, Christians and Jews are intolerant of each other. Atheists are intolerant of believers and vice-versa. Men are intolerant of women and vice versa and on, and on and so on.....
As for love, well, that is subjective too. Even a parent can love one child more than the other. Love comes and go, or we won't have divorces. If one can fall out of love with one's spouse and sometimes even hate one's parents, sibling and family, what more others.
Tolerance means just that - to tolerate. It does not call for respect, accomodation, much less love. I can't teach you love and tolerance but to start with acceptance. To accept that nothing is perfect. To accomodate the imperfections. Then, perhaps, you may be on your way to love yourself, then your spouse, your family, friends and the "rest".
And be sceptical. It is healthy. Just don't be cynical. Now, that is bitter. Do I sound chicken soupy enough :)
regards
March 6, 2007 3:29 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 6, 2007 03:29
The likes of me? How cute.
Why whatever do you mean Jihadist?
If by the likes of me you mean honest people with a low tolerance for BS, well, then I guess you got me. I showed up here.
Sorry if I seem a bit flip but in light of world history and current events I find this fixation and intolerance of homosexuals more than a bit sad. If not irrelevant.
Sorry but Steve and David getting hitched ranks pretty low on my list of issues.
Then again I thought God loved everybody equally.
I guess I have a lot to learn. Please enlighten me on love and tolerance my dear Muslim friends. Your track record is stunning.
March 6, 2007 2:21 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 6, 2007 02:21
I was just wondering when the likes of Hmmm will finally turn up here:)
Ashfaq
Come on out.... Sherman Jackson and Ali are real Muslims. Who are you? Another Sayeed and Ahmed? Nice try. As I've said before, Muslims can recogize the tone and approach of another Muslim. Even the Taliban would give additional points to reiterate their contentions.
Besides, a Muslim man would seek to soothe, mollify, console, appease a Muslim woman rampaging and raging about her rights in Islam with couterpoints.
March 6, 2007 1:10 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 6, 2007 01:10
Well Dr. Jackson,
Maybe we could just marry a 9 year old and strap a bomb to my car and drive through a market. Apparantly that is just fine with you...or is that a morality that I can just not accept?
"And God knows best..."
P.S.: Frankly I don't like your chances. Catholics, you better do some soul searching too. (Hint, the soul is not down the alter boy's pants)
March 5, 2007 11:29 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 23:29
Jihadist has No Master
but Allah
and His Conscience
Dr. J: your integrity and clear vision immunizes you from the futile attacks of those who fear the truth.
And again, this comes from me the Atheist (though I believe in Your Allah)
March 5, 2007 9:12 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 21:12
A Modest Proposal from Mr Jackson
An implication from this column is the following proposal:
MAKE ALL alliances that used to be called Marriages be defined as Civil Unions, whether between same sex or different sex couples.
Then let the religions be free to define them as Marriage or Not-Marriage according to their lights.
Would that not be
True Equality
True Separation of Church and State.
March 5, 2007 9:08 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 21:08
Pheadrus
From a movie on Chicago Socks, Black Socks and them throwing the game away. A boy said that to one of the players.
Ashfaq
Come on! Is that the best you can come up with? A slur, a slander? Instead of coming out with counter reasons?
No, I have no non Muslim masters. I live in an independent and sovereign country. I am master of my own choices in life as a Muslim.
And stop blaming the west for all our problems. You may part of the problem not the solution. Go ahead, waste your energies on hate and blame instead of channeling it positively towards the betterment of your fellow Muslims, especially those in developing countries and women.
And do read up what is happening in the wider Muslim world. News for you - Indonesia, Malaysia, Turkey etc are relying less and less on Middle Eastern thinkers and writers on Islam. Thank Allah that Muslim men in Indonesia, Malaysia and Turkey are positive towards women's rights under Islam.
Afraid of uppity Muslim women? The Prophet Muhammad PBUH never was and listen to women. Surely you remember this, the first Muslim who believed the Prophet was a woman, Khatijah.
March 5, 2007 9:06 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 21:06
Jihadist,
I see you are trying to receive the approval of your non-Muslim masters.
March 5, 2007 8:35 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 20:35
(laughing) Jihadist you kill me!
Alright, I am impressed with the breadth of your idiomatic multi-lingual prowess, but I must ask you:
Do you really know where the "say it aint so Joe" thing originates? Don't google now, just amaze me again!
March 5, 2007 8:19 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 20:19
Thomps
You :"Muslims unanimously condemned pork and wine consumption as immoral"
The pigs and grapes may not feel the wrath of a people that yammer away at nothing 6 times a day, but I'd feel a lot better if Muslims unamimously condemned gun powder and tnt.
Me : Ahh... the grapes of wrath from you. There was a Japanese translation of John Steinbeck's book that was titled "The Angry Grape", now out of print.
As for your angy gripe, pigs are supposedly smart and can still make you ill if not properly raised or cooked. Hindus don't eat beef, as cows are sacred, so why the fuss if Muslims consider pigs unclean? And you don't eat dolphins and whales, but the Japanese do, so, why not take up on that too?
Alcohol is addictive and mind altering. Are you sure you had not downed a sixpack before writing the above? Muslims condemn and oppose unjust wars and weapons of mass detruction. All Muslim states are state party to the NPT. Only one Muslim state with nukes, Pakistan. And no, we don't do cluster bombs, landmines, stealth bombers and other innovations in inhumane warfare. We just buy them from over-eager western arms manufaturers keen on profits.
By the way, Muslims are supposed to pray five (5) times a day, not six (6) as you always put in the On Faith threads.
Joe Campbell:
You: Just to be fair, belief in a muslim god is as dumb, useless, and dangerous as belief in a christian god.
You're all puppets. Be gone.
Me: That is ambitious Joe. A wish to that some 4 billion adherents, at least, of Christianity and Islam to be gone? Bgone has been wishing that for a long time with his persistent promotion of Hoaxbuster to open up the minds of believers re their delusions in believing in God. And why are Hindus exempted from being characterized as delusionals for believing in a deity/deities? So what if anyone believe in the flying spaghetti monster?
Say it ain't so Joe.
Had enough fun for today. Got to get to work. Different time zone for me chaps.
March 5, 2007 7:05 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 19:05
Ba'al
I was trying to get a rise out of Ali and Ashfaq.
Muslim men like them are never around to talk on women and polygamy etc, but turns up to condemn gays. It seems easy for everyone to take on gays.
Don't worry about it. Muslim men must be more honest that it was men's interpretation, formulation and enforcement of Shariah laws that are flawed and biased in many instances with regard to the promotion and protection of women's rights under Islam among others.
So, let me take on my fellow Muslims I disagee with here as I do in my own country. A few verbal or written grenades is what some of them needed to look honestly at what we think we believe in, what we think we know and what we are doing in the name of God and for God towards fellow believers and others.
March 5, 2007 6:36 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 18:36
Just to be fair, belief in a muslim god is as dumb, useless, and dangerous as belief in a christian god.
You're all puppets. Be gone.
March 5, 2007 6:07 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 18:07
Jiadist
You are a reminder that I need to be careful that my condemnations of repressive fundamentalists of all stripes do not edge over the line into a blanket that covers everything and everybody that is religious. I always appreciate your open and seeking tone.
With careful reading of Mr. Jackson's essay again, it is more tolerant than it seemed at first.
March 5, 2007 5:56 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 17:56
"Muslims unanimously condemned pork and wine consumption as immoral"
The pigs and grapes may not feel the wrath of a people that yammer away at nothing 6 times a day, but I'd feel a lot better if Muslims unamimously condemned gun powder and tnt.
March 5, 2007 5:45 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 17:45
.....and I am really, really getting ticked off at Muslim men who sought to oppress the "weaker and less powerful" among them, be they women or gays, in invoking God and the Qur'an when they feel oppressed by others, from the Taliban, to some Iranian mullahs to men like Ali and Ashfaq. Sorry chaps, we are not indulging in your security blankets of the known knowns.
The Prophet Muhammad PBUH said in a Hadith, "Half your religion is from women", and "Heaven is under your mother's feet". Muslim women are reading and studying the Qur'an, Hadiths, fiqh, kalam and Shariah laws too. We will make it so Mr Jackson, Ali and Ashfaq. In the name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful, we will make it so and take away interpretations that suits your personal interests, biases and prejudices, not the umma as a whole. Men like you hold back women, hold back Muslims.
March 5, 2007 5:23 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 17:23
Tonio,
How dare you!?!
Writing that a half-baked, semi-thought wrapped in a laughably sad red-herring coming out of Brambleton's keyboard?
Surely you jest...
March 5, 2007 5:06 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 17:06
Ba'al
Mr. Jackson, Ashfaq and Ali are all men who subscribe to Muslim orthodoxy.
Must be hell to be a Muslim in the US after 9/11, forcing many American Muslims to dig deeper into orthodoxy for self-assertion and identification as a sort of defence mechanism. It seems that US Muslims have to answer for all the "sins" of Muslims outside the US.
Yes well, it is not fair for me to say so, being a Muslim in a Muslim majority country where we are freer and be more open to question Muslim orthodoxy without feeling threatened, misunderstood or marginalised by the majority of another faith.
I should cut American Muslims some slack, they being everyone from Bosnians to Arabs to Iranians to Indians (Sunnis and Shiites), all with different traditions of Muslim practices and beliefs.
I pay more attention to Muslim converts. They are "purer" Muslims in many ways. Of course there are Muslim converts like the American Taliban and the British Shoe Bomber. Sigh...
And yes, I am with you against Taliban-minded believers. And against the Salafists too, the godfather of the Taliban take on Islam.
March 5, 2007 5:00 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 17:00
"Just a thought - I'm assuming that the 'it victimizes no one' crowd would also support any measure to make a marriage between a brother and a sister legal? Or an Uncle and his niece? As long as the incestuous relationship is consensual, I see no need for you to object. Agreed?"
No. There are most definitely victims in incest. They are the people who are abused and exploited for family members' lusts, as well as the offspring who are born with genetic defects. Those are very valid reasons to outlaw incest. In my view, the issues of incest and pedophilia and bestiality are red herrings in the discussion on this site.
March 5, 2007 4:47 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 16:47
The societal benefits of homosexuality are completely lacking. It is a very unfortunate scourge on society; most unnatural in every sense.
March 5, 2007 4:36 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 16:36
Ashfaq, You wrote "within the public sphere of life, homosexuality should be outlawed". If I were to replace the word homosexuality with Islam in that sentence I suspect you would be outraged. Rightly so -- at least in part because you are probably aware that there are people in the USA who feel that way.
If two people enter into a relationship by mutual consent, it is their own business, and not yours. Just as it is their own business whether they are Christian, Muslim, Jewish, Buddhist, or atheist. None of those decisions when made by other people affect you. This is very different from killing, stealing, defrauding, etc. etc.
The Taliban is an abomination --whether it be Christian or Muslim or any other kind. And you are a hate-filled bigot.
As for the comment by Mr. Jackson, I still wonder what he means by Islam "being forced" to work within a certain moral and political framework. It seems that the professor regrets this framework, not surprising because the point of view expressed in his essay and by his apologists would run roughshod over major swathes of the Constitution.
March 5, 2007 4:34 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 16:34
Mark,
You said : "Only when religion has died will civilization be able to confront the issues which plague us."
You are absolutely certain of that? Come to think of it, religion causes conflicts and wars in the name of God, but beliefs also created great monuments, structures and art - see all the magnificent churches, sublime music and great art of Europe in the name of religion, from Greeks to the Renaissance. And the Mayans, and the Egyptians, and the Babylonians and the Persians.
Pol Pot does not believe in religion. Castro too.
Religion bled and purged the communist tyranny, from Catholic Poles to, if you can stand it, Afghan Mujahideen.
Brett,
You said : "Islam, along with Christianity, is faced with a dilemma from science both are incapable of resolving."
Of course. It was the monasteries in the semi-dark ages and Middle Ages as well as Al-Andalus where Greek philosophy was preserved, translated and studied, and the sciences got their start. Including medicine. Anyone heard of, say, Ibn Khaldun, the first sociologist.
By the way, no Muslim has gone on a rampage on evolution and creationism. Bloody Muslims, coopting the Indian zero into Arabic numerals and passed it on to the west giving everyone hell on math.
Ali and Ashfaq
You must be living in the US. There is a progressive Muslim movement outside the US in some 50 Muslim countries. Surely you are not presuming to speak for all of the other 1.3 billion Muslims outside the US with their own Muftis and ulemas.
And what is wrong with being a progressive Muslim to push forward the Muslim world in line with the core Islamic principles of social justice, justice, individual dignity and peace?
Since you are both living in the US, I thank Almighty Allah that you both will never have the oppurtunity to discuss, revise and formulate Shariah laws in Muslim countries.
March 5, 2007 4:20 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 16:20
Either Brett and Mark are the same person, or neither can generate an original argument.
March 5, 2007 4:02 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 16:02
KazimBeg,
Religion is an ideology, a set of beliefs. If we cannot criticize someone's beliefs then you have effectively silenced all dialogue. Accusing me of "hate speech" because I criticize Islam (along with all other religions) isn't doing theism any favors. Theism must be rooted out from our societies and recognized as the great evil it truly is. Only when religion has died will civilization be able to confront the issues which plague us.
March 5, 2007 3:49 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 15:49
Islam, along with Christianity, is faced with a dilemma from science both are incapable of resolving. Science has clearly, and definitely, shown the absurdity of theism. We should discourage religious thought where ever we encounter it. Only when Christianity and Islam are both dead will civilization be able to truly confront the problems we contend with.
March 5, 2007 3:35 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 15:35
Just a thought - I'm assuming that the "it victimizes no one" crowd would also support any measure to make a marriage between a brother and a sister legal? Or an Uncle and his niece? As long as the incestuous relationship is consensual, I see no need for you to object. Agreed?
March 5, 2007 3:25 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 15:25
Changing the Tides
see how Islam is being destroyed!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WfEIGw8NtNA
March 5, 2007 3:23 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 15:23
Norrie:
I live in the United States
March 5, 2007 2:10 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 14:10
Ashfaq,
You said
" However, within the public sphere of life, homosexuality should be outlawed. Those who practice homosexuality in display should be punished so that this immoral and disgusting act is not something which people consider to be acceptable."
To re-emphasize Dr. Jackson's point, Islamic law applies to muslims only, even in a majority muslim place.
But in a majority non-muslim place, its the other religions or the secular law that have the burden of deciding what to do about this issue.
For muslims, its enough to know that homosexuality has no legitimacy in islam. Even with this progressive-islamic agenda that a lot of people are pushing, because the truth is, progressive islam has no merits itself.
March 5, 2007 2:05 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 14:05
Ashfaq,
After reading your comments, which are so opposed to the way we think here in the northeastern United States, I'm interested to know where you live - your country of residence.
Actually, I must tell you, my inner voice is saying to me, "What planet is he from?"
Best wishes.
March 5, 2007 11:23 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 11:23
"I should not have to accept the morality of homosexuality."
While I don't know much about Muslim doctrine, I agree with Phaedrus. No one is required to accept the morality of homosexuality. Any personal conduct that victimizes no one shouldn't be up for approval or disapproval by others or by society. You don't have to like homosexuality, but whether people should be gay or straight is not up to you.
March 5, 2007 8:44 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 5, 2007 08:44
Ashfaq:
Homosexual conduct between two consenting adults in private victimizes no one.
Theft is criminal conduct in that there is a victimized party who has been deprived of personal property by another.
Poor analogy.
March 4, 2007 8:54 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 4, 2007 20:54
Well Ashfaq
Homosexual acts is illegal under civil law inherited from the British in my country. And we have a parellel Shariah court system too.
To date, no one has been charged and punished for homosexuality either under civil law or Shariah law. As you said, it is all based on evidence.
So, now, let me say again to you, homosexuals are the least of our problems, but divorces, remarraiges, alimony, child support etc are the primary concerns of the Shariah courts.
March 4, 2007 8:34 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 4, 2007 20:34
Phaedrus:
As you are aware, even within a secular society, there are certain laws and regulations which people are expected to follow. If these regulations are not followed, there are consequences attached. For example, when an individual steals and is caught by the secular law authorities. This individual is processed through the judicial system and then based on the evidence he is either punished or set free. Similarly in a system based on submission to the will of God; i.e. Islam, there are certain laws and the inadherence to these laws lead to certain repercussions (based on the evidence). It's not arbitrary justice.
March 4, 2007 8:24 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 4, 2007 20:24
Mr. Sherman Jackson,
You said, "God knows best".
So, should we Muslims not leave God to decide on people whose sexual orientation are different from 'straights'?
Should not God be the final decider to forgive what is sinful?
As a Muslim, I am shocked and dismayed that you forgot that every Sura in the Qu'ran, and before doing anything, a devout Muslim would precede them with, "In the name of God, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful".
The Taliban said those very words in their most horrific transvesty of Shariah laws and interpretations of the Qur'an - judging and punishing victims on the flimsiest of allegations and slanders. Where is the justice called for by God? Is this not tyranny and oppression that God ask every Muslim to fight against?
And surely you do remember that the worst sin in the "eyes" of God is hypocrisy, and hypocrites would spend the most time in hell of all sinners.
March 4, 2007 8:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 4, 2007 20:21
"Within the public sphere of life, homosexuality should be outlawed. Those who practice homosexuality in display should be punished so that this immoral and disgusting act is not something which people consider to be acceptable. "
Another promoouncement from a practitioner of the "religion of peace."
March 4, 2007 5:34 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 4, 2007 17:34
Assalam Alaikum Mr. Jackson,
I agree with most of what you have written. I also agree with the fact that within the personal realm of non-Muslims there should be no interference in their moral affairs. However, within the public sphere of life, homosexuality should be outlawed. Those who practice homosexuality in display should be punished so that this immoral and disgusting act is not something which people consider to be acceptable. God created Adam and then he created Eve (Peace be upon them). The natural order which God created is that men should have a relationship with a woman. Those Jews or Christians or Muslims who say otherwise or accept otherwise are sinning.
And Allah knows best.
March 4, 2007 4:39 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 4, 2007 16:39
Mr. Jackson,
I don't think you'll find many people trying to deny your right to hold whatever repugnant prejudices you wish. That's part of living in a free society. Of course, that you derive your hatred of gays from medieval fairy tales does not change the fact that you are a bigot.
The only point of contention I have is your claim that marriage is primarily a religious institution. That is certainly not true in the United States or any other country I am familiar with, as marriage confers numerous legal and financial rights.
March 3, 2007 7:56 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 3, 2007 19:56
There is no god, thus there can be no prophets upon whom to wish peace. Get over it, grow up, look around, it is 2007. Stop blowing your selves and everyone else up over false claims and ridiculous beliefs.
Muhammed may not have been a pedophile, as mores were different then, but he ceratinly was a fraud. IF it were possible on this site I would draw you some cartoons. I would include yahweh and jesus too, just to convey egalitarianism.
March 3, 2007 8:46 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 3, 2007 08:46
Mark, I hope that you read about Islam from its original and authentic sources. Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) was a Prophet of God and to speak ill about any Prophet is not a good thing. Prophets peace be upon them all have brought nothing but good to humanity.
If there was any truth to the statement you have made I would have been the first person to leave this religion. Prophet Muhammad had fierce enemies in Arabia who wanted to kill him or defame him or harm him in any way possible but they fully aware of his life and history never accused him of what you have said above. So just think about it why was that? They accused him for a whole lot of other things but they never accused him of what you have said because it wasn't true and it was absolutely within the norms of that society to marry someone of a younger age.
You can study any culture from that era and you will find that in Europe girls would get married around that age. The age of physical maturity of any rural culture which does not enjoy the comforts of the 21st century living standards is very different.
I sincerely hope that you will reconsider your opinion about any Prophet of God or for that matter anyone or anything which other people revere and if its too difficult for you then the least you can do is to keep your opinions in private sphere so that you might not harm other people's feelings.
Otherwise its just a hate speech.
March 3, 2007 4:21 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 3, 2007 04:21
Allah, Jehovah, God, Lord, Tooth Fairy, Santa Claus, Leprechauns, blah, blah, blah.
March 2, 2007 11:37 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 2, 2007 23:37
Mr. Jackson writes "The moral and political framework within which Islam is forced to express itself – especially in the modern West – tends to distort its voice and force it into apology and misrepresentation."
I wish he would elaborate on this because I have the vague sense that the underlying meaning is pretty unpleasant.
March 2, 2007 10:44 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 2, 2007 22:44
Muhammed was a sick pedophile who raped a 9 year old girl. The religion he founded is equally immoral.
March 2, 2007 9:54 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 2, 2007 21:54
I agree completely, except....
the problem here is that accepting gay unions isn't just a religious issue. Once gay couples can be legally married, it affects me monitarily, educationally, politically, etc. If I could simply say "go ahead and be gay, I just don't have to agree with you," that would be fine. But in actuality, I will be forced to accept teaching in public schools about homosexuality being "right", among other things. And that affects me personally. So, go ahead and be gay if you want, but don't tell me I have to accept it as good and right.
March 2, 2007 4:16 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 2, 2007 16:16
good comments- I disagree in that marriage is more than religious preference but a societal institution that has significant ramifications on social order and the raising of children.
I also find it interesting that there are no comments on your page when you say that in the practice of your faith, you do not condone homosexual activities. I wonder if your Muslim faith is protecting you from being villified by those who so readily bash Colson and Thomas and other Christian postings.
March 2, 2007 3:47 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 2, 2007 15:47