Gay party men may be given hormone treatment

[N.O.R.F]

NGONGE

 

All the arrested parties were UAE nationals and one can only percieve them of having a sound knowledge base with regard to ISlamic teachings. Heck they were raised in a muslim country with quranic/hadeeth teachings through their lives.

 

Your last post is interesting but it is obvious these guys(girly guys) have not or are not following their knowledge and teachings obtained throughout their lives. They most probably know much of the Quran by heart but are then attending such places with such people with the aim/intent of doing what is forbidden. Flip the coin and you will get those who are hetrosexual but comitting sins 'hetrosexually' before or even during marriage.

 

Using the philosophical approach and trying to determine why people have homosexual tendencies is the way of the non muslim to try to justify reasons for being the afore-said. These areticle are written by non-muslims 90% of the time, you would not therefore expect them to bringing any religious analysis/comments to the table. Plus Gulf News is aimed at appeasing Expats. However, with the growing amount of western influence, many being able to read english and a teenagers interest in reading a tabloid rather than a broadsheet, it is only time when the next generation become accustomed to or accepting this issue.

 

I believe its more about a war of information where the local authorities are losing by a big margin and will only get bigger if they do not do anything about it before 'its their son'.

[Cara.]

Ngonge,

 

It’s all about the wrath of GOD and if you think (nay believe) that such a GOD exists. If you do, then you would drop everything and follow the commandments.

Do you follow all religious commandments?

 

I didn't know it was possible.

[NGONGE]

Originally posted by Northerner:

NGONGE

 

 

Your last post is interesting but it is obvious these guys(girly guys) have not or are not following their knowledge and teachings obtained throughout their lives. They most probably know much of the Quran by heart but are then attending such places with such people with the aim/intent of doing what is forbidden. Flip the coin and you will get those who are hetrosexual but comitting sins 'hetrosexually' before or even during marriage.

 

You are being very idealistic here, saaxib. Yes these guys grew up and were educated in an Arab country with a strong Muslim culture, but that does not mean they have to know and understand their faith. You’ll be surprised how many people can’t recall (or even know) the names of the shortest surahs in the Quran (never mind memorising it all). Many don’t know or understand much of the basics of our faith. The education is there but some people don’t want to be educated. You’ll even find a few in Mecca and Medina who daily tread on the same ground that the prophet and his companions trod on, and still not know things you were expected to know as a child (or not of course, depending on your education). It’s all about education, some people travel far and wide to seek it and others don’t benefit from it when it’s free and on their doorsteps!

 

The information war you speak about has just started. In the past, the government of the UAE seemed to turn a blind eye to the antics of the ‘girly men’ (they were the most visible of the gay community) but now, there seems to be new orders to stamp on that phenomenon!

 

 

 

Do you follow all religious commandments?

 

I didn't know it was possible.

Not sure if the question is to ME directly or a general one. I am assuming it’s a general one for to ask me such a direct question serves no purpose here (and just for the record, no I don’t follow all commandments, though I’d love to of course).

 

I think the argument really is about being a believer or a sinner (note that a sinner is still a believer).

 

 

And just as if by magic:

 

Pope's gay priest ruling is hailed by moderates

By Ruth Gledhill, Religion Correspondent and Richard Owen in Rome

 

 

 

A VATICAN ruling on homosexuals entering the priesthood received a surprising welcome from leading Roman Catholics in Britain yesterday after it became clear that it was not as severe as had been feared. However, gay pressure groups and liberal Catholics were critical.

Senior Catholics said that the ruling showed a slight softening of Pope Benedict XVI’s hard line against gays. The instruction from the Congregation for Catholic Education said that ordination was not permissible for men with “deep-seated†gay tendencies but was permissible for those who could show they had overcome “transitory†homosexuality for three years. It does not apply to those already ordained.

 

 

 

The instruction was welcomed by moderates because it is not an outright ban on all men of homosexual orientation, celibate or not, but it will disappoint traditionalists because it does not call homosexuality a “tendency ordered toward an intrinsic moral evilâ€, a phrase used by the Pope in his previous post as head of the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith.

 

The Archbishop of Westminster, Cardinal Cormac MurphyO’Connor, said: “A priest is primarily a witness to Jesus Christ. Anything that detracts from this impedes that witness.

 

“Priests are required to live lives of celibate chastity, whatever their sexual orientation, and must be able to relate freely and well to both men and women. Bishops must ensure that men are not admitted to the priesthood for whom its requirements and demands will be too burdensome or impossible to fulfil.

 

“The instruction is not saying that men of homosexual orientation are not welcome in the priesthood. But it is making clear that they must be capable of affective maturity, have a capacity for celibacy and not share the values of the eroticised gay culture. This is especially important because seminaries are all-male environments.â€

 

In 2004 the bishops of England and Wales said that “a homosexual orientation†was not sinful or evil in itself.

 

The Cardinal said: “The Church utterly condemns all forms of unjust discrimination, harassment or abuse directed against people who have homosexual tendencies.â€

 

The Vatican ruling was attacked by Peter Tatchell, of the gay rights group OutRage!, who said it was “bigoted and hypocriticalâ€. He said: “If these rules had existed in the past, many existing archbishops and cardinals would have never been allowed to enter the priesthood. Given the high proportion of gay clergy in senior positions in the Vatican, this new policy is rank hypocrisy.

 

“Given that about a third of Catholic clergy in Britain are gay, the new rules are an own goal that could result in hundreds of churches being left without priests.â€

 

He added that the Church should concentrate on eliminating child sex abusers from the priesthood.Widespread child abuse by Catholic priests has been revealed in the United States and other countries. The Boston Archdiocese agreed to pay £49 million to more than 500 victims in 2003. Last week a Brazilian priest was jailed for 14 years for abusing two children, and Italian police said yesterday that a priest in Tuscany had confessed to molesting 30 boys over the past five years.

 

Damian Thompson, editor-in-chief of The Catholic Herald, said the Vatican ruling was “a highly intelligent compromiseâ€. He added: “It is not nearly as bad as the gay community was expecting. They were fearing a blanket ban on the ordination of anyone under any circumstances who was gay.â€

 

He conceded that the reference in the document to “deep-seated homosexuality†would offend many but said that the document’s references to showing “respect†for gay people were also signs of a softening attitude. “All this is language that would have been inconceivable coming from the Vatican in the 1980s. The gay community was really worried that Benedict was going to come out with a blanket ban.â€

 

Father Timothy Radcliffe, former Master of the Dominicans, said that it would not be correct to interpret the document as ruling out men with a permanent homosexual orientation as there were “many excellent priests†who were gay and who clearly had a vocation.

 

The Human Rights Campaign, a gay pressure group based in the US, said gays were being used as scapegoats and called on “all fair minded Catholics†to protest to their local priests. “We urge them to consider what Jesus would do if he saw his neighbour treated this way,†the group said.

 

Father Donald Cozzens of John Carroll University, a Jesuit foundation in Cleveland, Ohio, said: “Our seminaries are likely to be depopulated to a significant extent.†He added that the hunters might become the hunted, suggesting there were “hidden†gays in the Vatican.

 

 

Source

 

 

Looks like the Vatican is trying to sweet-talk homosexuals into celibacy which, by any stretch of the imagination, would only mean they will not be gay anymore!

 

 

There is a point to me posting this article.

[N.O.R.F]

NG

It’s all about education, some people travel far and wide to seek it and others don’t benefit from it when it’s free and on their doorsteps!

Very true but one would assume that the wrong and right regarding this issue is in black and white no matter how much education one received.

 

Upon reading the above article, are proposing /advocating 'sweet' talking the girly men back into celibacy?

[NGONGE]

^^^ In a way I suppose I am.

 

As you can see with the Catholic Church, it’s been forced into a corner by the gay rights campaigners. But the Pope refused to further dilute his faith and therefore he decided to play the game of words. His argument still remains that homosexuality is forbidden in Christianity and that no new priests can be practicing and at the same time, practicing. What he did is consent to allow transient homosexuals to become priests. Once they’re priests they’re expected to stick to the vow of celibacy and that would make them, erm, not gay.

 

The point is that the Pope is asking them to put their faith before their transient urges. That reasoning is the same that any other divine faith demands or should demand.

[N.O.R.F]

AS we are all aware one will say anything in order to be left alone to do what he wants. I still prefer the lock-em up and throw away the key theory.

 

How would you think this will be brought to the table in the UAE for example, how can one prove that the other is/is not gay after their period of 'rehab'?

 

What the church is doing is condoning it but playing around with words and terms. How will a 'current' gay preist proove he is not gay in three years time? The church is merely trying to absorb the situation as 60% (if not more) of its priests are gay anyway :rolleyes:

 

I dont think anything similar will ever work in a muslim country. Best option is to beat it out of them so they do not repeat the offence(s).

[NGONGE]

^^^ Ah! But, it’s not our place to judge until we catch them in the act. What they do or don’t do behind everyone’s back is not our concern (and this would apply to adulterers and fornicators too). The point of all of this, as I see it, is to preserve society and halt the spread of undesirable practices. There are punishments that the law prescribes and then there is the Almighty’s punishment. In the first, we are required to provide evidence, real and strong evidence that these people were caught in the act of doing such and such. In the second, it’s God’s preference and with that, not even his beloved prophets would take for granted (hence how even though they were singly chosen by him to convey the message, all still begged and prayed for his mercy and forgiveness as if they were an everyday human or didn’t know that heaven was already promised to them). How the almighty eventually deals with them is not our concern (unless we aim to advice them to his probable wrath). What is our concern is how we treat them. Lock them up and throw away the key is not much of solution. Have we established guilt first? And if we have, what stops us from applying the usual Islamic punishment?

 

If we have not established guilt but know that these people are homosexuals, would that be reason enough to lock them up and throw the key?

 

It’s curious that you chose the beat it out of them method.

[Mowgli]

Salaams

 

I don't understand how pumping them full of testosterone will change anything? Yes sure it will make them appear more manly ie. deepen the voice, increase facial growth...but it will also increase their sex drive...which isn't really a good thing.... :confused:

[Cara.]

Hello Ngonge,

 

Not sure if the question is to ME directly or a general one. I am assuming it’s a general one for to ask me such a direct question serves no purpose here (and just for the record, no I don’t follow all commandments, though I’d love to of course).

Sorry for the impertinence, I was directing the question at you. You wrote,

 

Originally posted by NGONGE:

It’s not about nature, Bees, Dogs or Homosexuals. It’s all about the wrath of GOD and if you think (nay believe) that such a GOD exists. If you do, then you would drop everything and follow the commandments. If you don’t, then you would carry on as you are without the burden of guilt and doubt. I personally don’t think the middle ground here is advisable. There is no point in living a life of self hate and worry or living life as a hypocrite that believes in GOD but refuses to accept some of his commandments.

I'm trying to understand why someone would NOT live a life of "self-hate and worry" if, say, they were devout Muslims and also gay at the same time. Even if they never slept with members of the same sex, human nature would dictate that they agonize about it. To be a really religious person sometimes seems to require a great deal of guilt and a sense of worthlessness.

 

So that's why I asked you if you followed all commandments religuously, so to speak. Otherwise this "rant" devolves into "Obey god when you can". Not exactly a rousing battle-cry.

 

It's easy for you to say, drop everything and follow the commandments but hard in practice. Who has never lied? Gossiped? Envied another? Who has never missed a prayer? It's easy to visualize god forgiving all of those sins, but when it comes to homosexuality, oooh boy. Let's lock them up, or beat them up or kill them or shoot hormones into them. Note this part isn't aimed at you, just commenting on a general attitude among many here.

[Castro]

Originally posted by Callypso:

I'm trying to understand why someone would NOT live a life of "self-hate and worry" if, say, they were devout Muslims and also gay at the same time. Even if they never slept with members of the same sex, human nature would dictate that they agonize about it. To be a really religious person sometimes seems to require a great deal of guilt and a sense of worthlessness.

In the absence of conclusive and verifiable scientific evidence showing homosexuality to be a natural phenomenon, we as muslims are obliged to follow the divine teachings of Islam that say it is a deviation. I believe that's what Ngonge is trying to purvey. The quandary would have been the discovery of such conclusive evidence. But there is none, so we're safe in our knowledge in the Quran. There's ample 'research' out there on this issue, none of which by the way, shows with any comfortable degree of certainty that it is natural.

 

What to do then if this is the case and homosexuals don't plan to disengage from their behavior? How do we reconcile our life on earth with the teachings of Islam? The million dollar question indeed. The teachings of christianity (though not followed by christians themselves) may be of some assitance here: hate the sin but love the sinner. I don't know what can be done about this. I've spent much time seeking an understanding of the nature of homosexuality without appreciating the social ramifications of it. It's not clear what we can do about it. Tolerance may be mistaken for acceptance and encouragment. Intolerance may cause some of us to commit other sins or crimes against those we have branded gay. We should all do what makes us comfortable with ourselves, our religion and our neighbors.

[Cara.]

Hi Castro,

 

In the absence of conclusive and verifiable scientific evidence showing homosexuality to be a natural phenomenon, we as muslims are obliged to follow the divine teachings of Islam that say it is a deviation.

Ah. I believe I've forgotten that. I'm in the habit of taking people at their word. If someone says they can't help being a certain way, I tend to believe them unless strong evidence suggests otherwise. After all, I didn't choose to be heterosexual, it comes with the body, and I couldn't "turn it off" at will. Why should I assume differently of others?

 

But at any rate, this talk of injecting hormones into gays implies that Dubai at least considers homosexuality to have a biological basis. If one could devise a pill or shot to "cure" homosexuality, would this have any effect on how gays are perceived/treated? Would it go from being a deviation to being a disorder?

 

I believe that's what Ngonge is trying to purvey. The quandary would have been the discovery of such conclusive evidence. But there is none, so we're safe in our knowledge in the Quran. There's ample 'research' out there on this issue, none of which by the way, shows with any comfortable degree of certainty that it is natural.

I agree. Certainly some research suggests it is so, but I've never been concerned enough to look into it, living as I do in the great US of A, where gay bashing amounts to yelling "fag!" at a guy in drag prancing down Main Street.

 

We should all do what makes us comfortable with ourselves, our religion and our neighbors.

Amen.

[xiinfaniin]

Gays need no hormone treatment. They need not be locked up either. They represent a reality of social tendency that’s clear deviation from the norm. The Islamic prescription for all social ills has been containment, and not one of denial.

 

Their practice must be censored from the public through harsh implementation of Islamic penal code. Simple. You don’t have to hate them. You don’t have to seek them. When they are ****** enough to expose their wicked practice to the public eye, eliminate them.

 

Simple.

[SeeKer]

Originally posted by Castro:

In the absence of

conclusive

and verifiable scientific evidence showing homosexuality to be a natural phenomenon

Just wondering what that would exactly entail? stats? video? Oh and if you believe that evolution is actually a possibility?

 

Just thought you might want to check out Ultimate Explorer. I do believe that they have some videos that show homosexuality and bisexuality happens in animals............even to within our evolutionary family the chimps/bonobos or should I just primates .

 

 

Homosexuality in animals. I believe there are links on that page that lead other articles and websites. There is a phrase in the article that also borders what I said earlier about homosexuality being a phase

 

Looking at information provided as to what Islam prescribes as punishment to homosexuality I am conflicted.

 

“And the two persons (man and woman) among you who commit illegal sexual intercourse, hurt them both. And if they repent (promise Allaah that they will never repeat, i.e. commit illegal sexual intercourse and other similar sins) and do righteous good deeds, leave them alone. Surely, Allaah is Ever All-Forgiving (the One Who forgives and accepts repentance), (and He is) Most Mercifulâ€

 

[al-Nisa’ 4:16]

 

It was narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas said: “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: ‘Whoever you find doing the deed of the people of Loot, kill the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.â€

 

(Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 1456; Abu Dawood, 4462; Ibn Maajah, 2561. This hadeeth was classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, no. 6589).

 

:confused: What to follow?

[xiinfaniin]

^^What r u conflicted about?

[Castro]

^ Having read about Bonobos till I felt ill, it seems to me that extrapolating their behavior to that of humans is a leap of faith at best, and miscalculation of science at worst. We're not even sure why Bonobos do what they do. Is it out of aggression, lust, domination, submission, or are they just having fun? In addition, Bonobos will not have access to the divine knowledge that we do. Sounds obvious, right? It should. If the concept of morality is not even an issue for them, naturally or not, Bonobos will be Bonobos.

 

I can't even begin to alleviate your confusion for I suffered from it. Re-read what Ngonge wrote on belief in God's commandments. It should then become a simple choice of choosing to follow or not follow. I know this doesnt' help. I just had to get it off my own chest.