Pro-Gay books for 5 year olds?

[Khalaf]

^^ha ZU....but NG droped a bombshell nooh...expect another grand essay from MKA

 

Originally posted by xiinfaniin:

^^What does the Quran say? That only Muslims are clever and intelligent?

Would you let me go off the hook if I say Abdul-Mudhalib was very intelligent, Abu-Lahab was shrewd, and AbuJahl was eloquent and had a managerial capacity?

^^^Depends on how one measures intelligence adeer. Wit, cleverness, articulateness number of discoveries, noble prizes, ect can be deemed intelligence, however for men of understanding, the believers men and women are equipped with another type of knowledge/intelligence: belief in One God, Fear of Allah Most High which separates them from the rest of mankind, but that’s another topic. All I was saying was how can u call someone who claims to be somali and once a “muslim” and now has rejected the deen “intelligent”, the Quran tells us they are deaf, blind, no?

 

NG I thought u were rageedi adeer.........disappointed u back down from the challenge.....i was expecting a good reply with better creditablity/evidence then ur earlier example of your gay dog n sickos that would do poor sheep....forget MKA and I, present your case to the jury and letting them decide. U made claims and was call on it, I saw the fallacies of your claims right off da bat and called u on it before MKA, but he went furthur to refute your claims one by one. Now u wont own up to your comments or man up and say u were in simply error: I NG a Muslim believe homonimo is not inate/natural/or normal but a wicked sin no different then pedophilia and other sicknesses, and two every verse/ayat/ban/commandment in the Quran has wisdom/hikmah behind it from Allah Most High that if mankind follows he will prosper, and if they disobey they will be in disasters. what da u say adeer?

[Fiqikhayre]

Give it up Ngonge, your absurd fallacies and paradoxical beliefs have been highlighted to the gallery in here, so there‘s no way you can hide. You have nothing plausible and valid to add to this thread, thus you continue with your fallacious belief and your sheer ignorance, although you have been shown your true capabilities and boundary. Well, let’s see who needs a few more years ‘to understand the written form’ as you put it, it won’t certainly be me, but you, who is incapable to comprehend simple logical facts presented to him.

 

I believe this is a good time to remind you and the gallery what you actually said and how I refuted and destroyed your fallacies post and ridiculous belief with concrete and clear cut evidence. So I shall present it to you again.

 

He said in case he forgot:

 

Islam bans homosexuality because, simply, it’s the creator’s want.

there are no great logical explanations for such bans but we realise that it’s not our place (as Muslims) to question Allah’s commands.’

And I replied to him:

 

^^^What sheer ignorance. Ya Allaah forgive our sins. So he’s saying the prohibition of Homosexuality is without Hikmah and that Allaah banned this evil practise because in his logic ‘Allaah just felt like banning it ‘without giving a great deal of logical explanation’ hence we‘re required to just follow it‘.

 

Although he knows Allaah does not ban anything except it is harmful to his creation and goes against the natural inclination and predisposition the fitrah of his creation and that if he orders something or prohibits us from something else, that he always provides and gives us a compressible and logical explanation for it and this time it’s no different. So to say Allaah banned this practise because he ‘simply did’ is not only wrong but a total fabrication and false invention attributed to Allaah, which one has to renounce and make towbah from. Ngonge is doing nothing here but trying to strengthen his notion and argument of ‘homosexuality being normal or not unnatural’ , but he miserably fails because his own logic at the end defeats his sense of reasoning and thus his whole viewpoint and senseless judgement.

 

Oh Allaah exalted you’re and far from any ignorance and illogicality this ignorant created being of yours is describing and attributing towards you.

[Fiqikhayre]

And he ignorantly continues saying:

Originally by Ngonge: Sexual urges have no default positions. They fall into all sorts of styles and categories and all can be argued to be normal. The only reason that straight relationships are considered ‘natural’ is because of procreation and religious requirements.’

And I refuted his fallacies with the following:

 

Again that is a total fabrication, which is intended to strengthen his illogical reasoning.

 

Homosexuality is not natural and it is indeed against the fitrah (natural inclination) of human beings instilled by Allaah the exalted in his creation but the shaydaan (Iblees) swore to Allaah that he will try everything that is in his power to change that fitrah (natural inclination and predisposition instilled in human beings) but Allaah says in his noble and exalted book:

 

‘Set your face to the dîn in sincerity (hanîfan) which is Allâh’s fitrah (the nature made by Allâh) upon which He created mankind (fatâra’n-nâs). There is no changing the creation of Allâh. That is the right dîn but most people know not.’

 

We’re all born with this fitrah of Allaah and the sense to distinguish good from wrong, and falsehood from rightness. Only on our own will and the devil letting us astray from the right path do we commit deeds against that fitrah of Allaahs.

 

So what is Ngonge here saying that Allaah has instilled in us the fitrah of homosexuality? That would indeed be blasphemous and a wrong thing to say. Homosexuality is not part of the fitrah and thus unnatural and violating Allaahs fitrah. Indeed it is not part of Allaahs fitrah (natural predisposition) nor is it natural and it’s in fact only second in terms of wickedness to kufr (disbelief in Allaah) and the most evil of practises and sins.

 

So by saying that the only reason for its prohibition is indeed only ‘for reasons of procreation and religious requirements’ is also wrong and defies logic. The reason to why it is prohibited is actually of its harmfulness and because it’s not from the fitrah (natural predisposition}. Otherwise Allaah would not make it a ‘religious requirement’, if it wasn’t harming its creation and also if it wasn’t for the simple fact that it is against procreation because of the simple fact that it’s not natural. Allaah made it in his fitrah that Men use Women and Women use Men, that is the natural predisposition and fitrah of Allaah and anything apart from it goes against the natural disposition and fitrah as Allaah has intended it.

 

Allaah has created Adam and Xaawa for that particular reason because Allaah has inclined and instilled into his creation that men use women and women use men and not that his creation engages in something that not only is harmful to them but also against his fitrah and natural disposition, that’s why same sex relations and bestiality is haraam and against the fitrah of Allaah.

 

The Holy Quraan says the following:

 

And verily! Your Lord, He is indeed the All-Mighty, the Most Merciful.

The people of Lout (Lot) (those dwelt in the towns of Sodom in Palestine) belied the Messengers. When their brother Lout (Lot) said to them: "Will you not fear Allah and obey Him? "Verily! I am a trustworthy Messenger to you. "So fear Allah, keep your duty to Him, and obey me. "No reward do I ask of you for it (my Message of Islamic Monotheism), my reward is only from the Lord of the 'Alamin (mankind, jinns and all that exists). "Go you in unto the males of the 'Alamin (mankind), "And leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your wives? Nay, you are a trespassing people!" They said: "If you cease not. O Lout (Lot)! Verily, you will be one of those who are driven out!" He said: "I am, indeed, of those who disapprove with severe anger and fury your (this evil) action (of sodomy). "My Lord! Save me and my family from what they do." So We saved him and his family, all, Except an old woman (his wife) among those who remained behind. Then afterward We destroyed the others. And We rained on them a rain (of torment). And how evil was the rain of those who had been warned. Verily, in this is indeed a sign, yet most of them are not believers. And verily! Your Lord, He is indeed the All-Mighty, the Most Merciful.

”

I guess you have an answer for this one, when Allaah clearly states that Homosexuality is not part of the fitrah. Allaah intended men to have sexual relationships with women, which is the fitrah {natural inclination and predisposition Allaah has instilled in all of his creation}. Thus Allaah says: ]"Go you in unto the males of the 'Alamin (mankind), "And leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your wives? Nay, you are a trespassing people!"

 

"Go you in unto the males of the 'Alamin (mankind), "And leave those whom Allah has created for you to be your wives? Nay, you are a trespassing people!"

 

^^^However Ngonge still continues to say that homosexuality is quite natural and part of the natural predisposition instilled in human beigns as he clearly put it: 'homosexuality is ‘normal, natural, innate and inherent’.

[Fiqikhayre]

He still continues further with his fallacious absurdities and I quote:

 

Originally by Ngonge: the story of Sodom & Gomorrah the actions of those people were referred to as a sin (or Faaxisha in Arabic). It was not referred to as unnatural!…..It is simply wrong because we, as Muslims, have been prohibited by our faith from indulging in it.

Which I utterly defeated with:

 

Again he’s speaking form total ignorance. Allaah described the practise of homosexuality not only as a ‘faaxishah’ as he puts it but actually as ‘Al-faaxisha’ the worst sin, which reiterates that it contains all essence of evil and sin.

 

Here is the aayah:

 

“And (remember) Loot (Lot), when he said to his people: Do you commit the worst sin such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Aalameen (mankind and jinn)?”

 

So the whole notion of homosexuality not being unnatural and in agreement with human fitrah is defeated by the above aayah, which clearly says that it was something totally alien and unknown by Allaah’s creation and none has preceded this wickedness that’s why Allaah punished the people of Loot like he did to no other nation, so if it was something that someone is born with or natural or something innate, why were the people of prophet Loot the first to indulge themselves in such kind of evil and wicked activity as described in the holy Quraan? Everyone knows that the people of Sodom & Gomorrah were the first of their kind to commit such wickedness and evil and no one preceded them into it. So where’s the natural inclination or predisposition or the claim that homosexuality is not unnatural. Can you see the illogical falsehood that is pursued here? This is more than a farce and an actual mockery of our religion and its guidelines. We know that the Quraan is our moral guide and the most authentic source as it is the word of Allaah on the other hand it is our base for any historical happenings. The Quraan is vague in its descriptions of many historical events but not this one and it clearly states that civilisation and creation, mankind and the jinns alike did not know about this practise before the people of Luut. The people of Luut were the first to indulge themselves in such kind of act.

 

Furthermore the prophet peace be upon him cursed the people who commit such acts three times, which was also unprecedented. He cursed many evils but he did not curse them more than one time but homosexuality and the people who commit such actions were cursed by the holy prophet peace be upon him three times.

 

Furthermore Allaah did not test anyone else before the people of Loot calayhi salaam with this great evil and wickedness, that goes against the natural inclination and natural predisposition and the fitrah of human beings also Allaah did not inflict a greater punishment to any other nation than he did to the people of Luut and it is said the following:

 

‘Allaah did not test anyone with this major sin before the people of Loot, and He punished them with a punishment that He did not send upon any other nation; He combined all kinds of punishment for them, such as destruction, turning their houses upside down, causing them to be swallowed up by the earth, sending stones down upon them from the sky, taking away their sight, punishing them and making their punishment ongoing, and wreaking vengeance upon them such as was not wrought upon any other nation. That was because of the greatness of the evil consequences of this crime which the earth can hardly bear if it is committed upon it, and the angels flee to the farthest reaches of heaven and earth if they witness it, lest the punishment be sent upon those who do it and they be stricken along with them. The earth cries out to its Lord, may He be blessed and exalted, and the mountains almost shift from their places.’

[Fiqikhayre]

I concluded my valid contention with the following:

 

So we clearly say and state that homosexuality is indeed an act of wickedness and that is against the fitrah of Allaah that he has instilled in human beings and in all of his creation. This natural inclination or predisposition was given to us when we enter the wombs of our mothers and that is what distinguishes wrong from right and truth from falsehood. It is only up to our parents and the environment that we’re born in and our own free will and the influence of the devil that we commit acts that go against this fitrah and are in violation of this natural inclination and predisposition. Wallaahu aclam.

 

Let’s remember and quote the Quranic ayah one more time inshallah:

 

“And (remember) Loot (Lot), when he said to his people: Do you commit the worst sin such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Aalameen (mankind and jinn)?”

 

So I ask you if homosexuality is ‘natural, normal, innate and inherent’ in your eyes, how come that it wasn’t practised at all before the people of Prophet Luut? Is it perhaps due to the fact that it is not ‘natural’ and thus not part of the human fitrah and natural inclination and predisposition of Allaah’s creation and that he intended and instilled for them the way he did? How many people or prophets were there before prophet Luut calayhi salaam? We all know that Prophet Luut calayhi salaam lived during the time of Prophet Abraham and humans have been in existence then for quite a long time. The prophets of Idris, Nuux, Huud, Saalax calayhi salaam ajmaciin and their people were all before Prophet Luut calayhi salaam and the people he was sent too. So what does the Quraan say again:

 

Do you commit the worst sin such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Aalameen (mankind and jinn)?”

 

^^^The above alone proves that your fallacious and absurd belief of homosexuality being ‘natural, innate, and inherent’ is not only wrong but an utter mockery of Allah's creation. Otherwise you wouldn’t lie about Allaahs’ creation by saying and clinging on to the ridiculous belief of ‘homosexuality being natural’.

 

Where as Allaah swt says in his exalted and noble book:

 

Do you commit the worst sin such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Aalameen (mankind and jinn)?”

 

The worst sin as none preceding you in the Aalameen (mankind and demons or jinns).

 

So I would kindly conclude and ask Ngonge: When did homosexuality become ‘natural, innate and inherent’? Was it, when you were the owner of a ‘gay dog’, you repeated so many times in here or prior to that event? Well, let the gallery. For you to say that homosexuality is natural, you must believe that it was always like that. So your answer has to be: Since the creation of human beings?

 

^^^This is the logical conclusion of your fallacious belief.

 

But let me remind you of this:

 

Do you commit the worst sin, such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Aalameen (mankind and jinn)?”

 

I urge the gallery to not be silent and tell who is in error here, according to their judgement and god given intellect inshallah.

[Khalaf]

^^^hahahahahaha raageedi!..........ladies and gentlemen members of the jury the floor is yours to decide the outcome of this case.

 

and this show is over, rapit up! hahahaha dis dude is cool....waraa Yoonis hats off to ya brah.

[Fabregas]

lACANA RASULULAHI SALALAHU CALAYHI WASALAM, AL MUKHANISINA MINA RIJAAL,WALMUTARAJILAT MINA NISA!

 

" THE PROPHET MAY THE PEACE AND BLESSINGS OF ALLAH BE UPON HIM, CURSED THE FEMININE MAN AND THE MASCULINE WOMAN".

[NGONGE]

Mea Culpa! Pride goes before a fall and all that.

 

I certainly make no bones about the fact that I might have erred in here (how is that for three clichéd sayings in one go?).

Of course, I still stand by every word I wrote previously. However, having read MK's bumbling diatribes I have to admit that he might have a point in one certain area. Therefore, I grudgingly (would I do it any other way?) accept (and concede) the section of his argument in which he points out the verse that clearly indicated there were no homosexuals in existence preceding Loot's people! Of course I could have easily gone into dissecting the verse and enquiring weather it meant people rather than person, but that would have been futile and counterproductive. Moreover, it would only have been a weak and stubborn attempt on my part to have the upper hand.

 

I'd be lying if I said that my opinion has suddenly changed and that I now believe homosexuality to be unnatural (in the way it's being presented on this thread). However, I'm neither juvenile nor a simpleton. When those I debate with start substantiating their arguments, I am left with no choice but to concede. Especially that I have no strong argument to counter such powerful proof!

 

I may be vain, haughty and pompous. I might even come across as being superior, which I usually am (even if I say so myself). But obtuse I am not. In this instance (the bit about the verse only) the boys were correct (come on, MK let khalaf take some credit here). But, here is a parting shot before I conclude this reply: even a broken clock is right twice a day.

[Ms DD]

^^Blimey. This could be the first time in my short time here, that i came accross someone conceding gracefully. Perhaps not gracefully, but conceding nevertheless

[Fiqikhayre]

I shall accept Ngonge’s admission of his defeat and submission. I belief, this is a courageous and brave act of him to finally concede and accept the reality, when presented with concrete and clear cut evidence, which made it difficult for him, to maintain his indefensible and futile position. His surrender was no surprise and actually hastened by the fact, that he had been defeated by overwhelming evidence and strong argumentation on my behalf, which left him with no room to manoeuvre but to accept defeat, although grudgingly.

 

I knew he already conceded a long time ago, because I’m already acquainted with his peculiar way of admitting defeat, from earlier discussions with him. He has his own ways of conceding, but I shall not expose them to the gallery in here and instead keep it just between me and him (I’m doing you a favour Ngonge).

 

The reason to why I rigorously pursued to defeat Ngonge’s blunder and fallacious belief, was not because I enjoyed or liked shaming and embarrassing my fellow brother, but due to the simple fact, that I felt my creators name being used (misused) inappropriately. Allaah’s hikmah was questioned by Ngonge and if it wasn’t enough he attributed and credited to Allah a false and fallacious belief, which is not only very blasphemous but also mocking.

 

I, as participant of this forum could and would not allow to sit idly , whilst my creators and lords name is lied upon in a Sunni Muslim fora just like Sol. My conscious and love for my creator urged me to defend and clear’ my creators good name and reputation of Ngonge’s wicked and absurd attribution towards my lord. That’s why I composed a masterpiece which only took me twenty minutes to come up with in order to defend my deities good name. Ngonge’s blasphemy not only questioned Allahs’ hikmah but also managed to mockingly pass on the notion of homosexuality being ‘natural’ to a young Muslim crowd in here and that’s why I felt double-obliged to prove his fallacious belief to be wrong and completely absurd in nature.

 

Furthermore his first insistence of it being ‘natural’ and ’normal’ would imply, that it was something we were born with (and some for us, something that we could not defend ourselves from, as it was ‘normal’ and ‘natural’, thus some giving in to it, but because it was ‘natural’ in the first place it wasn’t such a big thing’), although we know that it wasn’t known prior to the people of Luut and far from being ‘natural’ and ‘normal’. How could I accept such fallacy when I know, that my Lord would never make such thing ‘natural’ and ‘normal’. Can you see the blasphemous ignorance? He’s attributing to Allaah something bad, Can you imagine Allaah making such a evil act ‘natural’? Subhanallaah! How wrong of him. How could you attribute such thing to Allaah? Doesn’t he have a conscious, he’s truly misguided in my eyes and not to be trusted. If it was ‘natural’ why would Allaah outlaw it in the first place? He says because ‘of religious requirements and Allaah wanted it that way’. Can you see the absurdity in his argumentation? No person with a sense and little intellect would even dare to say such absurdity, it borders stu!pidity of the highest order and blasphemy. If we continue with his belief, he thinks that it is ’natural’ and something ‘normal’ to be homosexual and that if Allaah forbid it because of ‘reasons of procreation and religious requirements’, otherwise we would all ‘happily’ and morally engage in it. Remember he also said that ’there is no great logical explanation for its outlaw of the practise of homosexuality’? His fallacious belief have been shown to be blasphemous lies attributed to our creator and he admits it but that is not enough for me. The fallacies in his reasoning and logic is what amazes and astonishes me and I have to pinch myself, to make sure that this is actually real. There are many irrational hollows and illogical absurdities in his fallacious belief, that I find difficult to comprehend how a person can believe in such thing.

 

I will not leave this guy of the hook and some might think I’m being harsh to him and ought to be left alone, because he already admitted to his defeat and guilt but ’No’, because is he advocating for something, that he doesn’t want to tell us about? Make up your mind dear gallery and address this wickedness. It is not enough for him to say ’Oh I surrender’ and ’I give in and concede’, when he clearly says and still maintains the following and I quote:

 

Originally by Ngonge: I'd be lying if I said that my opinion has suddenly changed and that I now believe homosexuality to be unnatural (in the way it's being presented on this thread). However, I'm neither juvenile nor a simpleton. When those I debate with start substantiating their arguments, I am left with no choice but to concede. Especially that I have no strong argument to counter such powerful proof!

^^^Allaahu Akbar, this fellow still continues in his fallacious belief and to blind himself, although he has been shown the truth. I urge the good people in here to condemn his belief. He’s speaking of me substantiating my arguments and that he had no ‘other choice but to concede, especially that he had no strong argument to counter such powerful proof’ as he put it. So what is stopping him to renounce his false belief? He’s saying he has been shown the truth with substantial arguments and that he had no other choice but to concede and accept it, especially so that he had no strong argument to counter such powerful proof’ in one go, whilst he is still maintaining the following:

 

‘I'd be lying if I said that my opinion has suddenly changed and that I now believe homosexuality to be unnatural (in the way it's being presented on this thread).’

 

However he continues to contradict himself by saying:

 

'I'm neither juvenile nor a simpleton. When those I debate with start substantiating their arguments, I am left with no choice but to concede. Especially that I have no strong argument to counter such powerful proof!'

 

^^^So tell me kindly, what gives? What is stopping him from renouncing it, when he admits to his guilt? He’s truly misguided and gone astray from the right path. I will leave for the gallery to judge inshallah.

 

The other thing, which I cannot accept is Xiin’s intervention into this thread, in which he clearly tried to derail my rightful intervention into it by highlighting the fallacies of Ngonge’s absurdities and countering his false belief that he wanted to ‘pass on’ to the gallery here unopposed but to no avail because I raised up to defend my creators and lords name and I knew god would be on my side. Xiin tried to prevent that, he tried to commit intellectual fraud by being an obstacle to the truth. What was he thinking? Surely I do not hesitate to tell how it is and the truth and he should have known that his tactics won’t work on me from previous encounters between me and him. For all of you who followed events last week in the politics section, you know where Xiin was coming from because he was after a personal vendetta and tried to avenge it, although he was humiliated just as Ngonge was in this thread but Ngonge had the courage to admit to his defeat and surrender although grudgingly, where as Xiin fled the scene and never returned to that said thread. For me he’s nothing more than a mischievous person, that commits fraud. I will leave the gallery to judge.

 

Ngonge is the culprit at fault here but two other persons are at guilty with him and that is Caano Geel and Mr. mischievous fraudster himself, Xiinfaniin.

[Alle-ubaahne]

Originally posted by NGONGE:

Mea Culpa! Pride goes before a fall and all that.

 

I certainly make no bones about the fact that I might have erred in here (how is that for three clichéd sayings in one go?).

Of course, I still stand by every word I wrote previously. However, having read MK's bumbling diatribes I have to admit that he might have a point in one certain area. Therefore, I grudgingly (would I do it any other way?) accept (and concede) the section of his argument in which he points out the verse that clearly indicated there were no homosexuals in existence preceding Loot's people! Of course I could have easily gone into dissecting the verse and enquiring weather it meant people rather than person, but that would have been futile and counterproductive. Moreover, it would only have been a weak and stubborn attempt on my part to have the upper hand.

 

I'd be lying if I said that my opinion has suddenly changed and that I now believe homosexuality to be unnatural (in the way it's being presented on this thread). However, I'm neither juvenile nor a simpleton. When those I debate with start

substantiating their arguments, I am left with no choice but to concede. Especially that I have no strong argument to counter such powerful proof!

 

I may be vain, haughty and pompous. I might even come across as being superior, which I usually am (even if I say so myself). But obtuse I am not. In this instance (the bit about the verse only) the boys were correct (come on, MK let khalaf take some credit here). But, here is a parting shot before I conclude this reply:

even a broken clock is right twice a day.

You can concede, but you shouldn't be conceding for a Daba-dhilif we all know. I am urging you to proceed with your position for the sake of Lug'gooyo upon the dabo-dhilif in Sheydaan Sakkhar!

 

Please do so, and take back your concessions and continue the subject by presenting a case of gayness in the government he (sakkhar or sakhraan) believes in.

 

You can do it, I know, you can!

[Caano Geel]

caano geel says:

- if the discussion is on books, then people have the right to object to what their children are taught. Since they live in such liberal places to be inflicted which travesties, then they can always withdraw their children

 

- if the discussion is on peoples sexuality, then allah created them, he (CG) didn't, so he'll leave their judgement to allah and wont stand in their way [dare we say, even advocate] their rights to lead peaceful and dignified lives.

 

He also adds that having had the pleasure of meeting a diverse set of people from all corners of the planet and with a multitude of beliefs and characteristics (some of which he considered plain daft and others outright lunacy) sexual orientation still hasn't been a characteristic that has defined a persons moral character and goodness as a human being..

 

While he understands Islam considers homosexuality 'sinful', he reiterates that he is not their judge beyond their interactions with him or if their actions do not effect his (and those he cares about) quality of life and will not hesitate to stick to his position..

[NGONGE]

Heh. Oh you insufferable oaf! You just never know when it's time to quite, do you?

 

I have no problem with my concession on the point: that there were no creatures that engaged in such sexual behaviour before Loot's people. On this I go by what the quran says. However, you simple child, one does not simply concede and accept without making sure of what they concede to. My reluctance to fully accept the argument (though I maintain that I yielded) was due to a multiple number of questions that came up as a result. Alas, this discussion and the calibre of participants is not the correct place to air such questions.

 

 

I would be happy to debate with you. I will even graciously concede when I'm wrong (for I am wrong, sometimes but not too often). But I don't believe you are capable of carrying a civil debate. For a start, you misrepresent and misinterpret your oppositions' words: I said twice that I don't think homosexuality was NORMAL but rather that I thought it to be natural (work out the nuances therein). Yet, amazingly, you still chose to twist my words and try to pass your own interpretations as being something I said or believed. In addition, when I have not questioned Allah's reasons (for that's clearly what I said) you still managed to distort those words and make them look as if I'm questioning Allah's Hikmah! Never mind, this is a waste of time.

 

 

By the way, the bit about 'fawaxish' and 'faaxisha' is total gobbledygook. If you bother to read the holy book you will come across the word 'faaxisha' (or even al faaxisha) in several places and not all are concerned with homosexuality. The rest of your contentions I would not deign to reply to. For you either didn't understand or you deliberately chose to use chicanery and underhand tactics! But that's neither here nor there. You will still come back with three consecutive replies repeating the same thing and distorting my words. Subtlety is not at all your thing. You rather follow the Arabic adage of: overwhelm them with noise or: خذوهم بالصوت

 

Two more years and you'll calm down. I'm sure of it. In the meantime, here are a couple of old poetic verses:

 

لو كنت تعلم ما اقول عذرتني

او كنت تعلم ما تقول عذلتكا

لكن جهلت مقالتي فعذلتني

وعلمت انك جاهل فعذرتكا

 

[Fiqikhayre]

Originally by Ngonge: I'd be lying if I said that my opinion has suddenly changed and that I now believe homosexuality to be unnatural (in the way it's being presented on this thread). However, I'm neither juvenile nor a simpleton.

When those I debate with start substantiating their arguments, I am left with no choice but to concede.

Especially that I have no strong argument to counter such powerful proof!

^^Addeer, You want to be embarrassed again. No twisting and turning or manipulating will help or save you. Let's thank Allaah as for you words are on record and you cannot retract them.

 

He says:

 

'I said twice that I don't think homosexuality was NORMAL but rather that I thought it to be natural (work out the nuances therein). Yet, amazingly, you still chose to twist my words and try to pass your own interpretations as being something I said or believed.'

 

^^Are we forgetting what we said or are we engaged in a futile attempt of washing the disgrace and embarrassment from our faces? You don't have a face to show around here and your return will only further embarass you, so I kindly advice you to do the most logic thing and look for the exist as you did before, if not then the same things that made you leave will make you again flee.

 

That's what he said before:

 

Originally by Ngonge:

Sexual urges have no default positions. They fall into all sorts of styles and categories and all can be argued to be normal.

The only reason that straight relationships are considered ‘natural’ is because of procreation and religious requirements.’

^^^This is what he said in his own words and now he wants to twist and change it.

 

Now that, he clearly lost the arguement and conceded, he wants to engage in a farce, in substitute of what he could not discuss in substance.

 

His whole contention has turned now into:

 

 

'My reluctance to fully accept the argument (though I maintain that I yielded) was due to a multiple number of questions that came up as a result. Alas, this discussion and the calibre of participants is not the correct place to air such questions.'

 

And then he paradoxically continues saying:

 

'I would be happy to debate with you. I will even graciously concede when I'm wrong (for I am wrong, sometimes but not too often). But I don't believe you are capable of carrying a civil debate. For a start, you misrepresent and misinterpret your oppositions' and 'I didn't say homosexuality was normal but natural .

 

What debate? Tell me, what is on contention other then the things you brought up, which I refuted and already defeated you on? Can you see him in his desperate attempt to avenge his awful defeat and lost? No manipulation or whatsoever can help you out of this situation. Tell me what we shall debate, alright?

 

This guy has totally lost it. Wallaahi this is getting really, really embarrassing and the gallery can see what he's trying to do here but to no avail and success.

 

Originally by Ngonge: 'I said twice that I don't think homosexuality was NORMAL but rather that I thought it to be natural (work out the nuances therein). Yet, amazingly, you still chose to twist my words and try to pass your own interpretations as being something I said or believed. In addition, when I have not questioned Allah's reasons (for that's clearly what I said) you still managed to distort those words and make them look as if I'm questioning Allah's Hikmah! Never mind, this is a waste of time'.

He furthermore says cryingly:

 

Originally: you deliberately chose to use chicanery and underhand tactics! But that's neither here nor there. You will still come back with three consecutive replies repeating the same thing and distorting my words.

Cry me a river Ngonge.

 

What other excuses will he bring to the fold and out of his sleeves? Continue amusing the gallery Ngonge surely they're having a great time.

 

Finally I shall remind you of what you said in case you forgot:

 

Originally by Ngonge: Sexual urges have no default positions. They fall into all sorts of styles and categories and

all can be argued to be normal.

The only reason that straight relationships are considered ‘natural’ is because of procreation and religious requirements.’

^^^You know what I refuted you with and that is on record, so I shall not post it again. Surely 'Sexual urges have no default positions. They fall into all sorts of styles and categories and all can be argued to be normal.

 

^^Your views and beliefs exposed again? Let me repeat it to you folks: 'Sexual urges have no default positions. They fall into all sorts of styles and categories and all can be argued to be normal.

 

Sexual urges have no default positions is Ngonge saying and that they fall in all sorts of styles and categories and he continues saying that all can be aruged to be normal/b].

 

^^^This are his words. No wait, he didn't say that. It was distorted, although Ngonge posted it. No, No it was another Ngonge and not this one. Check out his original post on page seven it was I think and tell me if I have misquouted him or used anything apart from his words. Ngonge come out again and tell us these are not your words.

 

He furthermore said:

 

Originally by Ngonge: the story of Sodom & Gomorrah the actions of those people

were referred to as a sin (or Faaxisha in Arabic). It was not referred to as unnatural!…..It is simply wrong because we, as Muslims, have been prohibited by our faith from indulging in it.

I refuted him with this:

 

Again he’s speaking form total ignorance. Allaah described the practise of homosexuality not only as a ‘faaxishah’ as he puts it but actually as ‘Al-faaxisha’ the worst sin, which reiterates that it contains all essence of evil and sin.

 

Here is the aayah as proof:

 

Here is the aayah:

 

“And (remember) Loot (Lot), when he said to his people: Do you commit the worst sin such as none preceding you has committed in the ‘Aalameen (mankind and jinn)?”

 

This man is indeed a wicked man and I urge the gallery to come out and condemn him again. If the things he said weren't on record he would turn and twist and say 'No, No I never said such a thing, because he would try to distort it in order to avenge his disgracful and utter defeat, but to no avail I say'.

 

Everything is on record that's the good thing about Camel Milk debates.

 

It's really getting embarrassing for him. After admitting to his defeat:

 

Originally by Ngonge: I'd be lying if I said that my opinion has suddenly changed and that I now believe homosexuality to be unnatural (in the way it's being presented on this thread). However, I'm neither juvenile nor a simpleton. When those I debate with start substantiating their arguments, I am left with no choice but to concede. Especially that I have no strong argument to counter such powerful proof!

And now he returned with something really embarrassing that is without any significance such as his awful cries in order to avenge his defeat. But he cannot manipulate the issue here because it is above him and one cannot defend the indefensible!

 

Furthermore everyone knew that he questioned Allahs' hikmah by admitting that Allaah did no rationalise the prohibition of homosexuality and 'that there are no great and logical reasons and explanations for its prohibition', remember that saying? I wonder who said it? I refuted him and put him in his rightful place like I did before and it is on the record for those who want to read it again.

 

Furthermore he engaged in blasphemous mocking of our creator by ascribing and attributing to him something he did not ordain. His utter ignorant and blasphemous belief of homosexuality being 'natural' and 'normal' (can't deny it now) clearly wants to say that Allaah made this evil sin and act as part of the human natural inclination and predisposition which it clearly is not. I pointed out to him that the act of homosexuality was unknown before the people of Luut and therefore not 'natural' and thus cannot be ascribed or attributed to Allaah the exalted and on that I caught him up. He lost it and thus has no valid or significant contention thus he pursues his trivial and ignorant viewpoint (hawaa') to no avail.

 

I urge the gallery and participants of this discussion and all the people who read this to come out and voice their opinion again on who is right and on who is wrong inshallah and to condemn Ngonge's pitiful attempt of avenging his defeat to no avail.

[xiinfaniin]

Originally posted by Sheikh Sakhar:

 

Ngonge is the culprit at fault here but two other persons are at guilty with him and that is Caano Geel and

Mr. mischievous fraudster

himself, Xiinfaniin.

^^ @Mr. mischievous fraudster.

 

 

You see, all Xiin wanted to do was to moderate your emotions. To that regard, I have admittedly failed as you continue to spew your uncontrolled rubbish in every thread you participate in! Despite NOGNGE’s concessions, the only point I thought was worth of our discussion was the central point of Cambarro’s post. The rest were diversions from the main point caused by hasty posts!

 

It’s simple adeer homo activities are prohibited by our religion. None of the Muslim posters in this thread contradicted that. The whole debate about homosexuality being natural or otherwise, though tempting a bit, is pointless (it's like debating about masalatul qadr!). That renders your whole exercise as no more than froths of a confused mind.

 

^^And with that being so, am I not justified to quote Geelle's poetic jabs which he poked at none other than his brother, Maahir?

 

Afkahadalka wuxuu uumiyihu moodayyaa odogaa reeraade'e

Anse ogi halkaad Maahirow iin ku leedahay'e