Homosexuality

Homosexuality is a mental illness. From what I have been able to find: “Up to 1973 the Diagnostic Manual of Mental Disorders of the American Psychiatric Association (APA) did include ego-syntonic (comfortable with orientation) homosexuality as a mental disorder. The reason it was dropped was not a change in scientific or medical thinking, but that homosexual activists besieged and disrupted psychiatric meetings and intensely harrassed and abused psychiatrists. For instance, psychiatrist Nelson Borelli was at the 1972 APA convention, and noted the following in the BRITISH MEDICAL JOURNAL: ‘I was there in San Francisco at the 1972 APA convention when the “Gay and Lesbian” activists forced the APA leadership to promise to drop ‘Homosexuality’ from the diagnostic manual or else there would be no APA Convention. Not only the scandal they were causing, but the activists had gained control of the infrastructure of the convention building. The APA kept the promise.”‘

THE OFFICIAL JOURNAL OF THE ASSOCIATON OF GAY AND LESBIAN PSYCHIATRISTS REPORTED : “Following the Stonewall riots of 1969, gay activist groups began to besiege the APA for its position that homosexuality was a mental disorder. At a 1970 APA meeting in San Francisco, activists slipped in. Once inside, they both verbally attacked the late Irving Bieber at one meeting and disrupted another devoted to aversive conditioning of “sexual deviation.” In response to the protest, the APA decided to open up its doors. In the following year, and for the first time, a panel of openly gay men and women spoke directly to psychiatrists at the 1971 annual meeting in Washington, D.C. Despite the APA overture, however, there were still protests at that meeting. Gay activists disrupted the Convocation of the Fellows, grabbed the microphone and declared “war” on psychiatry. They also entered the exhibition hall and demanded the removal of an exhibitor’s booth promoting aversive conditioning for the “treatment” of homosexuality. The following year’s 1972 APA convention in Dallas was not marked by disruption. Instead, it featured, for the first time, a booth in the exhibition hall entitled, “Gay, Proud and Healthy.””

As far as I can remember, it was the TV program “Soap” in the seventies which gave homosexuality social acceptance. What we do in this country is that first we present somebody as a “victim” then we start accepting their lifestyle as normal. What if the pedophylliacs start complaining that they are being mistreated by society and what they are doing is “natural ” for them. Should we accept their lifestyle too?

In the case of Lot, the entire town had adopted homosexuality, so it could not possibly have been natural. It had become a social practice–done for fun. And that’s why God condemned it.

Islam is not against homosexuality per se. There is NO punishment for homosexuality but there is for sodomy. And that is why, lesbianism, though sinful, is NOT a crime in Islamic shariah.

1.We need to recognize that the great fuqu’ah and ulema have disagreed over this issue. If that is so, why not give benefit of the doubt to the accused?

2. Although homosexuality is a sin in Islam, it is not a crime by itself unless it is accompanied by sodomy, witnessed by four people or proven otherwise.

3. The only source that supports the death penalty argument are couple of Hadiths quoted in Sunan Abu Dawud, which were then copied by Tirmidhi (reported through Ibn Abbas). But one has to be very skeptical about these Hadiths, none of which were picked up or considered reliable by other narrators.

4. Malik also reports in Muwatta that, “he asked Ibn Shihab about someone who committed sodomy. Ibn Shihab says, ‘He is to be stoned, whether or not he is a muhsan.” If you read the entire Hadith, it was about a woman, who was stoned, so it’s possible that it is she who was sodomized in an adultery case. That’s different from homosexuality, and Ibn Shihab could simply have been expressing just his opinion. By all accounts, the early Companions were not sure how to deal with this problem.

5. Abu Hanifa left the punishment up to the discretion of a judge. (If the Hadiths in Abu Dawud were well known and credible, why would Abu Hanifa rule otherwise?) Some, Hanafi ulema later thought that on second conviction there should be death penalty, but they were in a minority. Imam Shafi’i simply considered it a case of ‘zina.’ He thought that the death penalty should only be given if the sodomizer is married. Most people see that opinion as Imam Shafi’I ijtehad and not something that is based on Quran and Sunnah.

6. In most Muslim countries—especially where there are more Hanafis, and they are the majority among Muslims, there is no death penalty for homosexuality. Most people are jailed for overt expressions of homosexual behaviour but are then released.

4 thoughts on “Homosexuality

  1. A guy December 13, 2013 at 6:04 am Reply

    This is absolutely ridiculous. You actually have some pretty good explanations on this site but this one is absolute nonsense. Homosexuality is a mental illness? Really? Can you get educated please and stop being a bigot? Do you have any gay friends? How about you walk up to a gay person and ask if they think they have a “mental illness”. Your argument has been thoroughly debunked for years now, think about it, if homosexuality is a mental illness, then why does it occur naturally in almost all other animal species? Are they “diseased”? Please, get educated about this issue before you post this garbage. Also I’m sorry you can’t use your own bullshit religious story of Lot to prove your point, that is called circular reasoning. The psychological association was pressured to change the definition because that’s what is called moving forward. You know there was a time that we were burning witches? We got past that too, its called progress. One last thing, don’t embarrass yourself with the whole “homosexuality will lead to pedophilia and bestiality” argument. Come on man, that’s the same stupid shit rednecks use to justify their bigotry as well. Listen, you have alot of info on this site portraying Islam as accepting/nonviolent etc… If your trying to portray Islam as a tolerant religion you gotta go all the way, you can’t stop just because you’re afraid of the gay.

    • sincereadvisor December 15, 2013 at 4:47 am Reply

      First of all, you missed the point that I was making. I am not against gays, so your accusation of “bigotry” is without any basis whatsoever. You are essentially making a point that if I am to free myself from bigotry and embrace “progress,” I must accept homosexuality as normal. That is a totally false argument. I never said that homosexuality is “wrong.” What I said was that it’s abnormal and should be treated as such. If you don’t like the term “mental illness,” because in some people’s mind there is a stigma attached to it, at least call it abnormal. If you recognize it such, something can be done about it, and someday there can be a cure for it. If you don’t see it as a problem, scientists and doctors will not be allowed to come up with a solution!

      You are implying that gays who forced psychologists to embrace their lifestyle were more progressive than those eminent scientists. How can that be? Why do you want to change science by threats and intimidation? Why not allow scientists to do their work and come up with modern theories on their own? How is this progressive? If scientists now claim that homosexual brain is wired differently or homosexuality is caused by chemical or hormonal imbalance, what harm is there in calling it abnormality? I am not advocating ostracization of gays. I simply think they need help, and scientists and doctors are not being allowed to help them become normal, all due to politicization of this issue.

      Religiously speaking, as I pointed out, Islam is not against homosexuality per se [laws against it developed over centuries]. However, it is against sodomy, whether it’s homosexual or hetrosexual. So one can be a homosexual and avoid sodomy just as many heterosexuals can remain celibate. You will have to agree with me that the part of the anatomy we are referring to, and which need not be named, was not created for sexual intercourse but simply to eliminate bodily waste. Almost all human beings associate it with filth. So why treat it otherwise? Just because you feel sorry for gays? Why not help them become normal by allowing proper research which can lead to cures and allow these people to live a normal life and to have children of their own?

  2. Simon Pete July 11, 2014 at 6:19 pm Reply

    It was once thought that the sun revolved around the earth and scientist who dared to think different faced death. So you say let science do it’s job, well they did and they have found out that the earth revolves around the sun as it spins and that there is nothing wrong mentally with homosexuals and they don’t need to be cured, because they are not sick. The people who have a mental illness are the ones who have been brainwashed by religious bigots and books written by cave men. Like the guy who married a 6 year old girl and had sex with her when she was 9 years old., You see religion makes pedophiles not homosexuality. Religion makes a person very narrow minded and therefore mentally sick. That is why we have people blow themselves up for their religion. That is why there are still countries where women are seen as property and not even allowed to drive. That is why we have countries where people get killed for blasphemy. Yes I say let science do it’s work, we need to see these religious people as having a problem, maybe science will find a cure so that we won’t have people killed or jailed for blasphemy or homosexuality or apostasy..

    • sincereadvisor August 19, 2014 at 2:58 am Reply

      Simon, I don’t agree with your analogy or if I do it will not work in your favor, because Galileo was ‘forced’ to admit that the sun revolves around the earth, just as US psychologists were ‘forced’ to admit that homosexuality is normal human behavior. My point is that had scientists come with the view on their own that homosexuality is “normal,” you would have a point, but since there was coercion involved, you cannot base your argument on science. My other point was that US scientists are not allowed to research on finding a cure for homosexuality due to political correctness. Why should that be? If they can find a cure, why is it a problem?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: