Losing Our Religion: The Growth Of The 'Nones' in USA

http://www.npr.org/templates/transcript/transcript.php?storyId=169164840

As deeply religious as this country may be, many Americans are not religious at all. One-fifth of Americans in fact do not identify with any religion. This week we're asking who they are and what they do believe. Our colleague David Greene is with us for a series we call Losing Our Religion. Hi, David.

DAVID GREENE, HOST:

Hi, Steve.

INSKEEP: Let's define who we're talking about here. One-fifth of Americans - are they atheists or is there another term for them?

GREENE: Well, not necessarily. Demographers actually have an interesting name for them. They call them nones - that's N-O-N-E-S - because when asked to identify their religion they say none. But not necessarily atheists. Many of these people believe in God, many describe themselves as spiritual. And we're going to hear voices from this group as we go on this week.

INSKEEP: I'm reminded of the difference between faith and religion. They may believe in God but they don't believe anybody's particular creed.

GREENE: That's exactly right. They feel spiritual but don't necessarily belong to an organized religion. And so we're getting started today with two experts in the field. Robert Putnam is a professor at Harvard and he writes a lot about religion in public life. And we're also going to hear from Greg Smith. He's a senior researcher at the Pew Research Center. And Steve, they're the ones who did this study and found that one-fifth of Americans identify themselves as nones. One more thing really interesting. These people who don't belong to an organized religion, they're of all ages, but they're much more likely to be under the age of 30. And I wanted to understand why that is.

GREG SMITH: People raise the question: hasn't it always the case that young people are less religious than their elders and then they become more religious as they get older? And there is something to that on some measures. But religious affiliation is not one of them. Young people are not only more religiously unaffiliated than their elders, they are also more religiously unaffiliated than previous generations of young people ever have been, as far back as we can tell. So this is really something new.

GREENE: OK. Then let's explore the reason why young people are less religiously affiliated today than young people a few decades ago.

SMITH: Well, I guess one kind of broad explanation that we could point to is that this growth of the nones is consistent with what you might expect to find if some secularization were occurring. You know, we've seen over the last decade a slight uptick in the number of people who say they seldom or never attend religious services.

GREENE: So Professor Putnam, let me turn to you. Why are we seeing this happen?

ROBERT PUTNAM: I agree that there is this creeping secularization that Greg talked about, but I don't honestly think that that's the main reason for the rise in nones. I think there are factors that are really more important.

GREENE: OK. Give them to us.

PUTNAM: One of those is the distancing of this younger generation from community institutions and from institutions in general, actually. That's the same pattern, actually, that we find in politics. These are the very same people who increasingly describe themselves as independents rather than Republicans or Democrats. And those are the same people also who are not joining the Elks Club or the Rotary Club or whatever. I don't mean to be casting that as a critique of them, but this same younger generation is much less involved in many of the main institutions of our society than previous younger generations were.

GREENE: There's another point to make in looking at the research you both have done when it comes to politics. A lot of issues that are both important religiously and important in politics have become so polarized: same-sex marriage, abortion. And you both have written about that that might be turning some people off and making them less comfortable with religion in general.

SMITH: Well, in our polling we definitely find that the religiously unaffiliated do express the view that they think religious organizations are too involved in politics. They think religious organizations are too concerned with rules. They think they're too concerned with things like money and power. So I think that there is something to that. We also find that one defining characteristic of the religiously unaffiliated is their social liberalism. Three-quarters of this group say they favor allowing same-sex couples to marry legally. Three-quarters say they favor legal abortion.

PUTNAM: And I think, if I can add, that helps to explain why the trend suddenly begins to jump up around 1990. These were the kids who were coming of age in the America of the culture wars, in the America in which religion publicly seemed to become associated with a particular brand of politics. And so I think the single most important reason for the rise of the nones is that combination of the younger people moving to the left on social issues and the most visible religious leaders moving to the right on that same issue.

GREENE: Are all religions in the United States taking a hit here when it comes to numbers, Greg Smith, or is this affecting some religious sects more than others?

SMITH: It is affecting some religious groups' share of the population more than others. As we've seen the religiously unaffiliated's share of the population grow, the group that's really seen its share of the population decline is Protestants. In fact, in our most recent analysis, we found 48 percent of American adults identifying as Protestant. And that's the first time in our polling that we've seen the Protestant share of the population dip significantly below 50 percent.

GREENE: The first time you've ever seen less than half the country identify themselves as Protestant.

SMITH: That's right. And when you think about the United States historically, you think of it as a Protestant country. But it's also important to point out that the growth of the nones is really something that we're seeing across a variety of groups. We're seeing it among both men and women. We're seeing it among college graduates as well as among people with less education. We're seeing it occur in all regions of the country. Race and ethnicity though is one exception to that pattern. The growth of the nones really does seem to be restricted to whites. We haven't seen much growth in terms of African-Americans or Hispanics who say they're religiously unaffiliated.

GREENE: One interesting thing that I read in your research is that if you look at other countries that are highly developed, industrialized, big economies, wealthy, that has meant less religion over the years, that in some ways the United States has almost bucked that trend.

SMITH: I think that's an important point, you know, and that's correct. It's important to keep in mind that most people in the United States are still religiously affiliated. Most people in the United States are quite religious and that's especially true if you compare the United States to many European countries, for example. The United States, even with the rise of the nones, remains a highly religious country.

PUTNAM: I think probably both of us would agree even with these recent changes, the American religious commitments are incredibly stronger than in most other advanced countries in the world. The average American is slightly more religious than the average Iranian. So we're a very religious country, even today.

GREENE: So Steve, we were listening to Harvard Professor Robert Putnam, and he studies religion and culture. And the other voice was Greg Smith from the Pew Research Center.

INSKEEP: Those are the voices that begin this series, Losing Our Religion. So you're giving us an idea here, David Greene, that there are lots of different explanations for this move away from religion. So who are we going to hear from next?

GREENE: Well, a lot of explanations but a lot of these people are younger adults. And that's who we're going to hear from tomorrow to get their views. One of these younger adults is named Kyle Simpson. He found Christianity as a teenager, but over time he's come to question that religion, including the idea of hell.

KYLE SIMPSON: People who haven't accepted Christ are going to burn for all eternity and suffer for all eternity? It's so cruel. And it goes against everything that drew me to Christianity in the first place.

GREENE: So tomorrow more from Kyle and a handful of other people in their 20s and 30s.

INSKEEP: Thanks, David.

GREENE: Thanks, Steve.

INSKEEP: NPR's David Greene. This is NPR News.


“He’s a hedonist at heart”, Satan said.

“He’s a hedonist at heart. All those fasts and vigils and stakes and crosses are only a facade. Or only like foam on the sea shore. Out at sea, out in His sea, there is pleasure, and more pleasure. He makes no secret of it; at His right hand are ‘pleasures for evermore.’

Ugh! I don’t think He has the least inkling of that high and austere mystery to which we rise in the Miserific Vision. He’s vulgar, Wormwood. He has a bourgeois mind. He has filled His world full of pleasures.

There are things for humans to do all day long without His minding in the least– sleeping, washing, eating, drinking, making love, playing, praying, working. Everything has to be twisted before it’s any use to us. We fight under cruel disadvantages. Nothing is naturally on our side.”

–C.S. Lewis, The Screwtape Letters (New York: Macmillian, 1950), 112-113.

التماثيل السعودية المعروضة بأمريكا ليست "أصناماً"

التماثيل السعودية المعروضة بأمريكا ليست "أصناماً"
http://www.alarabiya.net/articles/2012/11/19/250611.html

الرياض - محمد العيدان


أكد أكاديمي سعودي مختص في علم الآثار أن التماثيل السعودية في معرض “روائع الآثار عبر العصور” الذي تنظمه هيئة السياحة والآثار في عواصم أوروبية وولايات أمريكية ليست أصناماً كما يدعي البعض، لافتاً إلى أن عدداً من الآثار محجوبة عن السعوديين، كونها لا تحتوي على قيم حضارية.


جانب من المعرض

وقال أستاذ الآثار وفنون الجزيرة العربية في جامعة الملك سعود، الدكتور حميد المزروع، لـ”العربية.نت”: “التماثيل الموجودة في “معرض روائع الآثار عبر العصور” ليست أصناماً كما يدعي البعض، بل هي هدايا نذرية، يقدمها المتعبد ليوثق حضوره الدائم أمام رمز الإله، وبما أنها صنعت لأسباب دينية يفسر ظهورها في المقابر والمعابد، وأن عددا كبيرا من التماثيل ارتبط اسمها باسم أصحابها”.

وأشار إلى أن أفضل التماثيل الأثرية متاحة للناس في المملكة، باستثناء بعض التماثيل التي لا تحتوي على قيم حضارية أو جمالية مثل شواهد القبور، أو مشاهد غير أخلاقية، أو موضوعات عن آلهة يونانية أو إغريقية، خصوصاً التي وصلت إلى الجزيرة العربية من خلال التجار الذين كانوا يجلبونها من الشام للتقرب من الإله في عروض التجارة.


تمثال بدون رأس

واعتبر أستاذ اللغات السامية والآثار في جامعة الملك سعود الدكتور سالم بن طيران أن التماثيل نِتاجُ حضارة وتمثل عنصراً فنياً مختلفاً يفهم فيها كل متخصص في فنون الجزيرة العربية والحضارة القديمة.

وشدد على المحافظة وتعريف المجتمع السعودي بها، وعرض بعض النماذج في المتاحف لما تمثله من حضارة ومعرفة تاريخية، ومعلومات قيمة عن تاريخ البلد، قائلا “نحن في القرن الواحد والعشرين والناس كلها على وعي وتعرف أهمية الآثار”.

صورة احد التماثيل

وعرضت هيئة السياحة والآثار السعودية نحو 400 أثرية سعودية في رحلة سياحية بين أشهر المتاحف العالمية وأغناها بالمقتنيات والتحف الأثرية بمرافقة وفد سعودي لاستقبال الزوار ومحاضرات توضح أهم الحضارات والأمم، التي نشأت في الجزيرة العربية.

ورفض مسؤول قطاع الآثار في السعودية الدكتور علي غبان الرد على سؤال عن وجود آثار سعودية مخبأة في المخازن ومحظورة على السعوديين مشاهدتها، وسبب قصرها على الأجانب فقط، بحجة أن المخول بالإجابة العلاقات العامة في الهيئة العامة للسياحة والآثار، التي هي الأخرى لم تجب عن ذلك طوال خمسة أشهر.


جانب من عرض التماثيل

وذكر خبراء في علم الآثار (فضلوا عدم ذكر أسمائهم) أن التماثيل الموجودة في معرض “روائع الآثار” مكتشفة على فترات زمنية مختلفة، فتمثال تاروت اكتشف في الستنيات الميلادية أثناء عمليات البحث عن آبار النفط في شرق السعودية ووجد على سطح الأرض في جزيرة تاروت، وتماثيل أخرى عثر عليها في مدينة العلا غربي السعودية في السبعينيات الميلادية، إضافة إلى تماثيل اكتشفت في تنقيبات 2004 التي قامت بها جامعة الملك سعود في العلا.

وتهدف هيئة السياحة والآثار من عرض الآثار السعودية في الخارج إبراز حضارة المملكة وتاريخها، إذ شهدت معارضها التي أقيمت في عواصم أوروبية إقبالاً كبيراً من الزوار. وستستمر في عرض آثارها في ولايات أمريكا خلال الفترة المقبلة.


Animal Farm : An Orwellian Vision on a Revolution Gone Wrong

As Orwell spent more and more time with the down-and-outs of England, he became convinced that the only remedy for the invidious problem of poverty lay in socialism, a political and economic philosophy arguing that only when the state controls the means of production and distribution will all members of a nation share its profits and rewards. Unlike capitalism, the philosophy holding that a nation's means of production and distribution should be privately owned and controlled, socialism argues that only government regulation of a nation's economy can close the gap between the rich and the poor. Although he was not a virulent anti-capitalist, Orwell did think that only with the gradual introduction of socialist ideas and practices into British life would the poor eventually come to share in the fruits of their nation's prosperity.

As he explained in his Preface to the Ukrainian edition of Animal Farm, "I became pro-Socialist more out of disgust with the way the poorer section of the industrial workers were oppressed and neglected than out of any theoretical admiration for a planned society." After fighting against fascism (an oppressive system of government in which the ruling party has complete economic control) in the Spanish Civil War, Orwell dedicated himself to exploring political questions in his writing. As he explains in the essay "Why I Write," "Every line of serious work I have written since 1936 has been written, directly or indirectly, againsttotalitarianism and for democratic socialism." His detestation and fear of totalitarianism — an even more extreme form of fascism in which the ruling party has complete control over all aspects of a people's lives — thus informed much of his literary output.

Orwell examined socialism in a number of his nonfiction works but was prompted to write Animal Farm by what he saw as a prevalent — and false — belief that the Russian Revolution of 1917 was a step toward socialism for millions of poor and oppressed Russians. Orwell felt that Stalin's brutal rise to power was not only barbaric, but a betrayal of the socialist principles for which Lenin, Trotsky, and he had presumably revolted. In hindsight, this seems obvious, but in the world of World War II Europe, such an attack on Russia was willingly stifled by many British leftists who wanted to believe that Russia was indeed moving toward a true union of socialist republics. The fact that Russia was — like England — fighting Hitler also made Orwell's position more unpalatable to leftist thinkers. Still, he felt that the U.S.S.R. was not progressing toward socialism but totalitarianism: "I was struck by clear signs of its transformation into a hierarchical society, in which the rulers have no more reason to give up their power than any ruling class." Convinced that "a destruction of the Soviet myth was essential if we wanted a revival of the Socialist movement," Orwell began thinking about how he could best communicate his opinions on socialism and Stalin.

His thoughts were ignited when he happened to see a village boy whipping a cart-horse. At that moment, Orwell received the inspiration he needed to formulate his ideas into Animal Farm: "It struck me that if only such animals became aware of their strength we would have no power over them, and that men exploit animals" as the government in a totalitarian state exploits the common people. Now Orwell had a plan for his novel which would both argue the need for a true socialist government and warn the world of the ways in which socialist ideas threatened the will of these in power who wish to control other people. His book would demonstrate the ways in which — despite all of their socialist propaganda — the leaders of the Russian Revolution (especially Stalin) had created in a system even worse than its previous one and sound an alarm to all English readers about the dangers of believing in the Soviet myth. (For a more detailed examination of how the events of the novel parallel those of the Russian Revolution, see the Critical Essays.) After a number of rejections from publishers, the novel was finally accepted by the small publishing firm of Secker and Warburg and proved to be a tremendous success, both in England and the United States. After Nineteen Eighty-Four, another novel that portrays life under an oppressive government, Animal Farm is Orwell's most renowned work.

Of course, the novel's meaning is not rooted solely in its portrayal of the Russian Revolution. The novel asks its readers to examine the ways in which political leaders with seemingly noble and altruistic motives can betray the very ideals in which they ostensibly believe, as well as the ways in which certain members of a nation can elect themselves to positions of great power and abuse their fellow citizens, all under the guise of assisting them. The novel also presents the subtle ways in which a group of citizens — of a farm or a nation — can be eventually led by the nose into a terrible life ruled by a totalitarian regime. In "Why I Write," Orwell describes Animal Farm as "the first book in which I tried, with full consciousness of what I was doing, to fuse political purpose and artistic purpose into one whole." His political purpose — presenting a model of socialism gone wrong — is found in the way that the novel's animals reflect different kinds of humans and their struggles for freedom and power. Orwell felt that a farm where "All Animals Are Equal" would solve many social and economic problems — but he also knew that such a system would be difficult to maintain, since some animals would act on the principle that "Some Are More Equal Than Others."

الفوضى و الفانيلة ...

http://m.almasryalyoum.com/node/1404856

السعودية تحظر التجول بالسروال و«الفانلة» في الأماكن العامة لأنهما «مدعاة للفتنة»

كتب: الألمانية د.ب.أ
الإثنين, 21/01/2013 16:11

عممت هيئة الأمر بالمعروف والنهي عن المنكر «الشرطة الدينية السعودية» على جميع المجمعات التجارية والأسواق العامة بحظر دخول الشباب الذين يرتدون السروال والفانلة فقط، كما وجهت منسوبيها بمنعهم من التجوال بهما في الأماكن العامة.

وقالت الهيئة، في بيان وزع في الرياض، الإثنين، إن «السروال والفانلة يعدان من الملابس الداخلية وإن التجول بهما ينافي الذوق العام ومدعاة للفتنة»، مشيرة إلى أن «الشباب يستخدمون هذه الطريقة بهدف الاستعراض ولفت الأنظار وخلق البلبلة والفوضى في أماكن ترتادها العوائل كالأسواق والمجمعات التجارية والحدائق».

وشددت الهيئة على ضرورة الالتزام بالتعليمات وعدم مخالفتها، مؤكدة أن «من يضبط من الشباب وهو يرتدي السروال والفانيلة سيتعرض للطرد والعقاب ويكتب بخصوصه تعهدًا، وسيتم إشراك رجال ودوريات الأمن في الحالات التي تخرج عن السيطرة أو تحدث فوضى».

وكان المقدم زياد الرقيطي، المتحدث الإعلامي بشرطة المنطقة الشرقية، قد أوضح أن المركز تلقى بلاغًا عن شباب «ارتدوا ملابس غير لائقة وتخدش الحياء»، مشيرًا إلى أنه تم توقيفهم وأُخذ تعهد عليهم بعدم تكرار ما بدر منهم.

كانت وزارة التجارة والصناعة السعودية قد قررت مؤخرًا منع دخول الملابس والإكسسوارات المخالفة للشريعة الإسلامية، وسحب الموجود منها من الأسواق السعودية.

"دماغ كابتشينو"

"دماغ كابتشينو" ..الخطوة الأولى لــ"أخونة" المقاهى فى مصر 

http://www.desouq.com/index.php?option=com_k2&view=item&id=5456:%D8%AF%D9%85%D8%A7%D8%BA-%D9%83%D8%A7%D8%A8%D8%AA%D8%B4%D9%8A%D9%86%D9%88-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%AE%D8%B7%D9%88%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%88%D9%84%D9%89-%D9%84%D9%80%D9%80%D8%A3%D8%AE%D9%88%D9%86%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D9%82%D8%A7%D9%87%D9%89-%D9%81%D9%89-%D9%85%D8%B5%D8%B1&Itemid=820

"دماغ كابتشينو" ..الخطوة الأولى لــ"أخونة" المقاهى فى مصر 

افتتح سلفيون مقهى "إسلاميا" في مصر، حيث يفصل الرجال عن النساء ويمنع التدخين أو سماع الأغاني.
ورغم الديكور والألوان الشبابية التي تطغى على مقهى "دماغ كابتشينو" أو "D. Cappuccino" التي قد تجذب المارة، إلا أن رجلا يقف على باب المقهى ليتأكد من "العلاقة الشرعية" التي تربط الفتيات والشباب الذين يأتون معا إلى المكان.
وقال أحد العاملين في المقهى لـ"سكاى نيوز": "يمنع دخول شباب وفتيات معا إلا إذا كانا زوجين على سنة الله ورسوله، أما في حال كذبوا بشأن طبيعة العلاقة التي تجمعهما فسيسمح لهما أيضا بالدخول، لأنهما يتحملان وزر الكذبة التي كذبوها فلا يمكن لنا الاطلاع على البطاقات الشخصية لجميع رواد المكان".
ويتكون المقهى من 3 أقسام، أحدها للشباب والآخر للفتيات والثالث للعائلات، تفصل بينها أبواب زجاجية غطيت بأحرف كبيرة حتى لا يتسنى للجالسين في قسم رؤية الجالسين في قسم آخر.
كما يوجد مصلى خاص للنساء وآخر للرجال في كل قسم على حدة.
وأوضح أحد العاملين في المكان أن الفرع الواقع في منطقة مدينة نصر بالقاهرة، ليس سوى بداية لسلسلة كبيرة من الفروع التي ستنتشر في مختلف المحافظات.
وأضاف أن الهدف من افتتاح مثل هذا المكان هو "أسلمة" المقاهي في مصر وتطبيق شروط على رواده وفقا للشريعة الإسلامية وضوابطها.
ترفيه بلا معاصي
وبرر العامل هذا الاتجاه الجديد بأن "فئة كبيرة من الشعب لا تجد لها متنفسا تحتفظ فيه بخصوصيتها".
وتابع: "نعمل الآن على ترفيه هؤلاء، بعد أن ظلوا قابعين في بيوتهم لسنوات نتيجة التجاوزات الأخلاقية التي تحدث في المقاهي المختلطة، فضلا عن أننا نعيد تقويم سلوكيات الشباب والفتيات، نحو ترفيه بلا ذنوب أو معاص".
ويسمح المقهى بإقامة أعياد ميلاد أو أي مناسبة اجتماعية أخرى، رغم تحريم الاحتفال بأعياد الميلاد من وجهة نظر عدد من مشايخ السلفيين، لكن إدارة المكان تسمح به إذا جرى تنفيذه وفقا لشروط الفصل وعدم الاختلاط التي يطبقها على زبائنه، وألا يتم تشغيل موسيقى.
يشار إلى أن إدارة المكان تمنع توظيف النساء، حتى إن كان ذلك لخدمة الفتيات في قسمهن الخاص، كما لا يسمح للفتيات بالجلوس في القسم الخارجي من المكان لأن "الرجال فقط هم من يجلسون في الشارع".
وشهد افتتاح مثل هذا المكان ردود فعل متباينة على مواقع التواصل الاجتماعي.
وعلقت فتاة في موقع فيسبوك قائلة: "لماذا يقوم سلفيون بافتتاح مقاهي؟ أليس من الأولى أن يقوموا بافتتاح دار لتحفيظ القرآن أو لرعاية الأيتام".
أما أحد الشباب الذين ينتمون للتيار السلفي فدافع عن هذه الفكرة، مؤكدا أنها توفر فرصة للاستمتاع من دون ارتكاب معاصي.

DFW Muslims discuss on GAY/LESBIAN Issues

MONDAY, JANUARY 14, 2013

The announcement to attend the Faith and LGBT Equality event in Denton on Jan 13, 2013, was sent to the members at WorldMuslimCongress@yahoogroups.com  as an invitation (appended below). The group is open to people of all faiths, so together we can learn about each other in a moderated environment.  We have about 1800 Members from around the world including but not limited to Imams, Muslim Scholars, Students and ordinary religious and secular folks from several different religions.


A discussion follows the posting and is now posted at our websitewww.WorldMuslimCongress.com  as well. An article is in the works for publication at a major news paper based on the input and quotes from the panelists from yesterday’s event.  We are committed to building cohesive societies, where no human has to live in apprehension or fear of the other.   

Panelists: Jeff Hood, Scottie McIntyre Johnson, Mike Ghouse and Peter Johnson
The following information is in a discussion format, it is carried with the title Future Muslim Leaders and Gay and Lesbian Issues;

  • PICs:

Javed

This is a long response to make the point. It is always good to exchange thoughts and ideas without judgments to enrich ourselves to deal with the issue.

I realize the traditionalist will not like my take on the issue, and they are welcome to go behind my back and malign me, as if that is the Muslim thing to do. As a Muslim, it is my duty to speak out the truth as I see as an individual; we may not be ready for it now. Right now we are at a stage to ignore the issue, next time, we will remain silent, a stage of “don’t ask don’t tell” will come upon us, and then finally we will have a heart to accept fellow beings, as they are.  Mahmood o Ayaz ( rich or poor) will be on par then.

The American Muslims and Christians are grappling with the issue; the majority is still swayed to think negatively, probably because of the propagated mis-understanding of homosexuality.

 Let me share another perspective on some of your comments.

You wrote, …the first step will have to be in the form of recognition of homosexuality as a problem that needs to be eradicated rather than legalised, institutionalised and commercialized....

I am concerned about your statement of eradication, << a problem that needs to be eradicated>>.

God did not do it himself,  but you want to do it then?  Even if we went with your interpretation of Sodom and Gomorrah that God destroyed them because of homosexuality, then why did he not destroy them for Good? That is the fallacy of interpretation.

Diversity is God’s formula for sustaining his creation, God did not make a mistake, neither did he goof up. Everything is created in balance and proportion, including sexual orientations, promiscuity, hyper and lower to no sexual drives. Had God willed, all of us would have been exactly alike (Quran).

The story of Sodom and Gomorrah serves to acknowledge the diversity of mankind. The story also is understood in two different ways; one that God destroyed the Qarya (township) because the population was homosexual, the other part is God destroyed the township because of the lewdness displayed by those men who forcibly raped other men.

Our traditions, both Christian and Muslim, have been interpreted by men, to suit their whims rather than what is right, and we need to fix some of the errors from the past.  I can give a lot of examples, but here are a few for you to ponder.

In case of Delhi Rape, thank God it was not Sharia, had it been the Sharia law, the Rapists would have gone scot free because the girl could not produce 4 men witnessing penetration of the rapists. So much for the mangled up Sharia! Thank God, India chose to be a pluralistic nation.   You know the flaws of the Sharia as practiced, I cannot call that Sharia <<Islamic>> when injustice is rampant in that system, a man can put a woman with children on the street in a hurry if the asshole is angry by saying Talaq (divorce) three times, that is not Islamic, are you ready to challenge the tradition of practicing Muslims? The Islamic Sharia is about justice, but where is it practiced?

It is time to think and give room to our intelligence to function.

First of all, I have nothing to gain from this, but standing up for others people’s right is the right thing to do.

Humans are born with a free will and there should not be any compulsion on any one to believe otherwise, did our wise prophet not say that?  Sharing knowledge, yes, but compulsion, No.

Javed, here you go again,  “The best form of compassion towards gays will be to keep them away from their addiction, even if by force. Institutionalisation of homsexuality accompanied with their rights to marry and adopt children will only ensure a big growth in the percentage of gays. Isnt it a big crime to expose children to gay parents rather than normals? Children exposed to gay relationships will obviously have much greater chances to grow as gays.”

I am not debating with you to win or lose, nor am I expecting a person to clap for you or me… it is a serious issue for discussion and we cannot be judgmental.

Are you denying the parenting rights to men and women who are gays and lesbians? You think children will not feel the need to have a father and a mother, regardless of what the parents are? You think the children are going to drop their  parents because of their sexual orientation, promiscuity or no sex drive?  You think your declaration will turn the switch off for the longing of the children? My friends, you have not understood the human need for longing, loving and caring. 

God may have a real problem with your statement, “If mankind is to be saved from the menace, homosexuality has to confronted and at a certain time, severe punishments may be required to first punish those who commercialise and institutionalise homosexuality and then the gays and lesbians themselves.”

You call it a menace? Are you saying God screwed up?

No, not at all. God did not mess it up.

As a society,  we need to punish rape, or any act that violates the rights of others. Indeed,  God did punish the people in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah, thepunishment was for the lewd behavior; raping men and not for homosexuality.  

Have empathy my friend, and ignore what people would say. They did not even spare the prophet, and they will not spare you or I. We might as well do the right thing then; to speak for the rights of all humanity.

Every human has a right to express his thoughts and sex without taking away things from others. There is a grave mistake on the part of hetrosexuals and bisexuals, marriage simply implies intercourse to them, ignoring all the other good and important things that come with it. They imagine lust as the driving factor in gay and lesbian relationships, and completely dismiss the overwhelming need to be oneself in a relationship, it is companionship over sex.

“I will request you to not become a pawn in the hands of the forces that have interests in the institutionalisation of homosexuality. Think of the larger mankind rather than a few perverted people. “

And my friend Javed, I request you not to pander to the men who would clap for you. The truth is neither you nor I are motivated by any such non-sense, we are speaking our hearts and minds out, period. We are being truthful in expressing our understanding. What we should not do,  is to deny other individual her or his right to the pursuit of his or her happiness.

Insha Allah, I am writing a full piece for publication - amazingly in the conference yesterday, we referenced Quraan and Bible with the exact same six verses, that seem to have been interpreted by men who were biased. 
Quraan, Al-'Ankabut (The Spider) chapter 29: 26-39; Nour (Light) Chapter 24: 30-32 and The Romans, Chapter 30: 20-23
I beg our friends to not clap for either one of us, we all need to learn the truth and not go by what is dished out to us, even if it were by the greatest Imams of the time, only Allah’s word is final, and the still to be authenticated Hadiths would be final - all else is simply guidance and not law. Sharia should be guidance and not the law, because it is not the word of God.


Mike Ghouse is committed to work for building cohesive societies, where no human has to live in fear of the other.  

Mike,

If Quran has prescribed death sentence for certain practices, do you think it is against the Wisdom?  The biggest farce being imposed on the world by vested and institutionalised interests is that homosexuality is inborn, and God has chosen to give birth to gays.

First, pure gays can in no way reproduce, which is the essential condition for genes to pass through to next generation. Second, even the people born with congenital anomalies are treated as required. Schizophrenia is often linked with genes but schizophrenics are actively and aggresssively treated, and if they become a threat to others, they are imprisoned in assylums.

Homosexuality is an addiction and gays should be given an opportunity to get treated. This is necessary in the first stage of what should be a phased campaign to eradicate homosexuality from society. But for this campaign to begin, the first step will have to be in the form of recognition of homosexuality as a problem that needs to be eradicated rather than legalised, institutionalised and commercialised.

Furthermore, it has to be recognised that homosexuality is the biggest threat to homosexuals themselves, with the life expetancy of homosexuals being 20-30 years less than the straight. They pose serious threats to others also as they are more likely to catch and spread STDS and AIDS.

The best form of compassion towards gays will be to keep them away from their addiction, even if by force. Institutionalisation of homsexuality accompanied with their rights to marry and adopt children will only ensure a big growth in the percentage of gays. Isnt it a big crime to expose children to gay parents rather than normals? Children exposed to gay relationships will obviously have much greater chances to grow as gays.

If mankind is to be saved from the menace, homosexuality has to confronted and at a certain time, severe punishments may be required to first punish those who commercialise and institutionalise homosexuality and then the gays and lesbians themselves.

I will request you to not become a pawn in the hands of the forces that have interests in the institutionalisation of homosexuality. Think of the larger mankind rather than a few perverted people.

Javed Jmail


Mike Ghouse 
Subject: Re: MuslimsTogether :: Future Muslim Leaders and Gay and Lesbian Issues
To: WorldMuslimCongress@yahoogroups.com
Date: Monday, January 14, 2013, 8:05 AM

Javed

Quraan is the basis for our conversation, whether one is conservative or liberal. 

Even though conservative religious rhetoric has dominated the american religious landscape, it has not permeated in the society. The people of two states have approved same sex marriage, and the trend will continue. 

A majority of American Muslims are grappling with the issue. If the conservative Christians and Muslims have the dictatorial powers, they will kill all Gays and lesbians, thank God, the power to judge one's faith still rest with God, it's his call. He created us all, and he could have created us all alike, like the angels, but he chose to create us to be different, each one with his or own unique DNA, thumb print, taste buds etc.., shouldn't we honor God's choice?

Javed it's not easy, Allah has given us the freedom to look at the masalah, and find answers thru what works in the society, and as Muslims particularly, we cannot judge ones practices, as long as they are not robbing others, hurting, killing or breaking the civil covenants.

Jazak Allah Khair 

Mike


--- In WorldMuslimCongress@yahoogroups.com, javed jamil wrote:

Mike and MAW

If speaking or campaigning against homosexuality is bigotry, God save the mankind!


Should I repeat the figures that tell how big a threat homosexuality is to human existence? Surely, thousands of times bigger than "Terrorism". Homosexuality is an addiction much more dangerous than cocain. It needs to be eradicated at the earliest. Compassion for gays and lesbians is understandable only if it is aimed at weaning them away from their addiction rather than preserving it. Severest measures need to be taken against those who commerialise homosexuality or promote/institutionalise it. 

Mike, it will be better if you do not try to gain support from Quran for everyting that you do. If you want to support gay rights, better do it withut invoking Quran, which does not accept homosexuality at all. 

Yes, you have the right to post or not post this letter of mine. You both also have the right to call me a bigot if it suits you. 

Mianwaheed likes my Ghazals more than my prose. But here he will have to bear with my prose. 

Regards

Javed Jamil 

From: mianwaheed 
 Subject: Re: MuslimsTogether :: Future Muslim Leaders and Gay and Lesbian Issues
To: "WorldMuslimCongress@yahoogroups.com" 
Date: Sunday, January 13, 2013, 2:28 PM

Mike,
You have guts to stand up against the bigotry.

respectfully,
maw

From: "MIKEGHOUSE@..." 
To: 
Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2013 2:12 PM
Subject: MuslimsTogether :: Future Muslim Leaders and Gay and Lesbian Issues

FUTURE MUSLIM LEADERS and GAY/LESBIAN ISSUES

.... As Muslims we need to be a part of the society, if any one of you is thinking of leading the communities in your city, county, state or national politics, don't be a Todd Akin or a Murdoch, or a bigot like Bachman, Cain, Gingrich, West and a host of others... please join us today to learn about dealing with the issues of Gays and Lesbians, there is someone in your family that needs your compassion.

We have to believe and be like Rahman (Gracious) and Raheem (Merciful) and a Rahmat (Mercy)  to fellow beings...... remember 49:13, the best among you is one is who knows and learns about others... 

If you want to shape the future of America, want to be in public office... you cannot be on the side lines or be an ignorant about the issues. Most of our Imams do not want to touch the topic, but we have to learn about the issues.

I am one of the speakers today, come and learn different perspective and develop your own opinions.

Faith and LGBT Equality event in Denton on Jan 13, 2013

Members of Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays Denton will conduct a forum on faith and equality featuring area religious leaders at 3 p.m. Sunday.

The event is free and open to the public and will be at Denton Unitarian Universalist Fellowship, 1111 Cordell St. Denton.

Scheduled to participate are:

• Rabbi Geoffrey Dennis of congregation Kol Ami in Flower Mound and adjunct professor in the Jewish Studies program at the University of North Texas;

• Mike Ghouse, president of the Foundation for Pluralism, founder of America Together Foundation and speaker and writer on intercultural issues;

• the Rev. Jeff Hood, Baptist minister and peace activist who works as a chaplain at John Peter Smith Hospital and as moderator of the Denton Fellowship of Reconciliation;

• the Rev. Peter Johnson, longtime civil rights activist and associate of Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.; and

• Scottie McIntyre Johnson, ministerial intern at Denton Unitarian Universalist Fellowship.

For more information, visit www.pflagdenton.org


PFLAG Denton
www.pflagdenton.org
PFLAG Denton is a local chapter of Parents, Families and Friends of Gays and Lesbians. Our mission is to support, educate and advocate for the LGBT community and their families and friends.


----------
Mike Ghouse is a speaker, thinker and a writer on pluralism, politics, peace,Islam, Israel, India, interfaith, and cohesion at work place and standing up for others as an activist. He is committed to building a Cohesive America and offers pluralistic solutions on issues of the day at www.TheGhousediary.com. Mike has a strong presence on national and local TV, Radio and Print Media. He is a frequent guest on Sean Hannity show on Fox TV, and a commentator on national radio networks, he contributes weekly to the Texas Faith Column at Dallas Morning News, fortnightly at Huffington post, and several other periodicals across the world. His personal site www.MikeGhouse.netindexes everything you want to know about him.

1 comment:

  1. This Javed fellow is on the loose side of a cannon. His four points (1) LGBT people are (a) mentally ill; (b) infectious; (c) convert children; (d) addicted; (e) a menace; and his solution is to murder/kill them. Doesn't sound like Quran to me...it's human beings do what human beings do best...kill other human beings when they don't act like they are "supposed" to act. Mike where did you find this "genius"? I'd ask for my money back.