-
Voting For The Equal Rights Of LGBTQ
Being a Muslim, one believes in avoiding homosexuality however, enforcing this onto others is not within our rights. We can only talk about its rationale of being forbidden in Islam but cannot deprive of someone’s right to live because of this, be them a Muslim or non-Muslim.
Keeping that in context, should a Muslim vote for the legal rights of LGBTQ community, again be them Muslims or not. Be mindful that staying neutral, in a democracy, will most definitely deprive them of their legal rights (right to live, right to work, right to marriage etc).
To help (or add complexity) another example is below:
Consider there is a vote in US or any other Non-Islamic country, in which Muslims are not able to practice their life freely. The vote asks “Should Muslims be deported or not allowed to work/get married, since that (being a Muslim) is against the spirit of the prevailing religion in that country?”
Even if people do not vote for Yes/stay neutral, the outcome might come against Muslims, depriving them of their basic rights in a land. Only an active voting of saying “No” assures the freedom.
-
15 Replies
-
Voting For The Equal Rights Of LGBTQ
updated 3 years, 3 months ago
6 Members
·
15
Replies
-
The right to live and work is basic human right. However, Marriage is something different for which Islam donot allow. Hence, we can not support them for it.
Please watch following
https://youtu.be/dsYW8rdaO1EYou can also listen to other videos in this thread Discussion 1499
-
The argument in the example is similar. In a more particular example, let’s say a particular religion does not allow an activity that is a part of Islam. How can we being a Muslim fight for the freedom of our own rights, our own lives?
What if another religion prohibits marrying a Muslim. What rationale would we have to fight for our freedom to marry?
I do understand that Islam forbids it and being a Muslim, one might/should have an opinion about it however, using that opinion to deprive someone of their right to live with legal sanction; how does that become a prohibition from Islam’s perspective?
-
Brother I think there r 2 separate issues
1. Muslim support of gay/lesbian relations
2. People’s right to live acc to their desire (Muslim / non Muslim)
For the first part it is clear. Muslims shouldn’t support anything clearly prohibitive.
Secondly, people do have the right to live acc to their biological and social and religious values. Muslims r using their religious right to not support gay/lesbian marriage.
We can not and shouldn’t ask Muslims to favor something unislamic because we’ll be depriving them their right of freedom to practice their religion.
-
“…depriving them there right of freedom to practice their religion”
Islam does not give us any freedom to apply its rulings on someone else. Its rules and prohibitions are only applicable to those who accept it. I cannot enforce my view on someone else and call it “my religious freedom”.
My religious freedom is limited only to myself and not to someone else.
Please correct me if I am wrong till here.
Now, in case of voting against the same sex marriage, we, as Muslims, are depriving other people of their freedom to have legal rights. Be mindful that they will still continue practicing their believes (homosexuality) however, having legal rights of marriage enables them to be a part of the society, to be included in the society, to be seen as an equal human being with equal rights, to have access to other legal rights (seeing in hospitals, attending funerals, access to justice and so much more).
Please tell me how is this your religious freedom when it is their lack of freedom to be an equal human being?
I keep bringing the example of religion. What if any country votes against the freedom of Muslim being an equal part of the society because they think being a Muslim is wrong accord To their religion/ethics? Would you accept that kind of freedom for them? Certainly not, because that would mean you, as a Muslim, not being accepted in that society, not having equal legal rights as them. This is the point of conflict and also my confusion.
-
-
U r very passionate about it
my request is to look at it practically
No disagreement that islam doesn’t allow us to enforce our beliefs onto anyone else
Muslims aren’t depriving anyone anything, they are simply using their right to practice their religion. Gay/lesbian is not allowed to they can not vote for it to be true. Similarly, if people don’t vote for the right to wear hijab and so muslims can not follow their religion, would u say the samething to them? Or green peace rallies again slaughtering animals and insist on stunning only, would u hold people responsible for not allowing muslims to live their lives acc to their religion?
Everyone has to the right to chose his/her do’s and dont’s and that is that simple. No one should force anything but having an opinion is every one’s right
again, I am only talking about accepting gays/lesbians relationship in the society, not their stature as human beings and their rights to job, health, security etc etc
why is this ok to expect muslims to give up their freedom of choice (not accepting homosexuality) for other to have their choice?
-
If by legal rights you mean the inalienable rights such as the right to life, liberty, and justice then of course as Muslims we should vote for these rights of any community, given that it has been established that members of that community do not pose any threat to the society or it’s other members.
In case of LGBTQ, at the same time, we should motivate our governments to educate people of this community so that they understand their error and hopefully refrain from taking liberties in their physical relationships.
-
“…Educate people…”
I completely agree with education part. We, as Muslims, may even campaign about it and try to educate or express the rationale behind our opinion.
However, intervening in someone’s personal relationships, as long as they do not pose threat to the lives, wealth, and honor of a community, is neither a government’s business nor someone else’s.
“…right to life, liberty, and justice…”
They do have the right to live but the right to liberty… unfortunately, not. As they do not have liberty to engage in a partnership, officially. They do not have a liberty to see their “partners” in hospital or prison, for that matters. They do not have a liberty to engage in certain judicial activities which are only restricted to partners/husband-wife so, apparently, they do not have a right to justice either.
Please correct me if this seems wrong.
-
Liberty doesn’t mean complete freedom. All liberties are and should be bound by certain norms.
“they do not have liberty to engage in a partnership, officially.”
If a state considers marriage to be a union between a man and a woman, as any Islamic state would then of course there’s no question of any such rights.
“They do not have a liberty to see their partners in hospital or prison, for that matters.”
“They do not have a liberty to engage in certain judicial activities”
If their union is not recognized by the state then of course they have to face these challenges.
-
-
Dear Faraz Siddiqui,
Thanks for labeling as a passionate but, anyway!
You mentioned Hijaab, which is exactly my point and I am trying to use as an example.
No one should vote to deprive Muslims of having a right to hijab even though if they have an opinion about it. Having an opinion is one thing but enforcing that opinion is another. Not liking hijab is one thing (which is a personal preference) but enforcing your opinion onto Muslims (by voting it to ban) is another and should not be carried out.
Similarly, when I say that having a religious opinion about homosexuality is one thing but taking it to next level and enforcing it using law (voting to deprive them of their rights that they can only have after marriage) is entirely different.
You do not want people to vote against hijab even though they have an opinion then how can you want for people to not be able to get married just because you have an opinion against it?
Also, as you said, see it practically. You might say that you’re okay with LGBTQ getting healthy, job, etc. benefits but practically, all of that wasn’t possible without them proving a relationship status aka marriage partnership.
Again, I will bring the difference between “having an opinion” vs. “using that opinion to deprive someone of their rights that they can only get by going against your opinion”. I hope this explains my question (or as you label it, passion).
-
Brother that’s the point, expressing your opinion is everyone’s right
If people can vote, to ban hijab or slaughtering animals or getting married to same sex, is all the same.
If the majority of any society decided against hijab or same sex marriage then it is their right to do so. Minority people have the choice to either accept the majority decision and use education and dialogue to change the opinion in their favor or leave that land and go somewhere else.
Why r u insisting that Muslim should disagree in their hearts but support something they despise? This is hypocrisy. We have to the right to practice our religion and others have same right too. Both should be held equal in all respects.
We can condemn the opinion opposite to ours but that’s it. This is freedom of choice and democracy.
-
i think I’d put it this way. You are a Muslim living in a non muslim country. you now have to vote if homosexual people have a right to marry. this vote primary includes non muslim homosexuals as they are the greater population (plus even if it includes muslims, our laws by Allah supercede the law of the land, we can not marry the same sex even if the state allows)
now you could vote in favor as it’s something that’ll effect people who do not abide by your religion. however, as a muslim, if you have conscious of Allah, you would not support something you see as such a big sin, even if it’s for non muslims. our (muslims) views of these issues are staunch, Alhamdulillah. we have not bent into these like the Cristians. plus since homosexual marriages won’t just be marriages, it’ll change the social structure and mindset of the public, which will include the muslim population as well. which a muslim would clearly not want. so for me, i would have only 2 options left. vote NO or don’t vote at all. If i truly don’t want this practice to be public and normalized I’ll vote no. and if I’m someone whose a muslim but also highly influenced and like the western liberal mindset, then I’d abstain from voting.
I’m not calling you out or anything, but brother, you seem to be putting the western liberal narrative and islam very much equal, in your argument. as a muslim, your islamic values should overrun this liberal mindset of complete freedom. as a muslim you really don’t want such a thing to be normalized. bot wanting a sin to be normalized is should be more important to a muslim than standing for total freedom. even though i believe non muslims, even in muslims countries should have a right to marry a same sex. i would in no way stand actively for it. I’d not vote NO (since they’re non muslims) but i I’d also never vote yes. I’d abstain, since it’s their issue, let them decide. for us, Allah has closed this door.
and as far as muslims in a Muslim state is concerned, every muslim should vote a NO, logically so.
-
Really appreciate it!
Thank you so very much for putting it nicely.
I am merely questioning the narrative since it seemed that this voting could affect a community seriously. But I get your point. I agree that staying neutral might be an option but even that can cause the similar affect as voting NO.
Thanks once again.
-
-
Well marriage is not a right. It is the state of a male and a female agreeing to produce offsprings and taking care of them.
The bottom line is that LGBT are not asking for marriage rights, because they are not part of gods scheme to produce offspring like a couple.
The right they want are all the benefits that a married couple receives and the title of a married couple.
Regarding all the rights and benefits, if state deems it doesn’t harm others rights, then why not. Let’s support that as a human they should get the rights and benefits.
Regarding the right to a title as a married couple. NO, that title is reserved for a natural couple. They can create their own title, such as Domestic Partners.
I also agree that it is our right to oppose anything that goes against our beliefs. So opposing LGBT is our right.
The last question that what if someone doesn’t give us our religious rights. Then first, the religious rights are different from a lifestyle or sexual orientation rights. Still if someone doesn’t give us those rights, we will fight for our rights. Still it doesn’t work, Allah says, move to another place where you can practice your religion freely.
Perhaps LGBT need to setup their own city, state or country and live there is they want to be called married.
-
This is a really interesting perspective, @Sonnadi shb. So, if I understood correctly, LGBTQ can have all the benefits and rights of a married couple as having these benefits does not harm anyone else however, it is just the title or label that they cannot have. They may enjoy all the rights/benefits of married couple by just being known as domestic partners (or any other name)?
-
That is what I believe Muhammad. The only issue is the title. Since the title of “married” is already being used; it makes it confusing if they call themselves married. For example, if we start calling a truck a car too, then it gets confusing. How do we know the difference between a car and a truck; these are two different things.
Let me expand the concept of LGBTQ rights further. Let’s say tomorrow the people who get married to robots start demanding the rights too and they want to be called married couple too.
Personally I believe whatever a couple do in their privacy is their issue, but bringing the lifestyle in the public, celebrating it and trying to convince others to that lifestyle is absurd.
-
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
