-
Should Muslims Support The Right To Gay Marriage In A Country Like USA?
While Islam is clear in its condemnation of homosexuality as a sin, I am not sure how the state should deal with people engaged in such relationships. In a country such as the USA, there are lots of homosexual couples in long-term relationships. For many of them, a state-sanctioned gay marriage means official recognition as a partner, which becomes relevant in inheritance laws, social security benefits, tax benefits, recognition as the next-of-kin in medical cases, etc.
Muslims should have their religious position that same-sex intercourse is a sin clear. However, is there any basis in denying two people who want to spend their lives together the aforementioned benefits? If so, should Muslims want the government to also not recognize inter-faith marriages?
Or is the other point of view correct, which says that the government should provide equal benefits to all its citizens without discrimination and agnostic of any religious worldview, and leave the task of preaching against sin to religious institutions?
-
19 Replies
-
Should Muslims Support The Right To Gay Marriage In A Country Like USA?
updated 2 years, 6 months ago
5 Members
·
19
Replies
-
Addendum: Isn’t this similar to how Ghamidi Sb. believes that the government should not discriminate in its support for building places of worship for different communities since it has an equal duty to all its citizens, even if it might be used to facilitate Shirk, the gravest sin.
-
-
Please also refer to the video below from 31:41 to 40:49
-
@UmerQureshi Thanks for your responses. I have watched these videos but I don’t think they answer the question specifically regarding the right to gay marriage. Please read my question again. Since the state should treat all citizens equally regardless of their faiths, why should it deny the right to avail government benefits available to married couples to homosexual couples on the grounds that it would improve their quality of life? Isn’t it similar to how the government shouldn’t discriminate between religions in its support for religious activites and places of worship, such as the construction of a Mandir in Pakistan, even though it considers Shirk to be a sin? Or similarly, the state’s recognition for inter-religious marriage which is also a sin in Islam.
I agree that homosexuality is a sin. Muslims can continue to preach the message of Islam and its position of homosexuality to the general public. I am asking regarding the approach of the state to gay marriage, and whether its acceptable for Muslims to support that right because they want the government to not discriminate between its citizens.
-
To put it in more explicit terms, and let’s limit ourselves to the USA context for simplicity, and we can talk about other countries later, I think that there are two factors involved in the Muslim citizen’s decision regarding which government policy they’ll support. The first is the state’s duty to all citizens and responsibility to not discriminate in providing them government benefits, regardless of religious views. The second is the state’s responsibility to not encourage sinful behavior, which might happen if the government recognizes homosexual marriage.
I feel that on the issue of construction of the temple, or inter-religious marriage, we have decided that the former consideration takes precedence. And that the appropriate forum for the latter, i.e, the discouragement of sin and the general preaching of Islam is religious institutions that can carry on either way.
Should we apply the same reasoning here and support gay marriage, while considering homosexual relationships sinful. Or is there any way in which this case is different?
-
We Muslims support right to freedom of religion for everyone, and state being a nation state provides equal opportunity for its citizens to express this right. The right to freedom of religion comes first here which is in line with Quran, but how one exercises that right (whether through Polytheism or other means) is secondary to that. However, this doesn’t mean that we Muslims support Polytheism in this case. Supporting gay marriage falls in a different domain, because here the right itself is something which goes against directives of religion and falls in Fawahish and is antithesis to the institution of marriage created by God, therefore, supporting gay marriage would explicitly tantamount to supporting Fawahish prohibited in Quran. Just the way we Muslims cannot support heterosexual live-in relationships, similarly we as Muslims cannot support gay marriage.
Please also refer to the following response by Ghamidi Sahab:
Discussion 56244 • Reply 57760
__
I think following video would be relevant in this context:
-
Thanks for your response. I don’t fully understand it, and maybe a hypothetical will help me explain my confusion. Suppose there was a religion(or interpretation of religion) that allowed homosexual relationships, would we support those couples in that case? By support, I strictly mean an attitude of non-discrimination in terms of court recognition of the relationship, rather than moral support. Meaning that the government would allow them to register as couples and give the same state benefits it gives to other couples.
If we would support it in that case, I don’t think the present case is that far from the hypothetical since a large number of people are either atheists or have an ultra-liberal understanding of their religious tradition, so it should fall under freedom of religion.
If we wouldn’t support that, then it’s strange to me that we don’t discriminate when giving money for building Mandir where they practice Shirk, but we discriminate when they might practice Fawahish.
One could easily say that what we are supporting is the right to live your life according to your own beliefs without discrimination from the state in how it supports that lifestyle. Which lifestyle people choose to practice is up to them.
So if the state doesn’t give any married couples financial support, then obviously there’s no problem. But if the state does recognize and financially support heterosexual couples and allows them to register, then why should it discriminate against homosexual couples.
-
We can separate political support from moral support. If you vote for Democrats instead of the Republicans for the overall benefit of the Muslim community, overlooking their support for LGBTQ then it’s a matter of selecting the lesser of two evils. This is a dangerous option since political support is more POWERFUL than moral support in promoting LGBTQ activities and recognition, it should not be given to them at all.
Since you are living in America, l think Republicans are the lesser of two evils as they have a lot in common with Muslims, esp the Christians amongst them who want to preserve traditional morality. The left has demonized them for long as racists and bigots. It maybe a bitter pill to swallow but they are the actual people of the book and you have a common Abrahamic heritage. Muslim community and traditional Christians should get along.
As for the third option, you can choose to not participate in elections and at the same time condemn LGBTQ normalization.
You are confusing a secular ideology with religion. It’s clear the bible is against homosexuality and the same goes for Quran. The Republicans are the actual Christians and they are the ones who are fighting for the freedom to practice religion. The interpretation of the liberal “Christians” doesn’t matter as they have long left the fold of Christianity by denying the clear text of bible. What you are actually promoting isn’t freedom of religion but liberalism and sexual promiscuity. This doesn’t come under the category of religion.
-
What if the majority of people in a comminity believe in atheism, or agnosticism?.
-
If every single political party supports LGBTQ then you don’t have a choice. You can still voice your moral concerns and religious views on LGBTQ, as it comes under freedom of speech but day by day they are criminalizing every kind of speech critical of LGBTQ agenda, in which case you should fight for your freedom of speech and the right to practice religion. If your country passes some kind of law related to LGBTQ, you are under obligation to obey such law as long as it doesn’t force you to go against the commands of God. ( eg you can refuse to conduct gay marriage if you are asked to do so even if you get sued for discrimination )
-
-
@UmerQureshi Would be grateful if you or any other moderators could address my reply. I have highlighted how the previous responses don’t make the distinction between gay marriage and state support for construction of Mandir clear.
-
In my opinion, the parallel drawn here is incorrect i.e. comparing freedom of religion to freedom to define the institution of marriage. In the former part, freedom has been given by God and therefore Muslims shouldn’t have an issue with people expressing that freedom of religion (even in the form of polytheism). In the latter part however, marriage is an institution created and defined by God, and we Muslims cannot alter with that definition to include recognition of homosexual relationships as a parallel to the institution of marriage.
Therefore, in a Muslims majority country, such a marriage can never be given recognition. Homosexual relationships at an individual level in a Muslim majority country can be tolerated to an extent since they do not invoke jurisdiction of a state unless they become so pervasive so as to actually threaten the institution of marriage as defined in Islam and disturb the socio-familial fabric of society that Islam wants to preserve in Muslim society. In that case, state level prohibition can be implemented after state justifies its jurisdiction through this acts pervasiveness in the society resulting in direct damage to the institution of family thus resulting in usurping rights of family and of society. And in extreme cases, can also suggest some punishment in this regard.
As for a Muslim residing in a Non-Muslim majority country, one cannot support recognition of such marriage on the same grounds mentioned above, just the way one cannot support recognition of live-in relationships in the same country.
Please also refer to the following response by Ghamidi Sahab:
-
Thanks for your response. Jazakallah Khair
-
-
A Muslim state will not allow Muslims to have gay marriages. It will make it illegal. However, with respect to the Non Muslims, the Muslims have to establish first, that it is Fuhash, until then, the state has to tolerate such anomalies.
-
Thanks for your response. Just to clarify, is this answer with regards to homosexual relations(intercourse) or state recognition of gay marriage(registration of the couple, etc). I ask because I remember Ghamidi Sb. mentioning in a talk that the punishment for Zina cannot be applied to same sex relations, so there is no requirement on a Muslim government to have a punishment for same-sex relations. So I am a bit unsure of what you mean by ‘illegal’.
-
I think by illegal he meant that a muslim state can’t allow such things as it’s totally forbidden .
-
The punishment for same sex intercourse if caught/proven is death penalty by stoning. Infact, some scholars have said it’s appropriate to throw them off a great height as same sex intercourse is a greater sin compared to adultery with the opposite gender. Ghamidi sb position here is at odds with 1400 years of Islamic scholarship but you if you want to pick and choose ,no one is stopping you.
al-Tirmidhi (1456), Abu Dawood (4462)and Ibn Maajah (2561) narrated that Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allaah be pleased with him) said: The Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.”. Classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi
Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq, ‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib, Khaalid ibn al-Waleed, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn al-Zubayr, ‘Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Abbaas, Maalik, Ishaaq ibn Raahawayh, Imam Ahmad according to the more sound of the two reports from him and al-Shaafa’i according to one of his opinions, were of the view that the punishment for homosexuality should be more severe than the punishment for zina, and the punishment is execution in all cases, whether the person is married or not
-
In our discourse, Ahadith are not taken on their face value, rather they are to be understood within the framework provided by Quran and Sunnah. Infact, as a matter of Principle, the same has been the principle of scholars of Hadith for the past many centuries with a few exceptions.
Since it is a different topic, please see for details:
-
-
The state will legislate on homosexuality and can devise any punishment with mutual consultation, except for the capital punishment as it is only against murder or corruption in land ( fasad Fi Al Ard).
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
