Iran hangs teenagers for being gay

[Stumpy Tim]

Some scholars hold the opinion that the homosexual should be thrown from a high building as a punishment for his crime, but other scholars maintain that he should be imprisoned until death."

Now that would be a quality punishment (not for being gay mind, but for proper crimes!). I can imagine a judge now, "You have been found guilty of shoplifting, so we're going to throw you off the shop."

That's genius

 

[HampshireSeagulls]

Now that would be a quality punishment (not for being gay mind, but for proper crimes!). I can imagine a judge now, "You have been found guilty of shoplifting, so we're going to throw you off the shop."

That's genius

Would be a great deterrent.

Is there a sliding scale of punishments? If you just look at someone of the same sex and have lustful thoughts, do you get thrown from a small building? If you brushed past a bloke in a pub and let your hand linger on his bum, would you get stoned with the little polystyrene chips that you get in packing boxes? There is plenty of potential for getting creative with the crime fitting the punishment, there could be a whole government department set up just to think of possible crimes and suitable punishments!

 

[Dandyman]

Would be a great deterrent.

Is there a sliding scale of punishments? If you just look at someone of the same sex and have lustful thoughts, do you get thrown from a small building? If you brushed past a bloke in a pub and let your hand linger on his bum, would you get stoned with the little polystyrene chips that you get in packing boxes? There is plenty of potential for getting creative with the crime fitting the punishment, there could be a whole government department set up just to think of possible crimes and suitable punishments!

It's a winner

Spending too long in a clothes shop - a nudge off the pavement.

Watching a Julian Clary show - off the top of the garden shed.

Wearing pink - pushed down the stairs on a double decker.

Tough on mincing. Tough on the causes of mincing.

 

[London Irish]

Hmmm...Al-Qaradawi believes homosexuality is a perversion and that "muslim lands" should be ruled by Sharia law.

He has gone onto say that:

"As to the issue of how the homosexual person is judged in an Islamic State, the Companions of Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessing be upon him differed among themselves on this issue, and this led to different views maintained by Muslim Jurists. For example, in the Hanafi school of thought, the homosexual is punished through harsh beating, and if he/she repeats the act, death penalty is to be applied. As for the Shafi`i school of thought, the homosexual receives the same punishment of adultery (if he/she is married) or fornication (if not married). This means, that if the homosexual is married, he/she is stoned to death, while if single, he/she is whipped 100 times. Hence, the Shafi`i compares the punishment applied in the case of homosexuality with that of adultery and fornication, while the Hanafi differentiates between the two acts because in homosexuality, the anus (a place of impurity) may also be involved while in adultery (and fornication), the penis/vagina (which are reproductive parts) are involved. Some scholars hold the opinion that the homosexual should be thrown from a high building as a punishment for his crime, but other scholars maintain that he should be imprisoned until death."


So his moderation would appear to mean that as a possible alternative to being stoned to death or thrown off the top of a multi-story gays and lesbians can just be locked up for the rest of their lives.

Where in that quote Dandyman does he say he's in favour of any of those punishments?

 

[HampshireSeagulls]

Where in that quote Dandyman does he say he's in favour of any of those punishments?

He doesn't - but he has missed out the rest of the quote. You need to go here to check out the rest of it.

This is a good site for sources as well.

 

[bhaexpress]

It's a tad ironic that the same people will cut off the right hand of a thief. That's the hand you eat with as you're supposed to use the left one wipe your 'place of impurity' with the other.

Well it seems that way to me anyway.

 

[Hiney]

No I'm not

Shit - what have I started

I know you're not GAY Beachy, as, like me, you are a 40-something with a lovely wife and family!!!!

Mrs Hiney's 40th clashes with the 3rd Round of the FA Cup so there could be some interesting conversations come the day of the draw!!

 

[Dandyman]

Where in that quote Dandyman does he say he's in favour of any of those punishments?

You are correct to point out that he does not explicitly say that he does, but if he believes in the application of Sharia law then does it not follow that he does believe that at least one of those options should apply ?

 

[Wardy]

If you steal you should have your hands chopped off, if you rape you should have you dick chopped off and if you killed then you should be executed.

Simple really , an eye for an eye and no messing about

So by your reckoning they should have had their dicks chopped off? That is if the alleged rape took place and was not just some trumped up charge.

So how do you defend the hanging of some one who did not kill?

 

[bhaexpress]

So by your reckoning they should have had their dicks chopped off? That is if the alleged rape took place and was not just some trumped up charge.

So how do you defend the hanging of some one who did not kill?

As Vlad would say, Ernie has a warped view.

 

[Dandyman]

www.islamonline.net also quotes al-Qaradawi thus:


"The eminent Muslim scholar Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, states:

"Almighty Allah has prohibited illegal sexual intercourse and homosexuality and all means that lead to either of them. This perverted act is a reversal of the natural order, a corruption of man's sexuality, and a crime against the rights of females."

 

[London Irish]

You are correct to point out that he does not explicitly say that he does, but if he believes in the application of Sharia law then does it not follow that he does believe that at least one of those options should apply ?

Frankly, I have no idea whether even your premise is correct, let alone any conclusion that flows from it. My understanding is that he has roughly the same anti-gay views as most of the world's religious leaders, the Pope, a Paisley-style Presbytarian, etc, yet he stands as a moderate voice within Islam given his belief that "Muslims have no right to punish homosexuals or mistreat them as individuals." (Guardian letter, July 13)

What is for me a far more interesting question is whether Al-Qaradawi is a victim of the pretty rampant Islamaphobia that we are currently living through that has this remarkable effect of turning people like Richard Littlejohn into gay-rights activists

http://www.whatnextjournal.co.uk/Pages/Politics/Islamophobia.html

 

[London Irish]

www.islamonline.net also quotes al-Qaradawi thus:


"The eminent Muslim scholar Sheikh Yusuf Al-Qaradawi, states:

"Almighty Allah has prohibited illegal sexual intercourse and homosexuality and all means that lead to either of them. This perverted act is a reversal of the natural order, a corruption of man's sexuality, and a crime against the rights of females."

Great. Now find a quote from the Pope where he welcomes a rampant bit of arse-f***ing

 

[bhaexpress]

Great. Now find a quote from the Pope where he welcomes a rampant bit of arse-f***ing

It does appear that some of his underlings are not adverse to that notion, just ask the Bishop of Boston for a start.

 

[Dandyman]

Frankly, I have no idea whether even your premise is correct, let alone any conclusion that flows from it. My understanding is that he has roughly the same anti-gay views as most of the world's religious leaders, the Pope, a Paisley-style Presbytarian, etc, yet he stands as a moderate voice within Islam given his belief that "Muslims have no right to punish homosexuals or mistreat them as individuals." (Guardian letter, July 13)

What is for me a far more interesting question is whether Al-Qaradawi is a victim of the pretty rampant Islamaphobia that we are currently living through that has this remarkable effect of turning people like Richard Littlejohn into gay-rights activists

http://www.whatnextjournal.co.uk/Pages/Politics/Islamophobia.html

While I have no desire to line with right-wing bigots and nutters I also have no desire to sacrifice basic beliefs on human rights and socialist principles on the basis of a fear of such a stance being exploited by our political enemies.

The following is a retort to Ken from people whom I would not see as being on the right:

LIVINGSTONE'S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims Dr al-Qaradawi is one of the Muslim scholars who have done the most to combat socially regressive interpretations of Islam on issues such as women's rights.

THE TRUTH:
Dr al-Qaradawi supports the killing of people who have turned away from Islam ("apostates").

In a fatwa issued in June 2002 concerning organ donation, Dr al-Qaradawi stated: "it is not permissible to donate it to an apostate as he is no more than a traitor to his religion and his people and thus deserves killing."

See: http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=49276

Dr al-Qaradawi supports female genital mutilation (female "circumcision").

He says that, while it is not obligatory, "whoever finds it serving the interest of his daughters should do it, and I personally support this under the current circumstances in the modern world."

See: http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=31397

Dr al-Qaradawi insists that a husband must compel his wife to wear the hijab.

"It is unanimously agreed upon among Muslim scholars that it is not lawful for a Muslim woman to uncover any part of her body other than the face and hands (and the feet according to some schools of jurisprudence). Hence, it is unlawful for a woman to reveal her hair, or arms, or chest or legs before non-mahram men. Wearing clothes that reveal such parts of a woman's body is completely forbidden. A Muslim husband is to order his wife to wear hijab."

See: http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=108163

Dr al-Qaradawi sanctions domestic violence in certain circumstances.

"If the husband senses that feelings of disobedience and rebelliousness are rising against him in his wife, he should try his best to rectify her attitude by kind words, gentle persuasion, and reasoning with her. If this is not helpful, he should sleep apart from her, trying to awaken her agreeable feminine nature so that serenity may be restored and she may respond to him in a harmonious fashion. If this approach fails, it is permissible for him to admonish her lightly with his hands, avoiding her face and other sensitive areas."

See: http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=7061

2
LIVINGSTONE'S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims al-Qaradawi is described as a supporter of terrorism, when, in reality, he has been one of the most forthright Islamic scholars condemning terrorism.

THE TRUTH:
Al-Qaradawi supports targeting Israeli civilians.

Sheikh Mohammad Sayyed Tantawi, sheikh of Cairo's al-Azhar University, is reported as saying that Islamic Shari'a law

"rejects all attempts on human life, and in the name of Shari'ah we condemn all attacks on civilians, whatever the community or state responsible for such an attack ... We disapprove of all those who justify attacks against children by reasoning that the children will join the army when they grow up."

Qaradawi, however, angrily disagreed. He argued: "Has fighting colonizers become a criminal and terrorist act for some sheikhs?" He added that Israeli society "was completely military in its make-up and did not include any civilians". In Israel, "men and women are soldiers", added al-Qaradawi. "They are all occupying soldiers."

See: http://www.islamonline.org/English/News/2001-12/05/article6.shtml

Qaradawi supports suicide bombing (including by women).

"Thus, women's participation in the martyr operations carried out in Palestine - given the status of the land as an occupied territory, in addition to a lot of sacrilegious acts perpetrated by the Jews against the sanctuaries - is one of the most praised acts of worship."

See: http://www.islamonline.net/fatwaapplication/english/display.asp?hFatwaID=68511

3
LIVINGSTONE'S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims Dr al-Qaradawi opposes "the repression of homosexuals".

THE TRUTH:
In his book The Lawful and Prohibited in Islam, republished recently on IslamOnline, al-Qaradawi says on the subject of homosexuality:

"Muslim jurists hold different opinions concerning the punishment for this abominable practice. Should it be the same as the punishment for fornication, or should both the active and passive participants be put to death?"

He then defends that view by adding:

"While such punishments may seem cruel, they have been suggested to maintain the purity of the Islamic society and to keep it clean of perverted elements."

He does not condemn the view - he excuses it! The death penalty only seems cruel, he argues, until we understand that it is actually necessary "to keep [Islamic society] clean of perverted elements".

See: http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=100855

The rhetoric used in the rest of al-Qaradawi's article hardly supports the Mayor's view that al-Qaradawi "opposes the repression of homosexuals".

Mayor Livingstone then points to the fact that Leviticus 20:13 also calls for the death penalty for homosexuality, asking provocatively whether that meant that the Chief Rabbi should also be excluded from City Hall. But the Chief Rabbi did not write Leviticus, nor any papers endorsing its modern-day application. In contrast, al-Qaradawi's condemnation of homosexuality comes from his own pen!

Additionally, in June 2001 al-Qaradawi and his colleagues launched a blistering attack on the gay Muslim group Al-Fatiha and tried to block gay organisations from participating in a United Nations meeting on HIV/AIDS.

See: http://www.islam-online.net/english/News/2001-06/27/article4.shtml

4
LIVINGSTONE'S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims no Muslim group was associated with the document.

THE TRUTH:
The gay Muslim group Imaan were party to the discussions all along. They dropped out only right at the end due to internal politics and after the Mayor had offered them a separate meeting to discuss their concerns.

Livingstone also favourably quotes a condemnation of the London community coalition's criticisms of Dr al-Qaradawi from a discussion board on Imaan's website. He claims it was typical of Imaan's views and fails to acknowledge that the passage he quotes is from one person taking one position. He does not mention that it was this one person, Bilal Patel, who posted 9 of the 22 posts in the discussion. Nevertheless, one of the other members challenged Mr Patel, saying:

"If your objective is a dialogue leading with, leading to acceptance by, the Ummah on behalf of Gay Muslims, then sooner or later you are going to have to take on and defeat the views preached by Imams such as Qaradawi ..."

To which Mr Patel answered: "Agreed about taking on Qaradawi's views."

Thus, Imaan's last-minute withdrawal from the London community coalition seems to have been an issue of strategy - not, as the Mayor attempts to persuade us, because they disagreed that Dr al-Qaradawi was anti-gay or that he should be challenged.

Furthermore, Ken Livingstone fails to mention that he had previously been in correspondence with Imaan over the al-Qaradawi issue and that they had criticised his decision to invite Dr al-Qaradawi. His reply to them is archived on their website here:

http://imaanlondon.f2g.net/KenReply.doc [Word document]

The Mayor also chose to ignore former Muslims and liberal Muslims involved in the coalition, many of whom are political dissidents from Islamic countries and have suffered death threats, beatings, imprisonment and torture at the hands of fundamentalists.

5
LIVINGSTONE'S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims that al-Qaradawi stresses that female genital mutilation (FGM) is not required by Islam.

THE TRUTH:
This is true, but the issue was never whether al-Qaradawi thought FGM was compulsory. The issue is that he personally recommends it, which he does:

"whoever finds it [FGM] serving the interest of his daughters should do it, and I personally support this under the current circumstances in the modern world."

See: http://www.islamonline.net/fatwa/english/FatwaDisplay.asp?hFatwaID=31397

6
LIVINGSTONE'S CLAIM:
The Mayor says the coalition's briefing contains Islamophobic statements that are evidence of a "conspiracy theory of Islam".

THE TRUTH:
The London community coalition's briefing does not condemn anyone because of their race or faith. Indeed, many of the coalition members are people of faith. Some are Muslims.

The Mayor's dossier does not attribute quotations and allows the reader to believe they were made by the compilers of the coalition's briefing.

Livingstone quotes two statements from the coalition's briefing as evidence of an anti-Muslim conspiracy: "The issue of the hijab was being presented as a first step on a long path of religious duties culminating in 'Jihad' ..." and "This fake Islamic Hijab is nothing but a political prop ..."

What the Mayor doesn't say is that these quotations are from Abd Al-Mun'im Sa'id, director of the Al Ahram Centre for Political and Islamic Studies, and the Iranian author Amir Taheri respectively. The Mayor's dossier insinuates that these quotations are from non-Muslim Islamophobes.

Far from being Islamophobic, the London community coalition has right from the outset made clear its objection to anti-Muslim prejudice; and that its criticisms apply only to Dr al-Qaradawi (and not to Muslims in general).

The coalition's al-Qaradawi briefing states:

"We condemn all forms of prejudice or discrimination against Muslim people, utterly and without qualification."

Additionally, the London community coalition cited a petition delivered to the United Nations on 30 October 2004, signed by over 2,500 of the world's leading Muslim intellectuals from 23 countries. The petition names al-Qaradawi as one of "the theologians of terror", accusing him of "providing a religious cover for terrorism". These Muslim critics cannot be dismissed as Islamophobes.

Many refugees from Islamist repression in the Arab world condemn al-Qaradawi as an apologist for "Islamo-fascism". They accuse him of opposing democracy, socialism and human rights. The apparently liberal opinions al-Qaradawi espouses when he visits western capitals are just a front, they say, designed to fool and seduce politicians like the Mayor of London. His true beliefs are the hard-line fundamentalism he preaches in Arabic to Middle Eastern audiences when no western journalists or politicians are present.

Arab News points out that al-Qaradawi's gentle words in London "don't match" the extremism he preaches in the Middle East. Undeterred, Livingstone denies the evidence and continues to side with al-Qaradawi against liberal and left-wing Muslims.

The Mayor has denounced Peter Tatchell as having "a long history of Islamophobia". On the contrary, Tatchell has condemned the racism that consigns Muslim people to some of the poorest housing and jobs in Britain. He has also been a long-time supporter of the Palestinian struggle and a fierce critic of the Western invasion of Iraq, and he has backed the campaign against the detention of Muslim suspects without trial in Belmarsh Prison.

7
LIVINGSTONE'S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims that Sikh groups distanced themselves from the dossier because "no evidence was produced by the authors to back up their claims that Qaradawi backs forced conversion to Islam".

THE TRUTH:
The section making that claim was inserted by the Sikh groups themselves. It is their own claim, no-one else's. If they do not have evidence to back it up, that is their own failing. Livingstone makes it seem as if those claims were made on behalf of Sikh groups but rejected by them, when the truth is that the Sikh groups made those claims themselves and submitted them for inclusion in the dossier, which was collaboratively compiled by the various community groups involved.

8
LIVINGSTONE'S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims Peter Tatchell cites Islam as "uniquely reactionary" on lesbian and gay issues.

THE TRUTH:
Peter Tatchell is far better known (some might say notorious) for his confrontations with the Church of England, the Catholic Church and Christianity in general. He has been quoted as saying (more than once):

"The Church of England is an oppressive, homophobic institution. I think that any lesbian or gay person who is a part of that Church, unless they are overtly, actively campaigning to change things, they are part of the problem. They are helping to sustain that historic oppression of lesbian and gay people."

And even: "The Bible is to lesbian and gay people what Mein Kampf is to Jews."

Such robust criticisms of Christianity hardly support the Mayor's claim that Tatchell believes Islam is "uniquely reactionary".

Nevertheless, it is certainly a fact that today the worst abuses of lesbian and gay human rights occur in Muslim countries under Shari'a law.

9
LIVINGSTONE'S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims the Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association (GALHA) is sympathetic to Pim Fortuyn and is opposed to laws against incitement to racial hatred.

THE TRUTH:
First, Livingstone quotes selectively from an article in Gay and Lesbian Humanist magazine on Pim Fortuyn. The article does indeed acknowledge that humanists share Fortuyn's worry that concessions to the Islamic religious lobby will erode liberal values - that, after all, is a concern of all liberal secular humanists. But the Mayor fails to include the sentiments of GALHA's Terry Sanderson - quoted in the same article in Gay and Lesbian Humanist magazine:

"While we in no way support Pim Fortuyn's ideas on immigration, or see any connection between immigrants and social decay ..."

The Gay and Lesbian Humanist Association may agree with Karl Marx that "religion is the opium of the people", but that hardly makes GALHA a communist organisation. Similarly, just because an article in the magazine acknowledges that gay humanists share Fortuyn's concerns about anti-gay attitudes in Islam, it is thoroughly dishonest to imply that GALHA supports Fortuyn's political agenda - especially since it is explicitly stated in the article that GALHA does not.

Second, Livingstone claims that GALHA opposes "the new law against incitement to racial hatred" (our emphasis). But this is untrue. There is no new law against racial hatred. The new legislation is against inciting religious hatred. In other words, it is not about protecting people from hatred, but giving religious ideologies a privileged protected status.

GALHA, like many liberal commentators, including the comedian Rowan Atkinson, opposes the new law of "incitement to religious hatred". It fears, quite reasonably, that the law will stifle legitimate debate and free speech about religion or criticism of religious views. Indeed, many religious groups also oppose the legislation, including the Barnabas Fund, the Christian Institute and the Evangelical Alliance.

10
LIVINGSTONE'S CLAIM:
The Mayor claims the London community coalition opposed his dialogue with "a leader of one of the world's great religions", and even that the coalition opposed dialogue with the Muslim community.

THE TRUTH:
No such call was ever made by the coalition. The criticism of Ken Livingstone was over his red-carpet treatment of Dr al-Qaradawi and his seeming endorsement of the cleric. The London community coalition positively encourages the Mayor to maintain a dialogue with all people, faiths and communities - including Muslims. But the coalition also expects him to challenge those who hold anti-humanitarian views and to not embrace those, like Dr al-Qaradawi, who explicitly endorse human rights abuses.

 

[DJ Leon]

Great. Now find a quote from the Pope where he welcomes a rampant bit of arse-f***ing

I could, but I did promise him that I'd keep it to myself. He's very private like that.

 

[On the Left Wing]

Why is it that as the gayest city in Europe and potentially the gayest team ... we always seem to end up with homophobic dominated threads like this on NSC?

BTW - I am straight (I think!)

 

[Tony Meolas Loan Spell]

Metaphorically Ernest is right, the punishment should fit the crime.

Maybe not quite amputation but sufficient punishment to deter criminals.

And yes the rope in extreme circumstances serial rapings, paedophiles and murderers for example where there can be NO DOUBT as to the persons guilt. Not Homosexuality tho. Dont forget its true that the USA are building up Iran as the next big monster because they have now come to some agreement with North Korea who were part of the axis of evil but strangely not now the US have agreed to sell Nuclear Powerstation technology to North Korea.

 

[DJ Leon]

While I have no desire to line with right-wing bigots and nutters I also have no desire to sacrifice basic beliefs on human rights and socialist principles on the basis of a fear of such a stance being exploited by our political enemies.

Exactly how I feel about it. Just because Richard LittleJohn hates him, it doesn't mean I have to like him. I'm not going to sacrifice my basic beliefs just becasue it may look like I'm falling in with popular right-wing opinion.

 

[Dandyman]

Great. Now find a quote from the Pope where he welcomes a rampant bit of arse-f***ing

I'm an atheist so I would happily put the Pope, Paisley, Bin Laden et al in a small boat and send it to the bottom of the sea.

The point, which I think you partly correctly identify, is not that fundamentalist islam is any more obnoxious than the same brand of any other religion but that anti-racism should not blind us to the fact that it is no less objectionable.