Foreign secretary advice to LGBT fans.... Be respectful
- Thread starter GaryLifo
- Start date
I'm not getting into specifics, that's not the point, because I believe the same thing applied to all special interest groups. We have a set of human rights that applies to all. If you want more than that you want privileges, not rights.
What if you were in the UK because Manchester decided to host a weed convention? Because that's essentially what's going on here. I'm sorry, but if people didn't realize there is a connection between live sporting events, football, and alcohol, then I don't know what to tell you.
It's the specifics that are essential to the discussion. Its the specifics that get taken away from a marginalized froup. Your Pollyanna take is laughably childish.
Then posts this…
There’s irony, and then there’s just… WOW.
Few points -
1. The World Cup isn’t a beer festival - it’s a football tournament. The comparison is utterly idiotic.
2. People can choose not to drink alcohol - People CANNOT CHOOSE WHETHER THEY’RE GAY OR NOT!
Don't be shy. It is ok to post your specific bigoted opinions. LGBTQ+ folks don't ask for any "special" rights. As it stands, just their very presence is criminal by law in Qatar. Unlike for a cisgender heterosexual. The rights you take for granted are the ones these groups have to fight for, no thanks to bigots like you.
I'm not on this board to discuss political issues in detail. My comment was broad, we have human rights that apply to all people. And we should absolutely do our best to ensure all people, groups, whatever can exercise and enjoy those rights. But if you want rights beyond those that apply specifically to a group you belong to you, then you are now asking for privileges.
And your ad hominem attack makes you like childish, not the other way around.
These comments have nothing to do with each other, where did I say that drinking alcohol is a human right?? Utterly ridiculous gotcha attempt.
Back up - are you saying getting pissed in public is a human right but being gay is a privilege?
Just answer that question.
And I think it's wrong they don't have rights in that country. If you ask my opinion on LGBT at the world cup, I think it should have been a requirement on FIFA's part to make sure that all people attending are safe and free to do so regardless of their lifestyle, or more so, they shouldn't have given the tournament to a country that doesn't respect the human rights of the LGBT community in the first place.
You are assuming my opinion and judging me based on that, when you don't know anything about me or my opinions.
Uhhhh when we say 'LGBTQ rights' we mean that gay people should be treated the same as other people, regardless of who they happen to fall in love with. That's why they are totally human rights. So I don't really think you have a point here.
It's not the same as that, because smoking weed is something you do for recreation and being LGBTQ is something that you are. Some of y'all need to research the difference between actions and inherent characteristics. The hint is with the verb you use in the sentence.
Clearly, Manchester should totally host a weed convention anyway, and so should Qatar.
That's not at all what I said, and you know it.
Just answer that question mate.
The history of the islamic faith is the history of ijtihad, right? I haven't met any serious islamic scholar who denies the importance of ijtihad in the formation of islamic law - even the most hardcore of salafis have to acknowledge the existence of alternative interpretations of Shari'a.
I have well educated Muslim friends who are devout and also gay, and who would argue hard against your interpretation of Qur'anic law. You can have whatever interpretation of the Qur'an that you like, but to pretend it's not an interpretation is just disingenuous. And in Qatar (and Saudi and other Gulf states) it is an interpretation by a group of politicians who aren't even religious. So blaming this on strict religious adherence doesn't work.
It's dangerous when people say their opinions about things as if they are facts. That's where a whole lot of discrimination comes from.
*"Again I can go through actual things happening over 1400 years ago to do with trans and homosexuality that would explain this."*
I'm totally curious about what you mean by this. Cos it sounds like total bollocks.
Nothing in your religion says LGBQT offenses will be punishable by jail or beheading or anything else. Its all nice that your beliefs are based on a higher power but then your actions should be as well. If human rights means nothing to you then so should man made laws mean nothing to you. If you dont believe in homosexuality but leave them the fk alone then everyone will be happy
Your comment is stupid, I didn't say or imply either of those things.
What are you saying? Cos you did make the obvious false equivalence between being gay and smoking weed.
I'm just flicking through this thread for the first time and I noticed that this post was flagged for "inappropriate content" and I was just wondering which specific part was inappropriate?
I didn't at all. One's a rights issue, one's a contract issue. And if you think I did that says more about you than it does about me.
Apologies I think I conflated your post with someone else's.
That’s one way to frame it. Another is that there’s a universal right for consenting adults to not be criminalized for something they can’t help any more than someone can help their ethnicity.
I 100% agree with that, that is essentially what I am saying. Basic human rights cover the LGBT as well. Basic human rights should be respected everywhere, and if they are then the LGBT community is living equal to the rest of us and we are in a good world. Hopefully we achieve that someday.
Youre just trying to make me say it again, so I'll get more points. Im on to you, shifty knickers!
The sentence with the arm pit was a touch too far as it was taken to mean all of the Middle East, when in fact I just meant Qatar. My attempt at colourful language got away from me for a moment.
Probably the racist xenophobic tropes from a skim read.
Being a bit harsh on Texas there mate.
I'm kind of glad the whole world turned against Qatar for this, they should be made to understand their beliefs are backwards and unacceptable in the international community. I think people who do visit there should abide by local laws, so as to not get into trouble, but they don't have to respect anything which they do not agree with, and should be free to criticize them as they please.
Uh? What culture to Qataris bring to European shores? And lastly, very ironic of you to say 'conform to my culture' sarcastically, when religious people, especially Muslim women, feel pressured to conform to European culture in terms of wearing a hijab or other religious clothing. Isn't a law that you can't wear religious symbols in some places in many countries in Europe, even Burkinis are banned in France. So we are supposed to respect western laws and culture regarding clothing but they can't respect another countries?
It's seriously moronic, and just general whinging, that people are making an issue about slight restrictions for clothing. Expats from the West visit the middle eastern countries in droves and there have never been major issues about the clothing culture, people go about them normally because it isn't a hassle at all.
Ok, then what’s the issue? Not sure why you felt the need to disagree with someone saying LGBT+ rights are human rights if that’s your stance.
'Go back to your own country where there is sharon law'
'We need to change the law of your country we don't like it there'
Iykyk
'We need to change the law of your country we don't like it there'
Iykyk
Hetero lives matter!
Wow. I've tried to type a reply. But I can't. There's no way to engage with that.
The armpit bit. Most of the mods feel that it's a harsh warning.
What?
This post does not reconcile with your previous ones. But fair enough, I will leave you to it.
With respect this was my point about sheikh Google and why I prefer a discussion than just googling.
Ijtihad is trying to understand shari rulings based on Shari evidences. It is the role of a mujtahid. Somebody who is versed in shari rulings. Many mujtahid only had/have understanding of one issue. Again with shari evidences.
Problem today is everybody thinks they are a mujtahid. When they are at best a student. This is where the whole "interpretations" comes from.
There are no alternative understandings of shariah. Every furu (new understanding) has to be based on the asl (shari understanding). So alcohol was made haram because of its Intoxicating nature . Cocaine didn't exist then so we use the asl of alcohol to derive a ruling on cocaine, the furu. This isn't a new ijtihad or interpretation. The original word for intoxication is khamr. It has conditions and if met then cocaine is khamr and therefore haram.
I've already said Qatar and Saudi aren't the benchmark. Islamically they are not even Muslim countries as the rulers are what dictates whether a country is Muslim or not, according to the shari understandings.
I am happy to discuss Islam and shariah with anyone. Including your friends.
As for my latter quote you are curious about.
Trans debate is a few years old in this country. In Islam this was an issue that was covered 1400 years ago. Transgender folks had rights and were totally able to live life as a woman or a man.
Similarly homosexuality, although stated as wrong in religion, was not something that was punished like even in the west not long ago.
The laws governing homosexuality were not seperate to laws governing sexuality generally. Sexuality if kept to those practising it was not anybodies business. Those who made it their business had to provide a set number of witnesses who saw first hand penetration. If not and they made allegations they would be punished. Not dissimilar to why Oscar Wilde went to prison incidentally. And no it wasn't because he was gay. It was because he made allegations against another, couldn't prove it so he was given to he sentence.
One other thing I will say is many of the rules and laws that are homophobic in Africa and in aprta of the middle East have more influence from missionaries from the church than Islam.
You may think that and good luck to you. I don't think it is and is as relevant today as it was 1400 years ago. I have no issue agreeing to disagree. Makes the world go round.
Some things do get updated. Again see the asl and the furu. Other things have set guidelines that make it appropriate for the ages. As an example look at the age of marriage. The guidelines today wouldn't recommend marriage for an 18 year old never mind puberty.
Other things like what we call the welfare state and even the jury system have their roots in Islam. Even certain divorce elements in English law are what Islam had 1400 years ago. I've just found out about this as I've just gone through one in English law.
That said the lack of education in places like where I was born and the manipulation by politicians and people in power is why these places are backwards. It's a constant battle for me with elders from my community who have beliefs that aren't real.
Absolutely and I wouldn't go up to an LGBTQ individual and condemn or deny either.
I was making a general comment and purposefully used a different example.
With regards to choice or not THAT is what I don't really understand or have a clue about. Imo I'm being honest whereas one person thinks it because I'm bigoted. Each to their own I guess.
To clarify this point I've said I'm a 50 year old who is religious. No moral high ground just fact. The debate around LGBTQ is fairly "new" to my life. It's simply not something I've thought about or engaged in. Never had to. Now it's an issue so I'm interested in the discussions. My first point of "research" was to Google etc. Not the best method as I've highlighted in other responses. I have yet to find a definitive answer as to whether it's a choice or not. I'm happy to be educated on this.
Amazing reasoning. Hats off.