Russia trying to pass bill to ban gays from talking about being gay in books, speeches, or other forms of expression

babun1024 wrote:@zizzle and 7amood, your responses are so aggressive Did he have a 9y old wife or not? Just answer the question
Now, GM attacks our beliefs and norms like everything that's western is bad. I don't base my understanding of country on religion, I base it on culture. If you do know what culture means (philosophy), you'd understand what I mean, religion is only a part of it. Each country has its own culture, they survived with them. It means, western culture is what people in west need and eastern what's good for them.
You don't really expect me to read that we tolerate pedophils because we're liberal and not respond to it

im being aggresive because in order to counter one person's views you do the lowest thing possible and attack his religion. And no, religion is in a part of the discussion here since the western churches and their 2 billion western followers oppose homosexuality and that has nothing to do with the western cultur's tolerance towards homosexuality. see where im going here ? its not a religious issue, or at least not in this discussion, but you chose to do it this way and im not okay with that

and to answer your question, alot of sources say alot of different numbers, some stories say she was 9 but others say she was 13-14 so you cant really judge.

much better

The last sentence of your last post shows your immaturity.

Look, I'm going to keep this short and to the point. If you want to reply, reply via PM because we've derailed this thread enough. Ok?

Translate this, read the 8th and last posts: http://www.ibnalislam.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3210

And notice that the last post comes from a professor from Al-Azhar (educated person), the chief centre of Islamic learning in the world. People who calculated Aisha's age as 9yrs used the birth dates of Asma and Fatima (Radia-Allahu 'Anhun). You'll notice the contracdiction in the middle of the last post, read it. Also, the marriage ages during those times were a lot lower than today, so even if the prophet Muhammad (PBUH) did marry Aisha (radia Allahu Anha), it was considered as normal those days, NOT pedophilia. And just to make things clear, I never said that Aisha (radia Allahu Anha) wasn't 9 yrs old at the time. I responded to you in such a way was because you called somebody a pedophile with 0 background knowledge. I mean, the people who have studied this deeper than you would ever imagine couldn't agree on an exact age, then you come and start insisting on something as if it's fact when you only pulled it off Google. I find that wrong.

7amood11 wrote:The last sentence of your last post shows your immaturity.

Look, I'm going to keep this short and to the point. If you want to reply, reply via PM because we've derailed this thread enough. Ok?

Translate this, read the 8th and last posts: http://www.ibnalislam.com/vb/showthread.php?t=3210

And notice that the last post comes from a professor from Al-Azhar, the chief centre of Islamic learning in the world. People who calculated Aisha's age as 9yrs used the birth dates of Asma and Fatima (Radia-Allahu 'Anhun). You'll notice the contracdiction in the middle of the last post, read it. Also, the marriage ages during those times were a lot lower than today, so even if the prophet Muhammad (PBUH) did marry Aisha (radia Allahu Anha), it was considered as normal those days, NOT pedophilia. And just to make things clear, I never said that Aisha (radia Allahu Anha) wasn't 9 yrs old at the time. I responded to you in such a way was because you called somebody a pedophile with 0 background knowledge.

If we had more posts with this level of maturity the level of discussion in this section would be on an entirely different level.

As it is, that isn't the case, so please get this thread back on topic or it will be locked or removed.

Grande_Milano wrote:Common Sense

Western World: 0 per cent


Again, world has been for ages with homosexuals, but nobody complained about rights being hindered. Nobody trying to deny, devalue their existence. But: there should be no propaganda via media and expressing of views.

Another example of when common sense actually gets in thick heads finally:

French took burqas from Muslims

Rights hindered?

Liberals will say yes, but if you look deeper things like these (burqas) are IGNORANCE OF THE RIGHTS of OTHER people.

French gov for one time stopped being a pussy and actually did whats right for the society and its people ignoring all these liberals.





If we live in completely liberal world with no constraints where evrything will be allowed, it d be chaos. I cant change your liberal mindset, so we can argue for ages. But if you look deeper inside you there is a thing called COMMON SENSE, something long forgotten by many people. Dont be afraid of it

Thanks for the advice. I’m neither a liberal nor a homosexual, but I find people that hold views like yours usually have suppressed homosexual tendencies. But to paraphrase your quote “don’t be afraid of it”!

What if all people in some country turn gay?

It has already happened.
The country is called Sweden.

lol how did you stumble upon a year old post

Grande_Milano wrote:
[homophobic rant]

Now, I am not a homophobe, I am just against homosexualism being promoted in any ways (e.g. schools in Sweden ). Gays do have the right to exist, but no parades, no political laws, etc

How, after writing all that, are you not a homophobe?
And you seem to be confusing "promoting equal rights for homosexuals" with "promoting homosexuality" - freeing the slaves wasn't about turning white people black as well, mate.

RealGunner wrote:lol how did you stumble upon a year old post

Who cares, I'm running with this!

Viva, I still have some (potentially fun/annoying) questions for you at some point in the hopefully near future.

Whenever you're up for it, I'm game.

I have no problem with gays. The only things that piss me off are the gay parades and crap. Besides america and some more conservative countries, being gay is not a big deal and they should shut up about rights and being treated equally, when there are worse problems. How about the people in africa starving every day, or people in NAME being denied basic minimum wage and proper infrastructure?

Again, I have nothing against gays, but some of them are just gay because they couldn't get some from woman. The only true gays are the ones who don't do that parade shit; matter of fact, they despise it.

If you were denied the access to visit family in the hospital because of legislation, would you shut up about it? It's ignorant to say that you should ignore an issue because there are bigger ones out there. Not to mention that extreme poverty is very tricky to eradicate whereas guaranteeing the same rights to everyone is comparatively simple.

Also, in the US there are Irish parades on St Patrick's, Italian parades on Columbus Day, etc, why can't LGBT have their own? They're within their rights to exercise it.

Also I assure you that no one turned gay because they couldn't find a woman

I agree with BC, rallying for LGBT rights is a no-brainer simply because it's not an inherent problem that needs fixing.

It's just like two laws per country. In Germany they already have pretty much equal rights, all it would take is like two tweaks to marriage licensing and adoption, and we'd be set, same for most of the US states. It'd be ridiculous to not stand with the Gay Community on those equal rights issues.

That doesn't mean I think marriage rights are more important than 100 million starving children, but about the equal rights thing, we can actually do something about quickly.

VivaStPauli wrote:I agree with BC, rallying for LGBT rights is a no-brainer simply because it's not an inherent problem that needs fixing.

It's just like two laws per country. In Germany they already have pretty much equal rights, all it would take is like two tweaks to marriage licensing and adoption, and we'd be set, same for most of the US states. It'd be ridiculous to not stand with the Gay Community on those equal rights issues.

That doesn't mean I think marriage rights are more important than 100 million starving children, but about the equal rights thing, we can actually do something about quickly.

How about Neo Nazis, why cant they have their own parades in germany?

Mamad wrote:What if all people in some country turn gay?

well i have to answer myself it seems.....that country will be destroyed.

If being Gay is not abnormal, how come they can't father/mother a child...?


Truth is painful but it's the truth.

Personally I can't stand those homesexual guys that act like girls, raising one hand up all of the time and talking with one annoying tune.


I am ok with other gay people who don't put it in your face, I'm gay(with gay voice)


I like lesbianism though, but that doesn't mean it's normal, I just like it for my own personal interest but not for the interest of human race, it's comparable to gay people who have sex with one another just for their own interest, imagine say all humans become gay, we'll be wiped out of this planet in less than 100 years, that alone is sufficient to make it abnormal and a dangerous Ideal.


What I hate the most is that people are no longer allowed to speak their mind on this topic, being gay is no longer the problem, the problem now lies on freedom of speech in regards to the ideal, majority of the people conceal their opinion regarding this.


and who says kids can not also choose who to have sex with, I know 24years old girls who lack brain to even choose the right people to open their legs for, even 13-16years old kid can make better judgement than them, but nevertheless I don't think it's right to allow kids go about having sex with old people, it's not like we don't have kids who do it willingly.

In Ghana the legal age is 16, so would you also refer to that as being paedophile just because your culture doesn't accept it? Does the western world now dictate to the universe what is normal and abnormal, should we now follow whatever you dictate and ignore our own cultures that we have followed for centuries..? or is that you haven't seen a 13/14years old girl who is even more matured than 18years old girl? or is it that you don't know climate and weather can affect how quick a girl can reach maturity...? would you deliberately ignore all this fact and act like a man putting his penis in another man anus as being now..? is that the purpose of anus..? pick up a dictionary and read the meaning of anus, oh I forgot you can also redefine the meaning of anus to suit your own purpose. Why don't you just take the universe and make it yours, eradicate everything therein and turn it around to suit your own purpose.


I can accept minority( if not insignificant number of people) can be born being gay, I can also accept people can become gay due to many reason eg personal choice, frustration, obesity, ugliness or many other reasons, Low self esteem, but I can never accept a man putting his penis in another man's anus is normal, just because people are born with it doesn't make it normal, I know many people who are born with many abnormality/disorder etc. Now I am not saying gay people should be treated unjustly just because of what they do, its their business, but it's not normal and why are so many people trying to force it on everyone as if its normal, it's clearly not, anus is made for different purpose, not for 6 inch rude harass.


Lets even forget this ideal of paedophile and compare homosexualism with polygamy, most men are born with polygamy, I mean MAJORITY of men are polygamous by nature, in polygamy an agreement is reached between 3 grown adult or sometimes more than 3, but yet the western law doesn't accept it, on what ground do they dismiss it..? Naturally polygamy is more normal than homosexuality...? it satisfy natural biology, men are born with it, there is consent between all parties, centuries upon centuries it has been practised all over the planet successfully, even amongst ancient Greek ( someone made mention of homosexuality being accepted in ancient greek culture, I don't know how true it is though, I mean some of the history like Alexandria the great being gay, look fabricated to me } but there are many records that polygamy was generally practised. But yet the western world scorn at it, because it doesn't coincide with their cultures/beliefs/ideals , and yet we see all this broken marriages in western world just because some men are being denied INDIRECTLY their rights of being polygamous by nature, Tigerwood cheated and they made him give away so much money he worked for just for another person to be living it up( probably spending it on younger men), is that justice..? How many rich PEOPLE have suffered this faith..? How many golddigga have exploited this, we scorn the ideal(polygamy) and accept an ideal that is even more ridiculous.




I'm ok with gay people, it's just that I think there is a lot more to the topic nowadays, especially the way the ideal is being encouraged and aggressively spread, it's abyss and far toO aggressive for my liking.


I mean they still have primitives gangs like KKK out there(operating freely), but people like Buju banton are being set up, arrested and jailed, just because they don't agree with the ideal, how about KKK, shouldn't they be eliminated...?

Yuri Yukuv wrote:How about Neo Nazis, why cant they have their own parades in germany?

So your "clever" counter-argument is that I'm supposedly a hypocrite because I think gay rights parades are boss, while Nazi parades should totally be outlawed, right?

Okay, 3 things:
1) They're totally different. Being a Nazi is a choice, and it's the choice to incorporate the ideology, that you have to harm, and possibly kill, certain people. If you are a Neo-Nazi, turning into a murderer is not a question of motive, it's a question of opportunity and nothing else.
Nazis are treated, basically, as organized crime/terrorists in Germany.
I'm pretty sure Al Qaeda and the Mafia can't have parades in the US either, right?

2) Neo-Nazi parades, if they don't publicly advertise genocide, are still technically legal, and do happen in Germany, sadly. And not as rarely as we'd like. They're a fringe group, but a vocal one.

3) Neo-Nazis aren't demanding rights for anyone, they're demand rights be taken away from certain people, which is entirely different. Their entire movement is not based on self-promotion, it's based on harming others, which runs against the "live and let live" attitude of even Libertarians, who draw the line where others are harmed, which is clearly the aim of (Neo-)Nazis.

Boom.

VivaStPauli wrote:

Yuri Yukuv wrote:How about Neo Nazis, why cant they have their own parades in germany?

So your "clever" counter-argument is that I'm supposedly a hypocrite because I think gay rights parades are boss, while Nazi parades should totally be outlawed, right?

Okay, 3 things:
1) They're totally different. Being a Nazi is a choice, and it's the choice to incorporate the ideology, that you have to harm, and possibly kill, certain people. If you are a Neo-Nazi, turning into a murderer is not a question of motive, it's a question of opportunity and nothing else.
Nazis are treated, basically, as organized crime/terrorists in Germany.
I'm pretty sure Al Qaeda and the Mafia can't have parades in the US either, right?

2) Neo-Nazi parades, if they don't publicly advertise genocide, are still technically legal, and do happen in Germany, sadly. And not as rarely as we'd like. They're a fringe group, but a vocal one.

3) Neo-Nazis aren't demanding rights for anyone, they're demand rights be taken away from certain people, which is entirely different. Their entire movement is not based on self-promotion, it's based on harming others, which runs against the "live and let live" attitude of even Libertarians, who draw the line where others are harmed, which is clearly the aim of (Neo-)Nazis.

Boom.

Well I dont mind gay parades to be honest, even though I hate collective identity in general (be it based on ethnicity, political allegiance or sexuality) and would rather see all of the parades taken to palaces where they dont disrupt the life of others.

Anyways its not personal I just think this is an interesting topic

1) Is being gay a choice or not? i dont think we have conclusive evidence about this, we actually dont have conclusive evidence about any non-physical traits not being a choice. This is important though, most Muslims believe that in order for you to be a Muslim you have to believe that sharia is the only legislative authority, in sharia it states that any person who converts out of Islam should be executed and it also says so of homosexuals or anyone muslim or not that insults their religion (which is why they call for the killing salman rushdie and the rest), should we allow Muslims who believe in sharia to protest? How about in countries where we have influence, should we oppose their protests or not?

2) Well I didnt know that they could parade in Germany if they dont advertise genocide. Can they do it if they just call for imprisonment of certain minorities?

3) How about Occupy wall street? Could someone say that they should not have a protest because most of them were demanding that the economic rights of others be taken away? Is it ok for people to have protests against gun ownership as they are trying to take someone else's rights away? What about when one party calls for the right of another party to freely assemble (like neonazis or homosexuals) to be taken away?

Yuri Yukuv wrote:This is important though, most Muslims believe that in order for you to be a Muslim you have to believe that sharia is the only legislative authority, in sharia.

False.

Yuri Yukuv wrote:it states that any person who converts out of Islam should be executed

False.

Yuri Yukuv wrote:and it also says so of anyone muslim or not that insults their religion (which is why they call for the killing salman rushdie and the rest)

And False.



I hope nobody's actually believing this BS. The amount of crap this guy is spewing is incredible.

Yuri Yukuv wrote:
2) Well I didnt know that they could parade in Germany if they dont advertise genocide. Can they do it if they just call for imprisonment of certain minorities?

I probably should have elaborated on this: in Germany we have a a law against "Volksverhetzung", which roughly translates as "inciting public hatred", also freedom of speech roughly ends where you openly oppose the basis of our constitution (that sounds worse than it is, since the parts of the constitution concerned really state nothing but the universatility of Human Rights, and Germany being a democracy, anything else is regulated elsewhere).

So propagating genocide, or dictatorship, is illegal. I'm not a huge fan of the part that protects the constitution, but historically, I understand where it came from. I just think we, as a society, probably wouldn't elect the next Hitler, just because Nazis were allowed to deny the holocaust.
That being said, denying the holocaust is illegal here (as it is in a couple other European countries).

3) How about Occupy wall street? Could someone say that they should not have a protest because most of them were demanding that the economic rights of others be taken away? Is it ok for people to have protests against gun ownership as they are trying to take someone else's rights away? What about when one party calls for the right of another party to freely assemble (like neonazis or homosexuals) to be taken away?

Well that's dodgy. In Germany there's a clear answer to that, and that is, that Capitalism isn't protected by the constitution. Personal property sort of is, but even our constitution already has an article stating that private property can be repurposed to public service, if in great need.
So occupy wouldn't be a problem.
But to be fair, I'm only aware of their talking points very roughly, I think calling for more regulation of the banking system is no problem at all, wanting to end capitalism is largely unproblematic, seriously proposing to lynch all bankers would be illegal here.

This is a false analogy still, though. I know you're trying to point out how muddy the water is here, it is indeed a blurry line in what is okay and what is not.

Ultimately it should be about whether people indifferent to the cause are harmed by it. And if the Nazis came back to power, people would surely be harmed. If homosexuals were to marry, nobody would be harmed. Well, except all the homosexual divorcees.

Freedom of assembly should never be taken away on political grounds, but with some "political" movements, like the KKK, the Neo-Nazis, or maybe even some "libertarian" militias, it's more a question of anti-racketeering laws than political percecution.

Especially with our very recent case in Germany of domestic neo-nazi terrorism, it is rather obvious that you have to stay alert - monitor the situation. Are we still watching a political movement we are in disagreement with, or are criminal groups openly organizing?

So I get where you're hinting at, but I just think the simily falls short.
Gay rights marches are, to me, more akin to the civil rights movements, or the universal suffrage movement, and not akin to insular political movements, that might include those harmful to the state they exist in.

So less KKK and more Dr. King.

7amood11 wrote:

Yuri Yukuv wrote:This is important though, most Muslims believe that in order for you to be a Muslim you have to believe that sharia is the only legislative authority, in sharia.

False.

Yuri Yukuv wrote:it states that any person who converts out of Islam should be executed

False.

Yuri Yukuv wrote:and it also says so of anyone muslim or not that insults their religion (which is why they call for the killing salman rushdie and the rest)

And False.



I hope nobody's actually believing this BS. The amount of crap this guy is spewing is incredible.

I know Im being lazy but here is an excerpt from the wiki page on apostasy in islam:

Execution
Legal opinion on apostasy by the Fatwa committee at Al-Azhar University in Cairo, the highest Islamic institution in the world,[56][57] concerning the case of a man who converted to Christianity: "Since he left the Islam, he will be invited to express his regret. If he does not regret, he will be killed pertaining to rights and obligations of the Islamic law." The Fatwa also mentions that the same applies to his children if they entered Islam and left it after they reach maturity.

In medieval Islamic law (sharia), the consensus view was that a male apostate must be put to death unless he suffers from a mental disorder or converted under duress, for example, due to an imminent danger of being killed. A female apostate must be either executed, according to Shafi'i, Maliki, and Hanbali schools of Sunni Islamic jurisprudence (fiqh), or imprisoned until she reverts to Islam as advocated by the Sunni Hanafi school and by Shi'a scholars.[58] A minority of medieval Islamic jurists, notably the Hanafi jurist Sarakhsi (d. 1090),[11] Maliki jurist Ibn al-Walid al-Baji (d. 494 AH) and Hanbali jurist Ibn Taymiyyah (1263–1328), held that apostasy carries no legal punishment.[59]

Contemporary Islamic Shafi`i jurists such as the Grand Mufti Ali Gomaa,[60][61] Shi'a jurists such as Grand Ayatollah Hossein-Ali Montazeri,[62] and some jurists, scholars and writers of other Islamic sects, have argued or issued fatwas that either the changing of religion is not punishable or is only punishable under restricted circumstances, but these minority opinions have not found broad acceptance among the majority of Islamic scholars.

The Messiah wrote:If being Gay is not abnormal, how come they can't father/mother a child...?


Truth is painful but it's the truth.

Personally I can't stand those homesexual guys that act like girls, raising one hand up all of the time and talking with one annoying tune.


I am ok with other gay people who don't put it in your face, I'm gay(with gay voice)


I like lesbianism though, but that doesn't mean it's normal, I just like it for my own personal interest but not for the interest of human race, it's comparable to gay people who have sex with one another just for their own interest, imagine say all humans become gay, we'll be wiped out of this planet in less than 100 years, that alone is sufficient to make it abnormal and a dangerous Ideal.


What I hate the most is that people are no longer allowed to speak their mind on this topic, being gay is no longer the problem, the problem now lies on freedom of speech in regards to the ideal, majority of the people conceal their opinion regarding this.


and who says kids can not also choose who to have sex with, I know 24years old girls who lack brain to even choose the right people to open their legs for, even 13-16years old kid can make better judgement than them, but nevertheless I don't think it's right to allow kids go about having sex with old people, it's not like we don't have kids who do it willingly.

In Ghana the legal age is 16, so would you also refer to that as being paedophile just because your culture doesn't accept it? Does the western world now dictate to the universe what is normal and abnormal, should we now follow whatever you dictate and ignore our own cultures that we have followed for centuries..? or is that you haven't seen a 13/14years old girl who is even more matured than 18years old girl? or is it that you don't know climate and weather can affect how quick a girl can reach maturity...? would you deliberately ignore all this fact and act like a man putting his penis in another man anus as being now..? is that the purpose of anus..? pick up a dictionary and read the meaning of anus, oh I forgot you can also redefine the meaning of anus to suit your own purpose. Why don't you just take the universe and make it yours, eradicate everything therein and turn it around to suit your own purpose.


I can accept minority( if not insignificant number of people) can be born being gay, I can also accept people can become gay due to many reason eg personal choice, frustration, obesity, ugliness or many other reasons, Low self esteem, but I can never accept a man putting his penis in another man's anus is normal, just because people are born with it doesn't make it normal, I know many people who are born with many abnormality/disorder etc. Now I am not saying gay people should be treated unjustly just because of what they do, its their business, but it's not normal and why are so many people trying to force it on everyone as if its normal, it's clearly not, anus is made for different purpose, not for 6 inch rude harass.


Lets even forget this ideal of paedophile and compare homosexualism with polygamy, most men are born with polygamy, I mean MAJORITY of men are polygamous by nature, in polygamy an agreement is reached between 3 grown adult or sometimes more than 3, but yet the western law doesn't accept it, on what ground do they dismiss it..? Naturally polygamy is more normal than homosexuality...? it satisfy natural biology, men are born with it, there is consent between all parties, centuries upon centuries it has been practised all over the planet successfully, even amongst ancient Greek ( someone made mention of homosexuality being accepted in ancient greek culture, I don't know how true it is though, I mean some of the history like Alexandria the great being gay, look fabricated to me } but there are many records that polygamy was generally practised. But yet the western world scorn at it, because it doesn't coincide with their cultures/beliefs/ideals , and yet we see all this broken marriages in western world just because some men are being denied INDIRECTLY their rights of being polygamous by nature, Tigerwood cheated and they made him give away so much money he worked for just for another person to be living it up( probably spending it on younger men), is that justice..? How many rich PEOPLE have suffered this faith..? How many golddigga have exploited this, we scorn the ideal(polygamy) and accept an ideal that is even more ridiculous.




I'm ok with gay people, it's just that I think there is a lot more to the topic nowadays, especially the way the ideal is being encouraged and aggressively spread, it's abyss and far toO aggressive for my liking.


I mean they still have primitives gangs like KKK out there(operating freely), but people like Buju banton are being set up, arrested and jailed, just because they don't agree with the ideal, how about KKK, shouldn't they be eliminated...?

So true.

So where does that leave women who are barren or men who cannot produce sperm? Are they also "abnormal" and therefor less equal then the rest of us?



Some absolutely shocking statements here.

RedOranje wrote:So where does that leave women who are barren or men who cannot produce sperm? Are they also "abnormal" and therefor less equal then the rest of us?



Some absolutely shocking statements here.

Yes they are abnormal in that aspect, otherwise most of them will want to cure it if it's possible.