![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
Someone wrote: "The Al-Fatiha Foundation's positions are rejected by the overwhelming majority or Muslims." This is highly unlikely as the overwhelming majority of Muslims have probably never even heard of the Al-Fatiha Foundation and/or its positions. It is also unproven, since nobody has gone out and surveyed the vast majority of Muslims. From a wikipedia point of view, the unfounded statement that the vast majority of Muslims reject or approve of the positions of an organisation seems to violate the principle of writing in the Neutral Point of View. -- Silver Maple
I disagree, Silver. The phrase is about "Al-Fatiha Foundation's positions, that is, the ideology and arguments that promove approval and acceptance of homosexuality in a non-orthodox interpretation about Al-Quran. Since we know that islamic orthodox views condemn homosexuality (and they are majority - because of this, they're orthodox), the phrase has sense. In traditional Islamic doctrines - as well as in christian ones -, homosexuality is a huge sin, and overwhelming majority of Muslims agree with it. This position is naturally against what Al-Fatiha teaches, it doesn't matter if the majority of Muslims have heard about the organization or not. Joaomarinho 15:28, 1 June 2006 (UTC).
This article is absolutely one-sided and POV. -- Amys 11:47, 3 Jul 2004 (UTC)
Compare John Boswell. ISBN 0226067114. pp 195-197:
"The Arabic language contains a huge vocabulary of gay erotic terminology, with dozens of words just to describe types of male prostitutes. Erotic address by one male to another is the standard convention of Arabic love poetry; even poems really written to or for women frequently use male pronouns and metaphors of male beauty: it is not uncommon to find poetry addressed to a female in which the object of the poet's affection is praised for 'a dark mustache over pearly white teeth' or the 'first downy beard over damask skin'. Poems about the physical allure of a young man's first beard constitute an entire genre of Arabic poetry. That such literary and social phenomena do not simply reflect social strictures against public exposure and admiration of women is demonstrated by the practice in many areas of the Muslim world (especially Spain) of dressing pretty girls to look like pretty boys or cutting their hair short and clothing them in male attire: the women who participated in this unusual form of transvestism were obviously available to be appreciated as females.
In early medieval Spain this tendency was if anything exaggerated. Every variety of homosexual relationship was common, from prostitution to idealized love. Erotic verse about ostensibly homosexual relationships constitutes the bulk of published Hispano-Arabic poetry. Such verses were written by every sort of person of every rank. Kings wrote love poems to or about their male subjects and received erotic poetry in return. Poets wrote love verses to each other or to those of humbler station. The common people as well repeated, if they did not compose, songs celebrating gay love and sexuality. When al-Mutamid, eleventh-century king of Seville, wrote of his page that 'I made him my slave, but the coyness of his glance had made me his prisoner, so that we are both at once slave and master to each other,' he was expressing a feeling with which his subjects could not only empathize but about which they themselves probably composed or recited similar verses.
Al-Mutamid also fell in love with the poet Ibn Ammar, from whom he could not bear to be parted, 'even for an hour, day or night,' and whom he made one of the most powerful men in Spain. Earlier in the century the kingdom of Valencia had been ruled by a pair of former slaves who had fallen in love and risen together through the ranks of the civil service until they were in a position to rule by themselves. Their joint rule was characterized by admiring Muslim historians as a relationship of complete trust and mutual devotion, without any trace of competion or jealousy, and their love for each other was celebrated in verse by poets attracted to their court from all over Spain.
Hispano-Muslim society combined the freewheeling sexuality of Rome with the Greek tendency to passionate idealiziation of emotional relationships. Its most intense erotic literature might celebrate relationships which were either sublimated or sexual, but in either case they were as apt to involve same-sex relations as heterosexual ones, if not more so.
It would be a mistake to imagine this cultural predilection for homosexual eroticism as the result of secularization or religious decline: Spanish Islam was noted for its rigidity in legalistic and moral matters, produced outstanding jurists and theologians, and was generally ruled by Muslims considered fanatics in the rest of the Islamic world. Homosexual love imagery was a standard currency of Islam mystical writings both in and out of Spain. Many of the authors of gay erotic poetry on the Iberian peninsula were teachers of the Qur'an, religious leaders, or judges; almost all wrote conventional religious verse as well as love poetry. Ibn al-Farra', a teacher of the Qur'an in Almería, addressed amorous verse to his pupils in class and wrote a poem about taking a reluctant lover to court, where the qadi ruled that the youth must give in to the teacher's advances:
[107] An image of graphic sexual import: the Arabic letters lam and alif are written together in a way that is here taken to suggest the insertion of one into the other.
The following three paragraphs from this website: http://glbtjews.org./newsletter/200306/June20.htm
In fact, "recovered" is what Palestinian gays must be if they are to survive in "Palestine." As Yossi Klein Halevi wrote last August in The New Republic, Islamic law prescribes five separate forms of death for homosexuals. To these, the Palestinian Authority adds several of its own. In the West Bank city of Tulkarm, Halevi reports, a young Palestinian homosexual he calls Tayseer "was forced to stand in sewage up to his neck, his head covered by a sack filled with feces, and then he was thrown into a dark cell infested with insects and other creatures he could feel but not see... During one interrogation, police stripped him and forced him to sit on a Coke bottle. Throughout the entire ordeal he was taunted by interrogators, jailers, and fellow prisoners for being a homosexual."
Tayseer's story is one of hundreds. Halevi also tells the story of one Palestinian homosexual who was put in a pit in Nablus and starved to death over Ramadan; of another whose PA interrogators "cut him with glass and poured toilet cleaner into his wounds"; of a third who lives in fear of his life from his brothers. "It's now impossible to be an open gay in the PA," says Shaul Ganon of Aguda-Association of Gay Men, Lesbians, Bisexuals and Transgender in Israel.
All this is of a piece with the broader treatment of homosexuals throughout the Muslim world. The Taliban used to put homosexuals to death by collapsing a wall on them. In Malaysia, the maximum penalty for sodomy is 20 years in prison and "mandatory whipping." In Egypt, an increasingly severe crackdown on homosexuals is now entering its third year. In April, Brazil put forward a gay-rights resolution at the UN Human Rights Commission; Muslim countries successfully filibustered it.
Spanish Islam was noted for its rigidity in legalistic and moral matters, produced outstanding jurists and theologians, and was generally ruled by Muslims considered fanatics in the rest of the Islamic world
You are grossly exaggerating this. The only time that the Islamic Spain was known for their rigidness was during the rule of Al-Murabitun Dynasty, established by Yusuf ibn Tashfin. In other times, Islamic Spain even encouraged the book-burning of Imam Al-Ghazali's "Tafahut-Al-Filasafa" (Refutation against the philosophers) because the government assume that it aims to restrict the thinking of the subject of Islamic Spain. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 113.210.2.118 ( talk) 09:35, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
"The vast majority of non-Muslims, led by Amnesty International, have condemned this practice, and some Muslims have joined in such condemnation. Muslims who condemn the executions might base such condemnation on their perception that it reflects poorly on Muslim society's current levels of tolerance for people who do not fit into accepted norms, while others might see it as an ineffective deterrent"
Are there no Muslims who actually find homosexuality to be acceptable (in a manner similar to pro-choice Catholics or other such)?
147.9.159.142 02:10, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
I'm sorry but i'm a muslim who used to live in a muslim country and i've never seen men holding hands and i've never heard of men holding hands either.
When I was in Turkey I found the men to be physically affectionate and demonstrative in ways you just do not see in the West. Haiduc 01:54, 3 March 2006 (UTC)
I lived in Pakistan for a while, where M-M hand holding is common. Here in the UAE men kissing cheeks in a non-sexual context is common (being kissed by a sweaty bestubbled Iraqi fencer after a bout was a surprize, but certainly not a "pass". However, cheek kissing is also common in France and Latin parts of Europe (rugby coaches were doing it at Stade de France yesterday). There is a tendancy to view male physical content from an Anglo-Saxon (or add celtic in there if you want) point of view, which seems to be about the least demonstrative in this respect than any other I've come across in my travels. Epeeist smudge 11:38, 13 March 2006 (UTC)
The bizarre stuff removed by Sam Spade has been lying in this article for about 8 months: can someone do a fact-check of this article? -- The Anome 00:48, 17 Mar 2004 (UTC)
So now the neutrality is disputed. Why exactly? Saying that the aforementioned sentence is "weird" is not a reason: people can and do believe plenty weirder things than that. - Mustafaa 06:27, 26 Apr 2004 (UTC)
How are we defining "Muslim nation" here? Note that although the majority of the Turkish population is Muslim, the Turkish government claims to secular. — Ливай | ☺ 22:57, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Hi, (sorry I have no idea what this is but hopefully my view might contribute in some way)
I'm a teenage Suni Muslim who is 'straight'. If there's a view I'm almost certain about regarding homosexuality, it is that homosexuals should NOT be killed. They do no harm by being homosexual, so they therefore definitely do not deserve to be killed. I personally feel that having a death penalty for homosexuality is absolute rubbish and I will never refute this belief because it's a humanitarian thing, not a religious thing.
Thanks "and remember to sign your posts by typing four tildes ( 86.166.113.67 ( talk) 21:23, 28 October 2010 (UTC))." I have no idea what that means, there is no name for me to sign with so I won't add one.
I put a sect NPOV on this because it does what so many articles do (actually not quite as badly) in making "the Sharia" a monolithic entity that Muslims must follow instead of portraying it as it is... the concept of God's law, which different interpretations of exist. I also think that some progressive (yes, I know they are marginal) schools (and not as formalized as the four main Sunni madhhabs) that allow for homosexuality. The gay Muslim groups in Britain are a good example. They should be mentioned because this notion in Islam is no longer that everyone believes it is wrong, just like in Christianity and Judaism the opinions on the issue have changed. gren 29 June 2005 23:22 (UTC)
This line does not fit with the rest of the content: "The result is a religion that allows love between those of the same gender as long as they do not have sexual intercourse" - It is perplexing, also, " It does not mean the act of masturbation....." - Now, I've always understood that "Slef-love" this was banned by at least two of the maddhabs of Sunni Islam so under whose interpretation of the shariat have we arrived at a situation where it is allowed if someone else does it? -- Irishpunktom\ talk 15:50, 26 September 2005 (UTC)
In the first line of the article: "In traditional Islamic societies it is considered normal for a man to be drawn to beautiful male youths", has there been anny study to show that traditional islamic societies consider it normal? I believe they don't consider it normal. 212.38.143.185 22:05, 6 November 2005 (UTC)
I have removed the following paragraph,
While homosexuality as an attraction is against the Sharia (which governs the physical actions, and also the inner thoughts and feelings), it is only the physical action of same-sex intercourse that is punishable under the Sharia. Thus, homosexual desire and love are accommodated, but same-sex intercourse is prohibited, as Islam teaches that such intercourse is a violation of the natural boundaries set by Allah.
because the claim that it is "attraction" that is forbidden contradicts much of what id written on this topic. It is also somewhat redundant. If anyone can provide references then we can determine whether and how to restore this. Haiduc 00:41, 8 January 2006 (UTC)
It says: "Same-sex intercourse officially carries the death penalty in seven Islamic nations: Saudi Arabia, Iran, Mauritania, Sudan, Somalia..." Isn't Somalia an anarchy? How can it have sodomy laws if there is no government to enforce them?
No where in Islam does it say that Homosexuality with minors is praiseworthy. That is very wrong. What past rulers did does not justify its praiseworthiness. This claim that it's praiseworthy is quite irroneous. Synkronyzer
Your quote by Ibn Jawzi is out of context. He is therefore stating in that quote in the Arabic text that it's a danger and we should stay away from young men becuase Satan can tempt one to do sick acts. As for the other quotes such as Shirazi and Sufi Rabah are not notable examples of scholars that represent Islam. Islam is not what people say. If you look into the Koran and Sunnah, no where does it sanction paedophilia. So i must say that these quotes are not accepted because they don't represent Islam in anyway. Synkronyzer 15:19, 6 March 2006 (UTC)
The page says "Homosexuality and Islam" - This should then be solely about the religious Fatwas about the subject. I suggest moving it to Homosexuality in Muslim Society to allow its broader scope. -- Irishpunktom\ talk 09:50, 22 March 2006 (UTC)
As a result of this debate, a section of the article Islamic Rulings was supposed to be merged here. However, it seems to me that the content of that article is already here; it can be recovered from the history if needed [3]. - Liberatore( T) 17:33, 6 April 2006 (UTC)
'Anal intercourse cannot be separated from role-playing and sentiments of domination and submission.'
What is this?? From an Islamic point of view, maybe. But from the point of view of a practicing homosexual (me), this is just inexcusable. Clear POV conflict. Am I wrong? I disputed the neutrality of this statement rather than just changing it because I know next to nothing about Islam and its standpoint on the psychology of anal sex. What do you think?
That's not the only thing about anal intercourse that bothers me about this page. al-Sistani, who certainly has the credibilty to comment on this issue, states that anal sex, while undesirable, is not haram, on the Q&A section of his official website. I don't think it's fair to call it a "major sin", and not mention his view. This is not to say that I think Islam generally, and most Muslims from traditionally Muslim nations in particular, shouldn't be a lot more tolerant than they are now. Edit: Actually, on a second reading, the statement I referred to is probably meant to refer to anal sex between two men, especially given the article in which the statement appears. I think that al-Sistani was probably taking it as implicit that anal sex with unspecified partners was between a man and a woman.
The sentence "In particular Islam condemns anal intercourse—whether with males or females—as a major sin" ought to be changed, because this is not a universal view. Sistani's fatwa is one example (from a Shi'a rather than a Sunni perspective). The Qur'anic basis for condemning anal sex is verse 223, al-Baqara, which says: "Your women are a tilth for you (to cultivate) so go to your tilth as ye will ...". By extrapolation, the word "tilth" (arable land; "harth" in Arabic) is interpreted by some scholars as meaning that "only vaginal sex is permissible in Islam, because it is from this place that children are produced. The semen lodged in the womb from which offspring comes is likened to the seeds that are planted in the ground, bringing vegetation" (quote from IslamOnline). This is very similar to the view held by many Roman Catholics that the only purpose of sex is for procreation and non-procreative sexual acts should be avoided. However, there is a good deal of evidence that on the whole Islamic scholars do not regard sex as purely a matter of procreation. While some Muslims regard anal sex as totally forbidden, others (in the context of male-female relations) say it is permissible with the wife's agreement, and some couples practise it as a means of contraception. ( Brian Whitaker 07:57, 14 May 2006 (UTC))
This needs to be integrated into the article, but if the main issue is "harth" then why all the fuss over "liwat," especially "greater liwat" with a male? Haiduc 12:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)
Despite the request for citation being present in respect of that alleged hadith for some time, none has been made. When it can be verified, re-add it.-- Irishpunktom\ talk 13:41, 10 May 2006 (UTC)
As there is already a link to the appropriate article, the following should be removed from the intro: The traditional tolerance, literary and religious, for chaste pederastic love affairs which according to Khaled El-Rouayheb had been prevalent since the 800's began to be eroded in the mid-1800's by the adoption of European Victorian attitudes by the new Westernized elite. (El-Rouayheb, 2005, p.156) SouthernComfort 20:12, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
Well, assuming that paederasty, in the context of this article, refers to same-sex relationships, I can't see any problem with this particular passage being in the article. Exploding Boy 23:09, 11 May 2006 (UTC)
There is also a reference to pederasty in 2.3 Modern Day, "the segregation of women in Muslim societies and the strong emphasis on male virility leads adolescent males and unmarried young men to seek sexual outlets with boys younger than themselves - in one study in Morocco, with boys in the age-range 7 to 13.[18]" As the reference is to an offline article I can't read it to check - but is there any proof whatsoever that these homosexual relationships with younger boys were CAUSED by the segregation of women and emphasis on male virility? The wording is problematic to me as saying one LEADS to the other implies causation, which isn't necessarily true. I suggest removing the first part of the sentence so it just says "unmarried young men have been found to have sex with boys younger than themselves.... etc." - any thoughts?
Bethgranter (
talk)
18:19, 24 May 2012 (UTC)
"men are encouraged to developed close friendships with other men, and women are encouraged to develop close friendships with other women, thus homosexual love is encouraged (while lust is not)"
does this conclude that close friendship = homosexual love ? what about brotherly love ? 86.16.116.224 06:50, 6 June 2006 (UTC)
I've blanked this section and suggest transwikiing ti to Wikisource, which is specifically designed as a repository of source documents. Pecher Talk 09:32, 7 June 2006 (UTC)
This I had to take away: But according to Justin Richardson, a professor of psychiatry at Columbia University, such thinking is backward - it is precisely the extreme restrictions on sexual relations with women that lead to greater prevalence of the behavior. "In some Muslim societies where the prohibition against premarital heterosexual intercourse is extremely high—higher than that against sex between men—you will find men having sex with other males not because they find them most attractive of all but because they find them most attractive of the limited options available to them." [4]
First, it is not clear, what thinking is such. Second, what qualifies Richardson to write about the subject? Third, the source does not support anything of what was said in the paragraph. Fourth, nothing essential is said here.
Read this book about middle east and azerbaijan you will see how turks were acting against homosexuality. It was a very serious crime on humanity so punisment is a very quick and bloody death by "Töre". Nowadays some homosexualist (who may or not be homosexuals) are trying to find roots for their ideas or acts but islamic world is a wrong place because islam punished this act worse than nazism. though they shall search this in ancient greece and rome also in pre-islamic arab traditions homosexuality is common. And Köçek(the male dancer) has nothing common with gays they were (and are) males who were entertaining crowds. If all male dancers are gay then tell me about their european counterparts today, are they gay also...
This is another mistaken thing among western people (who never have been free always a central government and Papacy ruled over them) In islam laws come from god and "BELIVERS" must obey and run these rules. Somalia may be in anarchy but there are mosques working in which trials can be made and sinners can be punished no need for a central government.
I've worked in the int'l oil industry for 30 years, so I've been to many Muslim nations, and many of them repeatedly.
On the 'holding hands' issue: In Pakistan, it is very much the norm, and if you are with a Pakistani man and you don't, he might become offended, just as many Westerners would be offended by not shaking hands. In the UAE and in Tunisia, professional people generally did not, but on the streets, men of lesser means did so often enough that it was not considered remarkable. There appears to be zero sexual content in the action. SO... why is it here at all? It has nothing to do with the subject of the article.
On the Justin Richardson topic: Gender-segregated societies almost always act in the way he describes, whether East or West. There is lust for a particular sex and there is just a plain old lust for sex, and the second type has no outlet other than what is available. Pure common sense. It happens in the West, too, and we call it prison sex. I have two friends who were in prison earlier in their lives, and they both said, "What you wanted there and what you want outside don't have anything to do with each other." BUT. That's not what the article is supposed to be about.
On the misuse of 'homosexuality': There is nothing strange at all about keeping the orientation of homosexuality unproscribed and the act of penetration heavily proscribed. It just means that people understood the absurdity of prosecuting thoughtcrime long before Orwell brought up the topic. So did the Baptists: "Hate the sin, love the sinner."
On the Sharia issue: The Sharia is important, and second only to the quotations from the Qu'ran (more on that later). That's because the Sharia is the forum by which we can know how Islam as a religion reacts to the issue, and that's the subject of the article. The Sharia is not there to enforce 'community standards' ot 'traditional prejudices.' That's not to say that it succeeds, but since it operates like common law, bad opinions create inertia in official opinions. So it is entirely relevant, and all the stuff about Spanish love-poetry, however enlightening and true, simply has very little to do with the article's subject. (So move it and call it 'Historical homoerotic writings within Islam' or somesuch)
It's a tough judgement call, but as pointed out by myk, the Sharia is not monolithic. The article made that clear, but then only quoted opinions by those parts that followed the same side side. Definitely not NPOV. Yes, the opposing ones were referred to (but not quoted in the same significant way), almost as if in passing. I believe the accused gets to choose which of the four main bodies in Sunni Islam he will be judged under, so what is requird is the range of modern opinions among those four. In Shi'a, only one body is binding, so take a representative decision.
There are two more Shi'a bodies, four more Sunni bodies, and three Westernized bodies. They are all limited in who accepts their judgments, but they all have followers. Pick two representative opinions on the negative end and two on the positive end. Now you have NPOV. "Just the facts, mam." You don't have to demonize Hitler for people to figure out he's a bad man... just state the facts in a neutral manner, and it will scream from the page. Trust wiki-users.
The public reaction issue: After the Qu'ran and the Sharia, it might be relevant to talk about current public opinion, but only if you can document that. I will tell you that it's a topic Islamic men seem very unconfortable about discussing (they're also about the same level of uncomfortable talking about adultery, however). The political actions in Saudi Arabia and places like that, however, cloud the issue, unless you can show that the religious authorities pushed for the changes in civil law.
In the cases of Iran and the Taliban, however, the civil and religious authorities are the same, and so those might be relevant as long as you keep clear those are local, and not general issues in Islam. It will be a tricky walk down the POV highway, so perhaps it should have its own article, and merely a link here. Most Muslims I've ever talked to felt that both governments were reprehensible, and the Islamist position is not as well-supported by workaday Muslims as the Western Press and Western politicians would lead you to believe.
An aside: I don't personally care if you have a problem with Anglo-Saxons, but don't blame the Celts. They were the conquered slaves. Julius Caesar said he respected the bravery of Celts above all the other tribes, and as evidense he described visiting a warrior's house and discovered the man had a wife and a teen-age boy lover, and they all slept in the same bed. I agree, that's brave!
And, finally, the Qu'ran quotes: Four translation-quotes of the same passage? My initial reaction was "Who edited this?" But on second thought, if the same words in Arabic can lead to such incredibly different renderings in English, then I can only wonder about any attempt to extract meaning from the book, because it means that the original had to have been very vague! But also, more context may be needed. The usual gay 'defense' on the Sodom and Gomorrah story is that the offenders were rapists who vioated the norms of hospitality. Is that true in the Qu'ran? I tried to look it up, but a friend has my copy. Lamabillybob 09:39, 29 August 2006 (UTC)
Article is POV and wrong, please read this from Sistani. -- Striver 23:35, 20 September 2006 (UTC)
Qu'ran misunderstands of the sin of Sodom which was the lack of hospitality see Genesis 19.6ff. Of course sexual matters are much more interesting, and they have overlaid the point of the story. The Qu'ran is not a very accurate set of Oracles. It was not committed to writing until about two hundred years after composition. Anyone who has lived, as I have, amongst Muslims becomes aware that homosexual behaviour is not un common, and indeed "marriages" between Muslim males have taken place with bride price etc. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.121.158.32 ( talk) 16:53, 3 February 2012 (UTC)
Talking just like a liberal christian. Who are you to say that the "Qu'ran misunderstands of the sin of Sodom" Have you studied that traditional exegesis of the Quran before you make that statement?
Another foolish attempt to undermine the Quran here is when you wrote "The Qu'ran is not a very accurate set of Oracles. It was not committed to writing until about two hundred years after composition" Funny. Your foolishness is evident in this part of Islamic history. While The Sunnah or Hadith was not codified until two hundred years later, the Quran was collected in a single book as early as within TWO YEARS after the Prophet's death.
Please, I'd stop if I were you, just stop embarrassing yourself with your half-baked knowledge about Islamic History. Just because the place you lived in practice homosexual behaviour doesn't mean that it represent's the Islamic faith; we can see that many Westerners who celebrated Easter Day and Christmas lost their virginity at a very young age, does this meant that the Christian faith encourage fornication or lust? Of course not. What you're doing is painting a broad brush of what a faith is to be based on the actions of the people in your surroundings. Just shut up. 210.195.207.198 ( talk) 17:10, 14 March 2014 (UTC)
Saying that Hanafi Fiqah allows homosexuality, is a lie found in Wahhabi books criticising Imam Abu Hanifa. I challenge Wahhabies to quote Imam Abu Hanifa directly. Hassanfarooqi 19:23, 5 December 2006 (UTC)
Whichever editor took the liberty to add the rambling, unarticulate section on "queer jihad", needs to know one thing: IT DOESN'T EXIST. This entire article can be one sentence long "Homosexuality is forbidden in Islam", period. With there actually being intellectual discussion about it, makes this a partially viable article. But the queer jihad article is, or rather was, for lack of a better term, ignorant. I will watch this carefully, and will make any and all edits neccessary to make sure no one thinks there is such a ridiculous thing as a queer jihad. Chairman Sharif 21:04, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Its just doesnt feel right to me that warning comes after reading the section. Warnings should come first right?. Warning at the bottom is like giving warning to a person who already cut their hand with a dangerous machinery. 202.185.20.111 00:05, 25 January 2007 (UTC) Izhar
Since the English version of Wikipedia is used by many Westerners not familiar with the Qu'ran, I think a listing of the specific Qu'ranic passages would be useful. (Surah and verse, not necessarily full text, but linking to full text might be handy) 4.224.252.183 00:54, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
"Homosexuality is a legal crime and forbidden in most of Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, etc. Whatever is forbidden is more attractive and homosexuality is not a habit that can be banned. So in all of these countries people are engaged in homosexual activity. As there are punishments for the act, everything is done in secret. Turkey is one of these countries where there is no problem when everything is done secretly."
That is written poorly And seems just like an opinion without any basis (from second sentence on). I think it should be removed Fatla00 22:48, 30 May 2007 (UTC)
I went through and seriously rewrote, reorganized and cleaned up this article. I hope it's better for the changes! ^_^ Wilybadger 02:31, 1 June 2007 (UTC)
I see no point in listing ex-gay/homophobic organisations under a title of 'LGBT Muslim organisations', and then under it listing a liberal organisation as an entirely separate section. Whether critical or approving of homosexuality, they are all LGBT organisations, and all need to be under the same heading. If there's some sort of substantial content that can be provided to warrant a separate 'Liberal views' topic, feel free to add it.
If you have some profound disagreement with this edit, please revert, but please explain why! Mentality 18:07, 1 July 2007 (UTC)
There are 2 sections which contradict each other on homosexuality in Turkey. 1. Despite being illegal(sic) there is a thriving homosexual subculture in Turkey. 2. In some place like turkey, Homosexuality is legal
81.179.72.238
04:30, 13 July 2007 (UTC)
There is a couplet that is growing in popularity in the English speaking world which purports to specifically describe the situation in the Arab world. "Women for procreation, men for recreation" Anyone heard of this, is there any truth to it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.32.77.48 ( talk) 02:13, 27 September 2007 (UTC)
Can anyone verify bit by Jonathan Margolis? I checked on amazon, the book does exist. But it would be nice to have the author's reference for this quote -- it strikes me as somewhat odd. -- hibou 18:25, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
is this the poet better known as Ibn Quzman i'm pretty certain it is and have fixed the link accordingly, but correct me if i'm wrong -- Mongreilf ( talk) 19:18, 18 November 2007 (UTC)
I disagree with this . The Qur'an is a primary source, and to quote a particular translation and use it to support a claim of pederasty is original research. ITAQALLAH 16:34, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
Margolis appears to be a British journalist rather than a historian or a scholar, so I'm not sure on what basis he can make the claim of a "homosexual predilection" in a whole religion simply by citing one poet. This claim also seems to be a bit of a WP:REDFLAG. ITAQALLAH 16:43, 9 February 2008 (UTC)
A tourist I meet told me about a book that was about how, during the imperial conquest of the Muslim world and the formation of "western" influences of colonial thoughts the laws and attacks on gays formalized (at least in some places), and the book goes on to look at how the hatred and rage for gays has the same roots in both the contemporary "outlaw" countries and the Imperial system of thoughts. If anyone can tell me what book this is I would love to add some article about how the postcolonial condition of many of the Muslim countries is the source of there hatred and rage towards the gays. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 130.208.135.23 ( talk) 04:14, 3 March 2008 (UTC)
I attempted to add a short section on Muslim literature and it was deleted by Itaqallah. His edit summary claimed: POV edit as before, literature is discussed in the following section. a separate section for a manipulated quote-mine is inappropriate - and it isn't an accurate representation of what EoIMW says.
On rereading EoIMW it seems to be devoted to Pederasty not homeosexuality in general so what I wrote would be better there but I must take exception to "POV edit"
Here is what I wrote:
According to the Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World, "expresson of male homoerotic sentiment" in poetry and other literature in the Muslim world was not only "accepted" but "assidiously cultivated," and far more common than expressions of attraction to women. [1]
Here is what Encyclopedia of Islam and the Muslim World says that I have been accused of "mapipulating:" After a couple of paragraphs about Islamic law and homosexual activity the Encyclopedia entry on Homosexuality says
Another question. The section on Pederasty starts out
No mention of Islam. But the rest of the article does mention Islam and makes no mention of pederasty by non-Muslim in the middle east. So why doesn't the article say The practice of pederasty in the Musilm world ....?
-- BoogaLouie ( talk) 20:02, 31 May 2008 (UTC)
Elazeez edit summary: Undoing redundant, incorrectly-tagged and incorrect edits. Please explain your views on talk page before undoing this
Explanation: The article has quite a bit on Islamic law and Homosexuality, and so something on Muslim literature and homosexuality (or homoeroticism) was added. The blockquote was used as the issue is very sensative and a quote by an authoritative source would avoid disputes over POV in "tone". It was acceptable to editor Itaqallah who is sensative to all this. -- BoogaLouie ( talk) 16:59, 11 June 2008 (UTC)
I read through the "Homosexuality laws in Muslim countries" and I noticed Libya isn't listed. Isn't that country predominantly Muslim? -- Dark paladin x ( talk) 10:50, 26 June 2008 (UTC)
Something out of a conference in Indonesia a couple of months ago http://www.thejakartapost.com/news/2008/03/27/islam-039recognizes-homosexuality039.html discofever ( talk) 12:25, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
The following line: "Based on the principles of the Qur'an and the Hadith, several eminent scholars of Islam, such as Imam Malik, Imam Shafi, Ahmad and Ishaaq have ruled that the person guilty of homosexuality should be stoned regardless of his married or unmarried nature.[4]" is incorrect. If you look at the source given for this statement, it states that the ruling according to the Shafi'i school is the same as for a heterosexual fornicator or adulterer. That is, if they are married, they are stoned, if they are unmarried they are lashed 100 times (not stoned).
Can someone please correct this ASAP? M2k41 ( talk) 19:20, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
I think only the penal codes of countries like Saudi Arabia, Iran, Afghanistan, Pakistan should be mentioned as they are the only Islamic states. The penal codes of other nations are based on European/secular law. Bless sins ( talk) 06:11, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
What are peoples opinions on renaming this article to a more wide "LGBT issues and Islam"? This article seems to give information on islamic views on transexuality (that it is part of homosexuality, or the prefered alternative). This would also make it more inline with the LGBT issues in hinduism article, and give a place to add trans issues (for which there is currently no good article). Yob Mod 14:11, 30 June 2009 (UTC)
Adding hadiths that are not authenticated for... I don't think that's how scholars cite hadiths Faro0485 ( talk) 22:20, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
There is a declared homosexual editor asserting his bias that there is some ambiguity about the question of whether homosexuality is forbidden in Islam - when there patently is not, and never has been. Izzedine 18:07, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
"al-Tifashi the Prophet is said to have allowed luti into the rooms where his wives were present, even when they were unveiled, and to have been particularly amused by their wit"
please, where did this come from? I've header something similar but it was not "Luti" it was an effeminate (Mokhanath) (مخنث) Will731 ( talk) 15:36, 25 July 2010 (UTC)
This article is about LGBT topics and Islam. It is not about every instance of LGBT relations with Muslims. Most of the countries listed in "Homosexuality laws in Muslim countries" are nominally Muslim (for example Albania, which has been athiest for nearly a century now) and have little to do with Islam. Unless the information is presented in a source that is about Islam (the topic of this article) it doesn't belong here. Bless sins ( talk) 23:16, 30 July 2010 (UTC)
Just skimming through this but seems to lack a lot of structure, and a lot of badly written sentances. For example:
Ibn al-Jawzi records Muhammad as cursing sodomites in several hadith, and recommending the death penalty for both the active and passive partners in same-sex acts.[11] (It is worth noting that Hadith are historical accounts and are prone to contamination and inaccuracy. This is particularly important since the Hadith on the subject of punishment seem a lot harsher, and to some extent opposing what the Quran suggests (if you kill a homosexual as per hadith, there is no chance of him repenting and receiving God's mercy as per Quran).
Discrepancy of brackets. Either this was supposed to have nested brackets, or a brakcet is missing from somewhere earlier. This whole section generally reads pretty badley imho
OllyThe23rd (
talk)
12:38, 29 August 2010 (UTC)
In 2009, Yobmod ( talk · contribs) moved this article from Homosexuality and Islam, citing project consensus that a broader title allows more coverage. [6]
I can believe that there was "project consensus" at the time, assuming that the "project" in question wasn't WikiProject Islam, but rather WikiProject LGBT topics, which in effect acts as a lobbying organization advocating the use of the neologism "LGBT" on Wikipedia in all possible and impossible places.
However, such a move is not arguable. This article deals with Islam and homosexuality, period. It does not deal with bisexuality, it does not deal with "transgenderism", and much less does it deal with the notion of "LGBT" as an unified entity, an idea that dates to the 1990s.
It is very well to use the term LGBT when discussing the LGBT subculture as it has stood since the 1990s, this goes under "self-designation". When dealing with topics outside of this subculture, and Islam most certainly is that, it is not permissible to simply use "LGBT" as a synonym of "homosexuality".
An article with the title "LGBT topics and Islam" would need to be based on references that explicitly discuss "LGBT" in relation to Islam. Otherwise. It is futile to move an article claiming broader title allows more coverage when no evidence has been presented that such coverage is possible in the first place. I have grave doubts whether Islamic tradition even has an opinion on Lesbianism.
My suggestion is this: Move the article back to " Islam and homosexuality". Make "LGBT topics and Islam" a section-redirect to the #LGBT_movements_within_Islam section, the only part of this article that actually discusses the post-1990 subculture in relation to Islam. Giving the past 15 years precedence in the naming of an article covering a 14-century moral and theological debate is biased to say the least. -- dab (𒁳) 15:23, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
This article seems to say a lot about what the qur'an and hadits say about sexual intercourse with the "same sex"... I'd say this seems rather inaccurate and misleading. Please correct me if I'm wrong, but there is nothing in the qur'an (and I would think the same is true of the hadiths) about homosexual sex, which isn't specificity about men having sex with men. I.e. women having sex with women is not condemned anywhere (by virtue of not being mentioned, that is). Naturally, later muslim scholars may have had opinions about lesbian sex, but to claim that the scriptures condemn sexual intercourse between persons of the same sex, rather than saying that it condemns sexual intercourse between men and other men, is surely factually inaccurate? I would like to know if I'm wrong. If not, I would like the article to be changed accordingly and for it to mention this curious little detail.-- 213.113.55.253 ( talk) 21:26, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
How this article does NOT exist on the Arabic, Persian...ect Wikipedia. (O_O) -- Nutthida ( talk) 19:37, 17 December 2011 (UTC)
In the last years some liberal imams celebrated blessings and marriage ceremonies during the last years, for example in April 2012 in France:
92.252.20.234 ( talk) 07:42, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
The entire modern day section just discusses Muslims who engage in clandestine homosexual acts, and implies they all do it, there is nothing in this section about Muslims against homosexuality, which makes the reader think all Muslims are secret homosexuals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.29.133.237 ( talk) 21:41, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
it is mentioned here that several Islamic states give the death penalty for this but there is no mention of how non-state actors such as al-Qaeda, the Taliban, Hezbollah, Hamas, and Lashkar-e-Taiba deal with these issues. no doubt they also give the death penalty but this part of the topic should be discussed especially since several Muslim countries have areas under the control of such groups. these areas include Gaza in Palestine, Waziristan in Pakistan, southern Lebanon, and northern Mali. please add a section for this issue as soon as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.203.139.194 ( talk) 21:09, 12 September 2012 (UTC)
Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, during his 2007 speech at Columbia University, asserted that there were no gay people in Iran.
This is a translation from the Farsi and misses a crucial phrase from his speech, "not like in America".
Either the above stands and paints Ahmadinejad as an idiot as American commentators universally assert, or he is misquoted, as the last part is almost always omitted in US discourse.
More likely from a literate ex Mayor of Tehran with a Ph D and elected President of a large sophisticated country, he meant that, or even directly said that (and I don't know because I am not literate in Farsi) Iran has no gay lifestyle such as in New York gay bars, gay dress and social activities. This interpretation is probably an accurate statement given his crackdown on gays.
In my opinion the statement in the main text is American propaganda meant to paint their enemy Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page).Ahmadinejad as an ignorant fool.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Controversies_surrounding_Mahmoud_Ahmadinejad#Columbia_University — Preceding unsigned comment added by 124.169.9.57 ( talk) 02:02, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
How about Inspired by God For homosexuals God said it is not good for homosexuals to be alone. So he created a helpmeet for each a woman for the woman and a man for the man. To be a helpmeet one for the other. Thus is the word of God. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
68.199.156.158 (
talk)
04:39, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
This is a very recent news release from the US State Department:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-hunter/state-department-sexual-abuse-boys-rise-afghanistan
The State Department in its 2013 human rights report on Afghanistan said the sexual abuse of boys, or bacha baazi, is on the rise in the region, with the practice becoming common in Kabul. “The practice of ‘bacha baazi’ (dancing boys) – which involved powerful or wealthy local figures and businessmen sexually abusing young boys who were trained to dance in female clothes – was on the rise,” the State Department said in its human rights report.
The report noted an increase in rapes during the year, with most victims being children. In fact, sexual abuse of children reached an all-time high, according to the Afghanistan Independent Human Rights Commission (AIHRC).
“Although pornography is a crime, child pornography is not specifically prohibited by law. Exploiting a child for sexual purposes, as was done with bacha baazi, also was widespread but not specified as a crime under the law,” the State Department noted in its report.
“Although the practice was believed to be more widespread in conservative rural areas, at least one media report alleged that it had become common in Kabul. Media reports also alleged that local authorities, including the police, were involved in the practice, but the government took few steps to discourage the abuse of boys or to prosecute or punish those involved,” the human rights report said.
An Oct. 28, 2013 article by Foreign Policy magazine said bacha baazi, or sexual abuse of boys, “has grown more rampant since 2001” when the Taliban was ousted.
“The Taliban had a deep aversion towards bacha baazi, outlawing the practice when they instituted strict nationwide sharia law,” the article said, adding that “one of the original provocations for the Taliban’s rise to power in the early 1990s was their outrage over pedophilia.”
“Once they came to power, bacha baazi became taboo, and the men who still engaged in the practice did so in secret,” FP reported. “When the former mujahideen commanders ascended to power in 2001 after the Taliban’s ouster, they brought with them a rekindled culture of bacha baazi. Today, many of these empowered warlords serve in important positions, as governors, line ministers, police chiefs, and military commanders.”
The article referred to a 2009 Human Terrain Team report titled, “Pashtun Sexuality,” which said bacha baazi is not considered “un-Islamic or homosexual at all” according to Pashtun social norms.
The report was done by the U.S. Army and is comprised of personal field notes dated May 15, 2009 by Human Terrain Team AF-6, which was assigned to the 2nd Marine Expeditionary Battalion and co-located with British forces in Lashkar Gah. It was requested to provide insight into Pashtun cultural traditions regarding male sexuality.
‘Women are for children, boys are for pleasure’
The 2009 Human Terrain Team report noted that “one of the country’s favorite sayings is ‘women are for children, boys are for pleasure.’”
Homosexuality is strictly prohibited in Islam. “To identify as such is to admit an enormous sin in Islam – one punishable by death under the Taliban and one that would result in severe tribal and familial ostracization today,” the report said.
However, “even men who practice homosexuality exclusively are not labeled by themselves or their counterparts as homosexual.” Therefore, “it appears to be the label, not the action or the preference, that poses the greatest problem.”
Homosexuality is defined – “narrowly and specifically” – as the love of another man, the HTT report said.
“Loving a man would therefore be unacceptable and a major sin within this cultural interpretation of Islam, but using another man for sexual gratification would be regarded as a foible – undesirable but far preferable to sex with an ineligible woman … which would likely result in issues of revenge and honor killings,” the Army’s report added.
The report noted that in Pashtun society, access to women is “extremely limited.”
“Heterosexual relationships are only allowable within the bounds of marriage, and Pashtun honor demands that a man be able to demonstrate his ability to support a wife and family, as well as produce abundant wedding-gifts for the bride and her parents, before he is allowed to marry,” it said.
“Therefore, given the economic situation of most young Pashtun men and the current state of employment and agriculture within the Pashtun regions of Afghanistan, marriage becomes a nearly unattainable possibility for many,” it added.
The report noted a cyclical effect when young boys are sexually abused.
Many of them spend their “formative years” in Taliban madrasas (Islamic religious school), where they miss out on a mother’s influence. “Women are foreign, and categorized by religious teachers as, at best, unclean or undesirable,” the HTT report said.
“It is then probable that the male companionship that a boy has known takes a sinister turn, in the form of the expression of pedophilia from the men that surround him. Such abuse would most likely result in a sense of outrage or anger, but anger that can not possibly be directed at the only source of companionship and emotional support a boy knows, and on which he remains dependent,” it said.
“This anger may very well be then directed at the foreign object – women – resulting in the misogyny typical of Pashtin Islamism. Men and boys therefore remain the object of affection and security for these boys as they grow into men themselves, and the cycle is repeated,” the unclassified report said.
It concluded that such a cycle affects both males and females and “leads to violence against women and women’s suppression in Pashtun culture.”
“If women are no longer the source of companionship or sexual desire, they become increasingly and threateningly foreign,” adding to the cycle of “male isolation from women.”
CNSNews.com asked the State Department to confirm and explain the correlation between the practice of bacha baazi and the Taliban while the Taliban was in power in Afghanistan.
The State Department responded, saying, “As noted in the report, Afghanistan has made important human rights achievements in the past 12 years, but more work remains to be done to protect and expand on the gains made since 2001. The overall human rights situation in Afghanistan remained poor.
“The Taliban and other insurgents killed record numbers of civilians and pursued targeted killings of persons affiliated with the government. Widespread disregard for the rule of law and official impunity for those who committed human rights abuses were serious problems, and the government did not prosecute abuses by officials consistently and effectively,” it added.
“The United States continues to provide diplomatic and programmatic support to Afghanistan, including to civil society and human rights actors, as Afghanistan seeks to build a stable, prosperous, and democratic future. Our support includes building civil society’s capacity to defend against a rollback of critical human rights gains,” the State Department concluded.
-
See more at:
http://cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-hunter/state-department-sexual-abuse-boys-rise-afghanistan#sthash.TA41mVEz.dpuf Cite error: There are <ref>
tags on this page without content in them (see the
help page). MorganMac March 20, 2014
MorganMac (
talk)
18:04, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
![]() | This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
This table is very confusing! Is it listing the percentages as percentages of muslims or percentages of citizens? If it is of citizens, then the percentages are basically irrelevant.- 2605:A000:DFC0:6:584D:2F29:2471:36AF ( talk) 17:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Homosexuality is legal in Iran, one can admit to be homosexual and nothing will happen. Special homosexual acts (i.e. penetrating the buttocks) are de jure (not really de facto, i.e. because of witness situation) illegal, and not per se death penalty. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2003:CB:DBC6:9400:84F4:8BF8:923:51DA ( talk) 00:31, 17 March 2018 (UTC)
Today in most of the Islamic world homosexualitySodomy? is not socially or legally accepted.
Since this seemed unclear, I inserted the query in the sentence above. This was removed by user:flyer22. deisenbe ( talk) 09:03, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
At the end of the same paragraph as the preceding note, I added the following:
However, in no case do these prohibitions antedate colonialism and other extensive contact with Europeans, which began in the nineteenth century. citation needed
This was deleted ad "unsourced" by user:flyer22. deisenbe ( talk) 09:07, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
This was reverted three minutes after I put it in:
However, in no case do these prohibitions antedate colonialism and other extensive contact with western Europeans, which began in the nineteenth century.
The persecution of homosexuals in the Islamic world is very recent, and it is a result of colonization and the influence of Western culture. There is abundant evidence that until colonization, homosexuality was widely accepted. During the first two decades of the twentieth century, Morocco was "a paradise for homosexuals", who fled puritan Europe in search of the sexual freedom one enjoyed in Islamic lands. In fact, homosexuality was legal in Morocco until 1972, and it was Saudi pressure that led to its banning. In Indonesia (the most populous Muslim country) it has never been prohibited, since the shafi'i school of law was dominant. The acceptance of homosexuality in the history of Islam is well documented, in different lands and in different periods. It was not something hidden or marginal, but socially accepted. Western researchers on homosexuality have pointed out, with astonishment, the attitude toward this topic in dar al-Islam. One should consult the views of John Boswell on homosexuality in al-Andalus in his works Christianity, Social Tolerance, and Homosexuality and Same-Sex Unions in Premodern Europe. [2]
deisenbe ( talk) 22:14, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
References
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to 4 external links on
LGBT in Islam. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers. — cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 10:48, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: withdrawn by nom in order to reach some consensus before renominating. ( non-admin closure) PanchoS ( talk) 17:59, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
– These topics's titles are in need of a somewhat consistent terminology, especially after there has been a number of page moves without debate.
Now, we use "x and y" in titles only if a more precise relation cannot be established. However, in all of these cases, sexual orientation is discussed within the discourses of the respective faith, not the other way around. In some cases this may be an omission, as the LGBT discourse occasionally covers religion. However it doesn't hold doctrines or a set of views on religion, apart from where a religion interfers with the rights of LGBT people. Therefore we can clearly speak of a discourse within the particular religion, without subordinating the general LGBT discourse under the respective religious discourses. And while the acronym "LGBT" is widely used within LGBT discourses, it is not sufficiently common within general religious discourses. Therefore "Sexual orientation in x" clearly seems to be the best definition of these topics.
PanchoS (
talk)
12:55, 23 December 2015 (UTC)
"Oppose mass move, because gender identity ≠ sexual orientation."
^That seems like a perfectly reasonable point of view, but if so, then why does it make sense to keep lumping the transgendered in with homosexuals? It seems the obvious alternative is to proceed with the mass moving of those same articles, but to strip them of their transgender content, and to move that content into separate articles ie., Islam and Transgenderism, Zoroastrianism and Transgenderism, etc. KevinOKeeffe ( talk) 19:24, 27 February 2017 (UTC)
Propose amending the first sentence of the third paragraph from:
To:
Beyond a problem of a clear generalization being presented in regard to LGBT people not being "socially accepted", the issue here, that has already received a lengthy introduction in the previous two paragraphs, is one of prejudice. As the next sentence clearly demonstrates, the issue may frequently be a matter of life and death.
In other Wikipedia articles such as those on the treatment of Jews, gypsies and black people in WWII Germany, and article would not merely say that these people were "not ... accepted" not least because that would not be true. Wikipedia even present: Category:Rescue of Jews in the Holocaust. People in such circumstances were taken into homes, hidden, protected and certainly accepted. In a similar way it seems to me that Wikipedia goes too far with its unsubstantiated claim that "homosexuality is not socially ... accepted" "in most of the Islamic world". As with all similar issues, it depends on the extent of their prejudice of the people concerned.
I will leave a link to this thread at WP:LGBT and WP:Islam and Ping recent contributors to the article: Alexis Ivanov, AstroLynx, BethNaught, Bgwhite, BorgQueen, Chrisdike95, Contaldo80, Deisenbe, DMacks, Dialectric, Erodes43, Flyer22 Reborn, GermanJoe, GorgeCustersSabre, I dream of horses, Ibrahim Husain Meraj, Instantpancakes350, JCO312, Jeff5102, Lutipri, Maplestrip, Nematsadat, Nøkkenbuer, Philip Trueman, Rupert loup, Serols, Tadeusz Nowak, Talebhaq, Tymon.r, Winner 42
Greg Kaye 10:26, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
LGBT in Islam. Please take a moment to review
my edit. If necessary, add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 10:43, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on
LGBT in Islam. Please take a moment to review
my edit. You may add {{
cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{
nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:06, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on LGBT in Islam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{
Sourcecheck}}
).
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— cyberbot II Talk to my owner:Online 03:16, 27 May 2016 (UTC)
Iraq is included as one of the countries who have Capital punishment, yet according to his article - /info/en/?search=LGBT_rights_by_country_or_territory#Asia. - homossexuality is no longer considered illegal there since 2003. Is it included due to the fact that ISIS controls part of its territory? If so, why Syria is not in that same group? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.199.195.253 ( talk) 04:47, 11 February 2017 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 9 external links on LGBT in Islam. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 17:28, 9 May 2017 (UTC)