Message to Muslim Westerners on LGBT – California

JOHN Locke, I think you made some very valid points there. And I want to add to something very important, right. And this is, I think, one of the biggest challenges in this state, in particular with the Muslim community, and I have to address it head on. Obviously, we have the same challenge in the UK. But I believe that we have better mechanisms of dealing with it there. I'm not trying to, you know, but I think that we have, you know, more established community in the UK already, because we've been there for much longer, and we've been able to establish ourselves and our population is much more concentrated.

And we have much less apostasy rates and in the United States. However, having said that, to answer your question directly, I think,

the question of the first and foremost about homosexuality and Islam

and LGBT activism, and how does it how do we deal with that? Because, obviously, from an Islamic perspective, we know that homosexuality, not from an inclination perspective, from a tendancy perspective, from a feeling perspective, but certainly from an action perspective, is something which is an aberration in religious against our religion, we can't, we're not going to change that part of our religion, and in fact, one of the major sins of Islam. So we, I feel like this, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, obviously, this is your state and you've been living here. But I feel like there's a, there's a there's a pressure to capitulate to this idea that actually, we should say

that the act itself, I'm not talking about the feeling, and I'm not talking about the person. homosexuals. I'm not talking about the feeling how they feel. I'm talking about homosexual sex, to be completely honest with you. Right? penetration. Yeah, sorry to be kids in the room, I'm talking about that. We are under pressure to say that's legitimate. And it's moral is fine. But I say and this well, if there's anything you got to live with today, make this be the thing that you live with. Yeah. Because it's something that hopefully will protect your community and our communities everywhere. This is against every approach.

And we stand up for this. Okay? No, it's against every single approach. Let me tell you why. We talked about the intersectional approach. What if someone who feels gay also believes that that homosexuality is a sin? What if they have two things that they're doing at one time they feel homosexual? They feel like they have homosexual relations, but they also have the belief that what if they if they act upon that impetus, that what they will do is they'll do something sinful? So on an intersectional analysis, now, we have to go back and ask,

what do we prioritize and analysis, what they believe, or what they feel.

And if that person makes a conscientious decision to say, you know what, I feel like this. But my identity as a human being is should be prioritized in this way, for example, in a religious way, and therefore, I'm going to suppress my sexual, you know, homosexuality, for example, I'm going to suppress it, then that is as legitimate on an intersectional analysis and the liberal analysis as someone, quote unquote, coming out of the closet. Basically, there is a presupposition that sexual expressionism should be prioritized over and above suppression.

But that that doesn't make any sense. Why is that the case? Can that be proven? So in other words, there's this idea which actually takes us all the way it takes us all the way back to Freud, one guy called Freud. Yeah, Sigmund Freud, he wrote a book called civilization and its discontents. And in it, he basically argued, and he had this thing called the Oedipus complex, I don't want to go into major detail. But he said that, you know, When, when, when a child is born, they have psychosexual stages of development. And at one stage, like a, for example, a young boy feels attraction for his mother, like he wants to engage sexually with his mother, right? And then we start, you know,

controlling those desires and so on.

And he argues in his book that basically, we should be able to express ourselves as much as possible. And this is incorporated into this liberal ethic, this liberal ethic of just do it kind of like you know, the Nike slogan, yeah, just do it. You know, YOLO, live once, and so on. So sexual expressionism is prioritized over and above sexual repression ism, if you like. So coming out of the closet, is seen as the epitome of a self expression. Yes. Even though, as I made the point in my debate yesterday, for those of you that are coming out of the incest closet was not seen the same way as someone who has sexual inclination for their brother or sister. Sorry to be very explicit

here. But this is a very important topic. Because the truth is this on social liberalism, the Haida or the The principle is, you can do whatever you want, so long as you don't harm anyone else. That's what they say. Yeah, do whatever you want, so long as you don't have anyone else. Okay, so therefore, the homosexual has the right to have sex with another man. But a brother doesn't have the right to have sexual intercourse with his sister. Sorry to be young.

Well, because deformed babies will come about, okay. contraception.

The same logic applies. Why is the LGBT rights in this country and not incest rights when both of them are predicated on the same social construct? idea of harm principle. So the idea is that sexual expressionism should be prioritized any over and above repression ism. But even in certain contexts, there'll be exceptions that are made, like incest, for example, some taboo things that they have society still haven't has a civil rights movement. Yeah, for if there was if there was a, you know, 100,000 people that had sexual feelings for their sisters and their brothers, and they come hand in hand in the streets, and they say, look, give us our rights. Maybe things will change.

But why should it be the case that that should be? What has to happen in order for society to accept them? Right? This, you know, they have the same issue, they should have the same rights to sexual respect. Anyway, that's a different question. The point is, as Muslims, we say, all of these things are go back to our expression as Muslims.

We say, as Muslims, our morality is defined by what Quran and Sunnah. And through the mother have and so on. Yeah. So if we believe that having sex with a man, if you're a man is a sexual operation, is it religious is wrong? And you say, No, that's an illegitimate belief, then you're stopping us from believing what we want to believe. Where's the freedom of expression in that?

We're not gonna we are not going to sacrifice our expression to satisfy your own expression.

Don't ever allow that to happen to your community. You have to fight tooth and nail before that ever happens in this community. Don't let them win the argument will lie even on their principles. There's no way you can lose this argument. You should be allowed to believe that having sex to men having sex with each other is a moral aberration is a religious is not correct. It's never going to be correct. In my eyes. That doesn't mean now that I'm going to be disrespectful to homosexuals. No, we're gonna have a good relationship with homosexuals. Because Allah subhanaw taala told us and we're also not a matter of mental illness.

Almost like a like a fountain in se. We haven't sent you except for as for all of the people for all of the people, not just for you know, one sexuality, no discrimination. We're like, the perfect game for everyone. The homosexual, heterosexual, the bisexual, the black man, the white man, the Green Man, the yellowman. Everyone. He wasn't sent for specific people, which goes back to the racist point raises important human

and left for the law to be there's no fuddle there's no Liana peon. For for RP, you know over a Jimmy or Jimmy over r&b or for a black man over a white man or a white man. So it's an inclusive message of Islam. But that should not mean that we're going to change our morality because now you're you're impinging on our freedom of expression. And you're impinging on our freedom of thought. You're telling us what to believe? You're telling us what to believe it's the equivalent, it's the moral equivalent of someone who's a vegetarian who believes that eating meat is wrong. Yeah, it's told no, you can't have that belief. Because we have this, you know, all these people are

eating meat, therefore, you know,

you're calling them immoral. Even if they believe that that is an immoral action, and eating meat is wrong. Shouldn't they be allowed to believe right that eating meat is an immoral action is vegetarian isn't going to be outlawed?

veggie phobia.

Your veggie folk?

No, no, don't don't go that the LGBT community, they have to know full well. And you have to make this case very clearly. That we will definitely treat you with respect, and definitely allow you to enter our spaces, they're more welcomed in our spaces than we are welcoming our spaces because we want them to come into the mosque, we want the LG we want homosexuals to come to the mosque from from, from from Muslim faith or non Muslim faith. And yet it's not an impossibility to be a Muslim homosexual, you can have those feelings, and you can even commit the action. We're not even going to excommunicate you from Islam, even if you have sex with 1000 men that would excommunicate you from

Islam. Sorry to say, I'm, however, we are going to say that action is wrong.

And if you are and if we are stopped from doing this, because of this was referred to as a homegrown nationalist agenda. Yes. Where homosexuals juxtaposed themselves away from the Muslims in order to find some homes in nation state in the Western world and so on. Forget about it. We're not going to accept that Muslim communities have to be strong. Just like Jewish communities. We're just like Orthodox Jewish communities. We're just like Christian communities in the Bible Belt can say ridiculous things. You're going to hell, you know, shut up.

Be quiet redneck.

Donald Trump and these guys

be quiet. They and they're allowed to do that. Anyhow, I got a gun here and they're walking around with guns and threatening behavior, and they're okay. But as Muslims we have to be victimized otherwise objected for homosexuals.

You know, what we believe firmly, wholeheartedly, definitely, blatantly, obviously, willingly, that homosexuality, if done in practice is sinful and we will never back down from that. Don't ever let you don't ever let them back down from that position. The moment you back down from that position will lay you back down from Islam