Mohammed Hijab – Neil Degrasse Tyson on LGBT (Response)

			Hey you are you wasting your time on social media again, your brothers and sisters in Islam net from
Norway are establishing a message in a Dawa center. Establishing a message to convey the message of
Islam is one of the best deeds a Muslim can do. There's a huge need for annoying you know this and I
know this, so that makes it even greater. So give generously and Allah azza wa jal give you even
more.
		

			Salam aleikum wa rahmatullah hear what I can't so how are you guys doing? I recently came across the
video of Neil deGrasse Tyson, an individual who I've been hammering lately, yes, hammering, and who
deserves the hammering, let's watch the video and come back and respond in kind. I care what is
objectively true in the world, as a scientist, but let me not say even as a scientist, I just simply
care what is objectively true. And science happens to be a pretty potent path, to invoke, to find
out what is true. And so if people express themselves on a gender spectrum, and that is an actual
thing, and an actual society,
		

			if we have not fully explained that, scientifically, that's an interesting frontier to study. If you
want to say it's only sociological,
		

			then it's the purview of the social sciences. I don't care who studies it. It's an interesting fact
about society that's worth learning about. To make it to fight someone and say it's not biological.
It's just your decision.
		

			It's real. And it's there. Well, because it's real, because it manifests. What I find most egregious
about this video is that this is an individual who has been a mascot for the New Atheists. Yes, a
mascot for the New Atheists, an individual who was blasting religion, on the basis that it doesn't
have empirical evidence for its validity. And here he is, talking about objective reality in one
breath. And in the other breath, he's talking about what
		

			the fact that you have an expression, he's talking, of course, about the expression of somebody of
another gender and so on. The fact that you have this expression, in his words, is a manifestation
of was a real manifestation. reality was, it's real, because it manifests in reality, couldn't the
same exact line of reasoning be afforded to every single religion on the face of the earth?
		

			Every single fiction, every single myth on the face of the earth.
		

			It's real. It has ontological significance, conceptual significance, actual realistic, real
significance, because it manifests itself in the world.
		

			That is not the standard that you use, kneel when you deal with religion. But here you are the
traitor that you are to your own profession. That traitor that you are to your own profession, as a
scientist, cannot even summon the courage, the fortitude, the bravery,
		

			to say actually,
		

			this is something which is unscientific. This is something which is against basic biology, the fact
that somebody expresses themselves in X way, the social construct, this social fiction,
		

			referred to as gender transitioning or considering yourself to be another. This is a fiction
actually, it's a figment of one's imagination. It's a kind of delusion. Wait a minute, what do you
mean, it's a kind of delusion, the same kind of delusion? That if you remember Richard Dawkins,
because he thought the only way to finding out things was through empiricism, and you agreed with
him, the materialist naturalist physicalist that you are, but you don't employ your empiricism, your
naturalism, your physicalism, or materialism, when you're dealing with a gender issue. You sideline
or you're worried to speak and say certain things that will offend certain people. You coward.
		

			You are a coward. You are a coward.
		

			I watched the entire video and saw how much you tried to evade answering Ben Shapiro's question, Ben
Shapiro's question, who on these issues we agree with,
		

			about how these things are not biological realities, and you're trying to escape that conflating and
equivocating and creating red herrings and distractions from that question, and instead tried to
equivocate as a manifestation of the expression of an interview
		

			A jewel to
		

			another gender is the same is real because what you mean is rewatch using the word real? Because
what the question initially was, was, is this individual actually X, Y and Zed from a biological
perspective?
		

			You have no defense, you have no defense. And I don't want to hear anything from you. Yeah.
		

			I don't want to hear that because even Richard Dawkins, even he was courageous enough to speak about
these issues, and to call a spade a spade.
		

			But until you come out and admit the gender delusion,
		

			it's not The God Delusion, the gender delusion, which is causing irreversible damage to people,
which is causing which is subjecting children to confusion, mental psychological confusion, even now
talk of pumping them with steroids, and
		

			you know, hormones.
		

			Miss educating them, teaching them your western fiction,
		

			Western fiction,
		

			Western mythology,
		

			religion of the left.
		

			Yes, until you come out and speak about that religion.
		

			Then you're not a man at all.
		

			You're coward. Solomonic Come on, I have to live with the Prophet Muhammad sallallahu alayhi wa
sallam told us to whoever builds a mosque for Allah, Allah were built in a similar house in Jannah.
And we know the great reward that will not only be gained but rather will fill your grave after your
death. Whenever someone prays that whenever someone gives shahada in the masjid whenever someone
learns something in the masjid, yes, that will be something that you will have on your scale.