Box Turtle Bulletin

Box Turtle BulletinNews, analysis and fact-checking of anti-gay rhetoric
“Now you must raise your children up in a world where that union of man and box turtle is on the same legal footing as man and wife…”
This article can be found at:
Latest Posts

Park51 Imam echos Focus on the Family

Timothy Kincaid

January 27th, 2011

It appears that Park51, the proposed Manhattan Islamic Center (called the “Ground Zero Mosque” by detractors) may not prove to be quite the beacon of tolerance and enlightenment that supporters have promised. Or, at least, not on gay issues.

Imam Abdallah Adhami, newly associated with the project, has expressed views about homosexuality that are consistent with those of Focus on the Family, NARTH, and other anti-gay activists: (NY1)

“An enormously, overwhelming percentage of people struggle with homosexual feeling because of some form of violent emotional or sexual abuse at some point in their life. Again, not necessarily in their childhood….A small, tiny percentage of people are born with a natural inclination they cannot explain. You find this in the animal kingdom on some level as well.”

While this statement has concerned local gay advocates, it should be considered in context. As some who have looked at Islam and its relationship to homosexuality note, this is the position of the tolerant liberal end of Muslim thinking.

“I don’t agree with the imam, but I think what he said is progress,” said Sharma. “Usually, from the Muslim orthodoxy, you are prepared to listen to very strong words of condemnation.”

At least the Imam isn’t calling for my execution.

Comments

POST COMMENT | COMMENT RSS 2.0

Lindoro Almaviva
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

This should come as no shock to anyone, their views on the issue are well documented and explained.

The sad part is that if NOM, Focus on the Family or any virulent anti-gay group decided to make their headquarters in the same building they would be welcomed with open arms; and their anti-gay views would not even be news.

Emily K
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Gee, sorry Islam hasn’t quite reached the level of tolerance The United Church of Christ and MCC have, Timothy, but instead reflect the standing of some of the largest Christian denoms in America (Evangelical, Catholic, Mormon). I’m sure you’re quite pleased that you have a “reason” to look cross-eyed at these woman-stoning terrorists who are building a “victory mosque” on the land YOU have a birthright to. (“probably for offensive reasons.”)

Dan
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Birthright? The owners of the property would not agree that you have any birthright to it. You don’t seem to have much respect for property rights Ms K. What are you some kinda communist?

Priya Lynn
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Dan, Emily as is usual is doing what she accuses others of, making a characature of someone’s beliefs and writings and pretending that’s the stand they actually take.

Emily K
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Lol Dan, I wouldn’t say communist, these days i’m more of a nihilist.

Emily K
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

oh and Priya, i don’t accuse “others” of doing it, just you. :D

L. Junius Brutus
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Lindoro: “This should come as no shock to anyone, their views on the issue are well documented and explained. ”

Here I was, thinking that it would come as a shock to you, since you ignored all the warnings people posted about the GZM imam Rauf supporting sharia law, refusing to condemn Hamas as a terrorist organization, calling US policy an accomplice to the 9/11 attacks and telling people that the “grievances” of terrorists should be taken seriously.

“The sad part is that if NOM, Focus on the Family or any virulent anti-gay group decided to make their headquarters in the same building they would be welcomed with open arms; and their anti-gay views would not even be news.”

Would they also be welcome if people of their religion had committed a terrorist act which cost 3000 lives, two blocks away?

Emily: “Gee, sorry Islam hasn’t quite reached the level of tolerance The United Church of Christ and MCC have, Timothy, but instead reflect the standing of some of the largest Christian denoms in America (Evangelical, Catholic, Mormon). ”

Right, because evangeicals, Catholics and Mormons regularly stone gay people to death.

“I’m sure you’re quite pleased that you have a “reason” to look cross-eyed at these woman-stoning terrorists who are building a “victory mosque” on the land YOU have a birthright to. ”

Says the person who claimed that 82.5% of Americans are stupid and bigoted. Oops, I guess you don’t need a “reason” to look cross-eyed at Westerners and Christians – people you don’t like very much.

“Lol Dan, I wouldn’t say communist, these days i’m more of a nihilist.”

What a surprise.

Priya Lynn
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Junius said “Would they also be welcome if people of their religion had committed a terrorist act which cost 3000 lives, two blocks away?”.

Yes, because the religion didn’t commit the terrorist act, the terrorists did and sharing their religion doesn’t make them responsible for the terrorism.

Priya Lynn
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Emily said “oh and Priya, i don’t accuse “others” of doing it, just you.”.

Oh, right, that makes your lies so much more ethical.

L. Junius Brutus
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Priya: “Yes, because the religion didn’t commit the terrorist act, the terrorists did and sharing their religion doesn’t make them responsible for the terrorism.”

That argument is detached from reality, even though it might make sense to you. I’m pretty that people would be against a Nazi Party wanting its headquarters two blocks from Auschwitz, even though Nazism, in theory, is not “responsible” for the Holocaust.

Priya Lynn
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Not a valid analogy Junius. Part of Naziism is about being the master race and killing Jews. Islam is no different than christianity in that both have parts of their holy books that advocate murdering infidels. Many more muslims than christians take this seriously but just as many christians don’t believe in murdering infidels many muslims do not either. Its no more valid to assign those muslims responsiblity for the 9/11 murders than it is to assign blame to all christians for the murders that have taken place in the name of christianity.

Timothy Kincaid
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

I am unfamiliar with the Christian tenets that call for the murder of infidels. Perhaps they only exist in the imaginations of antiChristianists.

L. Junius Brutus
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Priya Lynn: “Not a valid analogy Junius. Part of Naziism is about being the master race and killing Jews.”

No, no, no, that is just a “misinterpretation” of Nazism, not true Nazism. Nazism is anti-semitic, but killing Jews is not a sine qua non of Nazism – demonstrated by the fact that Hitler wanted to deport the Jews to Madagascar. So why should ‘innocent’ Nazis be responsible for what Nazi extremists did in the 1940s? (note: only the second sentence is not satirical)

“Islam is no different than christianity in that both have parts of their holy books that advocate murdering infidels. ”

Overly simplistic and uninformed statement. Islam spread through the violence of its founder and his successors. The violence that he so extolled made Islam a “great world religion”. Show me where Jesus instructed his followers to spread his religion through the sword, or to kill people who leave their Christian religion, or to wage wars of aggression to spread the faith.

“but just as many christians don’t believe in murdering infidels many muslims do not either. ”

Many Christians do not believe in “do unto others as you would have them do unto you” either, but that does not make it any less a tenet of the Christian religion. On the other hand, if you want to say that violent aggression is not a element in Islam, you’d have to say that Muhammad was wrong, you’d have to say that the Koran is wrong, that the hadith are wrong, that Muhammad’s successors were wrong, that Islamic theology is wrong and that Islamic tradition is wrong. Basically, you’d have to strip every Islamic authority of its authority, and what would you be left with? Hint: it’s not called Islam. Maybe Priyaism.

“Its no more valid to assign those muslims responsiblity for the 9/11 murders ”

I don’t. I dislike the ideology of hate and violence that it is. That does not mean that Muslims who are not hateful and violent (like the founder of their religion) can’t exist, just like there are (many) Christians who are not loving and peaceful (like the founder of their religion).

Graham
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

“Overly simplistic and uninformed statement. Islam spread through the violence of its founder and his successors. The violence that he so extolled made Islam a “great world religion”. Show me where Jesus instructed his followers to spread his religion through the sword, or to kill people who leave their Christian religion, or to wage wars of aggression to spread the faith.”

So then why was heresy punishible by death until so recently(in historical terms)? I mean, if it was so obvious that Christians were to be tolerant, why so much Catholics killing Protestants, Protestants killing Catholics, Christians killing atheists, Christians killing pagans, etc? Were they all just misinterpreting it?

L. Junius Brutus
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Graham: “So then why was heresy punishible by death until so recently(in historical terms)? I mean, if it was so obvious that Christians were to be tolerant, why so much Catholics killing Protestants, Protestants killing Catholics, Christians killing atheists, Christians killing pagans, etc? Were they all just misinterpreting it?”

It surprises me that you are surprised that people in the Middle Ages were irrational. There is no basis in the life and teachings of Jesus for such actions. On the other hand, there is plenty of justification in the life and teachings of Muhammad.

It is easy to imitate Jesus and be a peaceful, good and loving person. Is the same true for Muhammad?

L. Junius Brutus
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

“It is easy to imitate Jesus and be a peaceful, good and loving person. Is the same true for Muhammad?”

Lest you say that it is not easy to “imitate Jesus”: I am not talking about how easy it is to imitate Jesus, but how easy it can be combined with being a “peaceful, good and loving person”.

Priya Lynn
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Timothy said “I am unfamiliar with the Christian tenets that call for the murder of infidels.”.

Of course you are.

Timothy said “Perhaps they only exist in the imaginations of antiChristianists.”.

Perhaps not:

Deuteronomy 12:30

Take heed to thyself that thou be not snared by following them, after that they be destroyed from before thee; and that thou enquire not after their gods, saying, How did these nations serve their gods? even so will I do likewise.

Deuteronomy 13:6-10

6If thy brother, the son of thy mother, or thy son, or thy daughter, or the wife of thy bosom, or thy friend, which is as thine own soul, entice thee secretly, saying, Let us go and serve other gods, which thou hast not known, thou, nor thy fathers;

7Namely, of the gods of the people which are round about you, nigh unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end of the earth even unto the other end of the earth;

8Thou shalt not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him; neither shall thine eye pity him, neither shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou conceal him:

9But thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterwards the hand of all the people.

10And thou shalt stone him with stones, that he die; because he hath sought to thrust thee away from the LORD thy God, which brought thee out of the land of Egypt, from the house of bondage.

Deuteronomy 17:2-7

2If there be found among you, within any of thy gates which the LORD thy God giveth thee, man or woman, that hath wrought wickedness in the sight of the LORD thy God, in transgressing his covenant,

3And hath gone and served other gods, and worshipped them, either the sun, or moon, or any of the host of heaven, which I have not commanded;

4And it be told thee, and thou hast heard of it, and enquired diligently, and, behold, it be true, and the thing certain, that such abomination is wrought in Israel:

5Then shalt thou bring forth that man or that woman, which have committed that wicked thing, unto thy gates, even that man or that woman, and shalt stone them with stones, till they die.

6At the mouth of two witnesses, or three witnesses, shall he that is worthy of death be put to death; but at the mouth of one witness he shall not be put to death.

7The hands of the witnesses shall be first upon him to put him to death, and afterward the hands of all the people. So thou shalt put the evil away from among you.

Now you can explain to us how those passages don’t really mean what they say, I’m not going to stick around for that.

Timothy Kincaid
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

I’m not going to stick around for that.

Please don’t.

As usual, your cherry picked texts have nothing to do with Christian theology. While your continued insistence that “if it’s in the text it must be a Christian tenet” may work with other antiChristianists, it simply is wrong.

The codes dealing with paganism in Deuteronomy were not adopted by Christianity. It isn’t that “more muslims than christians take this seriously” but rather that absolutely no Christians believe that these scripture apply to either Christianity or to how they should treat those who do not share the faith.

In fact, I doubt that there are any Jews (who, in theory might be held by Deuteronomical codes) that believe that these scriptures have a literal application to how they worship today.

I’m sorry that this doesn’t fit well with your antiChristianist campaign. Well, no actually, I’m not.

Timothy Kincaid
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

And now let’s return to the topic at hand: the views of the Iman at Park51

Emily K
January 27th, 2011 | LINK

Brutus: tl;dr

Mihangel apYrs
January 28th, 2011 | LINK

way to get onside with the fundies!

“these muzzies can’t be all bad if they hate the fags”

Penguinsaur
January 28th, 2011 | LINK

As usual, your cherry picked texts have nothing to do with Christian theology. While your continued insistence that “if it’s in the text it must be a Christian tenet” may work with other antiChristianists, it simply is wrong.

“All the crazy violent BS in my holy book doesn’t count, but all that crazy violent BS in Islam’s holy book totally does count!”

L. Junius Brutus
January 29th, 2011 | LINK

Emily: “Brutus: tl;dr”

I understand. Reading is not your forte, or you would have read a book by now.

Penguinsaur: ““All the crazy violent BS in my holy book doesn’t count, but all that crazy violent BS in Islam’s holy book totally does count!””

Not too surprising, if you were to realize that the Bible and the Koran are two very different books, and that they are viewed in a different way. Christians view the Bible as divinely inspired, whereas (‘mainstream’, non-fundamentalist) Muslims view the Koran as the uncreated, eternal word of God. Thus, Christians don’t have to take the “crazy violent BS” seriously (and how many Christians do?), while Muslims do. It therefore should not come as a surprise that it’s hard to find a civilized Muslim-majority state.

Timothy Kincaid
January 29th, 2011 | LINK

Penguinsaur,

The problem with trying to attribute attitudes to others is that you actually have to be somewhat close or else you look like a fool.

For example, when you quoted me above and attributed a hypocritical attitude to me, you made one glaring mistake: I don’t quote the Koran – I don’t talk about “the crazy violent BS in Islam’s holy book”. I don’t assume that I can cherry pick text to prove some point.

I am not a scholar of Islam and cannot discuss with any authority the teachings and interpretations of the various sects of that faith. And to thrown down some cut-and-paste words as some trump card would be intellectually dishonest of me – just as it is intellectually dishonest when antiChristians cherry pick scripture to try and set up strawmen about “what Christians believe.”

I do know what Imam Abdallah Adhami believes, however. He told us.

Timothy Kincaid
January 29th, 2011 | LINK

Brutus,

Don’t quote me on this, I’m only going by what I’ve been told.

But I understand that much of Malaysia views the Koran in a manner that Western Christianity views the Bible – as a divinely inspired Word of God, but not one that is taken literally at all times. Thus, Malaysia has some religious freedom and political stability. Even some degree of social acceptance of gay people. I think you could probably call the country civilized.

Again, I know little about Malaysia and this is likely not a very sophisticated analysis.

Leave A Comment

All comments reflect the opinions of commenters only. They are not necessarily those of anyone associated with Box Turtle Bulletin. Comments are subject to our Comments Policy.

(Required)
(Required, never shared)

PLEASE NOTE: All comments are subject to our Comments Policy.