Twisting Islam to Justify Cruelty Essay

In Mohr’s essay there are one major aspect, with two parts, that fuel the hate fire against homosexuality. This aspect is religion. The first part of religion

“Fight in the name of God and in the ‘path of god’. Combat those who disbelieve in God.” The quote above is an excerpt from Matthew Gordon’s book, “The Rise of Islam”. Throughout the course of history, many religions have had a profound effect on western civilization. During the early 5th century a religion arose that had an extremely important impact on western civilization. The Arabic prophet Muhammad founded the religion known today as Islam. Violence, diplomacy, Arabic tradition, and public law played a vital role in the rise and conquest of Islam. These four key elements that fostered the rise of Islam helped establish one of the largest religions in western civilization.

During the 1980’s indulging in homosexual activity was considered in crime, people were imprisoned when caught doing so. But in 2003 some parts of the United States, suspended the law, and made homosexuality legal, soon European countries such as Canada, Belgium, and Netherlands passed an act which approved of homosexual weddings (Bonvillain 2006). If one digs deeper into this issue, where these debatable, one can find that it roots back from religions. Most religion disapprove of homosexuality but in religions such as Hindu, for sexuality, scriptures of homosexual activity only stated that it was normal and natural, to be attracted to the same sex (Bonvillain 2006). But in today’s society the main issue is regarding the issue of males being attracted to each other, an example of this issue is ‘Homophobia of men’. Homosexuality is considered to be a cultural construct, which apart from the ‘lesbian identities’ gave rise to the ‘gay identities’ (Herek 1986). It is common for normal men, to avoid influencing with homosexual men, as they fear what the public might think of them being judged as not ‘masculine’, where as its more normal for woman to associate with lesbians or homosexual women, as they are not being judged by the rest of the females (Herek 1986). Studies showed, that the social construction of gay identities meant that there was something psychologically wrong with that person,

The Qur’an stated that God does not love aggressors. The Qur’an stated that you should fight for the sake of God against those that fight against you, but only if they attack first. Upon being attacked, you should slay them where you find them and drive them out of the places from where they drove you; fight against them until God’s religion reigns supreme. For nonreligious violence, the Qur’an stated mankind has the right to guard himself against evil, but only if the means are just; one should not devour one's property by unjust means or be the first to attack.

About two years ago I read Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s memoir “Infidel” and was immensely moved by her story, especially the atrocities she went through in her childhood in Africa and the way she struggled to flee from an oppressive life. At that time, I could not imagine that anyone (except fanatic Muslims), let alone victims of the same oppression that she was, would not share her feelings and views. However, the reading of Ian Buruma’s Murder in Amsterdam sheds light on bigger and obscure components of this story, which clearly influenced some people to disapprove her behavior – even Islamic women. Like in Hirsi Ali’s story, Ian Buruma also identifies nuances in the main episode of the book – an episode that at face value could be described as a

Rabbi David Lau, Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi said that the Torah forbids acts of violence and injury, especially attacks that attempt to cause death. Rabbi Lau said that

The Quran mentions, “ And slay them whenever you come upon them, and expel them from where they expelled you; persecution is more grievous than slaying … Fight them till there is no persecution and the religion is God’s; then if they give over, there shall be no enmity save for evildoers … holy things demand retaliation” (8:238). In accordance with the holy Quran, being defensive is very significant which means that people can fight as long as they are doing it for a relevant reason. Slaying the enemies is considered less grievous than persecution. Therefore, the enemies would be slain if they start the conflict, and the battle wouldn’t end unless the enemies surrender and only then would God forgive them and so would the

Brian Whitaker, in his paper ‘Unspeakable Love: Gay and Lesbian Life in the Middle East’, argues that homophobia in Arab Muslim countries “is not a religious or a cultural issue, but is foremost a political problem of which culture and religion are reliant factors”, arguing that Homophobia in the Muslim world can be attributed to the attitude this world has to its counterpart, the modern secular European and Western

One of the Qur’an’s teachings state that, “to those against whom war is made, permission is given to fight, because they are wronged; and verily. Allah is most powerful for their aid; they are those who have been expelled from their homes in defiance of right, for no cause except that they say, our Lord is Allah. Did not Allah check one set of people by means of another, there would surely have been pulled down monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques, in which the name of Allah is commemorated in abundant measure? Allah will certainly aid those who aid his cause; for verily Allah is full of Strength, Exalted in Might, able to enforce His Will” (The Holy Quran,

Ever since September 11, 2001 Americans along with the majority of the world’s population have been skeptical of Muslims. It’s a sad reality but it’s hard for people to think of a Muslim without linking them directly to terrorism. But these assumptions aren’t totally out of the blue—the Muslim’s religion, Islam, teaches a low tolerance for other religions and the Islamic government has no separation of church and state, so it’s only normal to assume that their government shall have a low tolerance as well—some however, immediately translate this into terrorism. Through the Islamic government and religion, relations with foreign countries, and separation amongst themselves it can be concluded that Islamic Fundamentalism is clearly a threat

The verse used supporting this argument would be “And slay them wherever you find them” (Quran 2:191) this does support their argument this is extreme but who does them refer to?. Before considering the same verse with the verse before and the next few verses could be have the answer it needs to be clarified that “There is no compulsion in religion” (Quran 2:256) and Islam encourages Muslims to tolerate different religions not kill them. Back to the verses “Fight in the cause of Allah those who fight you, but do not transgress limits; for Allah loveth not transgressors.(190)And slay them wherever you catch them, and turn them out from where they have Turned you out (Mecca); for tumult and oppression are worse than slaughter; but fight them not at the Sacred Mosque, unless they (first) fight you there; but if they fight you, slay them. Such is the reward of those who suppress faith. (191) But if they cease, Allah is Oft-forgiving, Most Merciful. (192) And fight them on until there is no more Tumult or oppression, and there prevail justice and faith in Allah; but if they cease, Let there be no hostility except to those who practice oppression.(193) The prohibited month for the prohibited month,- and so for all things prohibited,- there is the law of equality. If then any one transgresses the prohibition against you, Transgress ye likewise against him. But fear Allah, and know that Allah is with those who

In the days after September 11, 2001, American leaders rushed to portray Islam as a peaceful religion that had been "hijacked" by a fanatical band of terrorists. One hopes that these assurances were merely tactical—that nobody was meant to believe them and that they were meant to assure the Muslim world that the inevitable American

Ever since September 11, 2001, Americans and many others have been asking themselves whether Islam is a violent religion. In some ways, this is an easy question to answer. religions are not violent, and people who are violent. Places like Myanmar. explained that even certain interpretations of Buddhism -- a religion associated in the United States with meditation, mindfulness, and the Dalai Lama 's embrace of non-violence -- can, in fact, produce violent manifestations. a religion such as Buddhism cannot itself be classified as non-violent. indeed, anything as vast and complicated as a religious tradition cannot be so definitively defined.

Khalid Zaheer is a fervent critic of liberal and religious extremism, and firmly believes that Islam provides a remedy for this plague by preaching an ideology of a pluralistic society that espouses of peace, harmony and egalitarianism. His article, “The Salman Rushdie Case: An Islamic View” was posted on his official website in July 2007 and is aimed at addressing the resentment against Salman Rushdie’s controversial book “The Satanic Verses” in the Muslim community. Muslims accused Rushdie of apostasy and blasphemy against their prophet and demanded his immediate execution. In his article, Zaheer bases his claims on credible historical religious evidence and argues that the Muslim demand for Rushdie’s death is absolutely un-Islamic, since Islamic law has never suggested capital punishment for blasphemy and irtidad - apostasy. Zaheer’s effective use of credible sources and logical progression of ideas along with the rhetorical devices efficiently develop his argument and persuade the reader. However, his occasional fallacious reasoning and overlooking of significant details make the reader question the reliability of his assertions.

However, Jihad’s age old association with violence was nearly unavoidable. Struggle can rather easily be translated into a call to conduct an external Jihad for the Islamic faith. For example, a verse in the Qu’ran states, “go forth, light armed and heavy armed, and strive with your wealth and your lives in the way of Allah” (Church 111). This verse clearly pairs Jihad (“strive”) with external violence (“go forth, light armed and heavy armed”) (Church 111). Indeed, violent Jihad was an obvious necessity because the Muslim community had always been a religious and political faction. Many lost their lives to spread and defend the newfound faith in Arabia and eventually to locations far beyond. Jihad’s association with violence and religious duty made it an ideal expression for Muslims to justify “lesser Jihad,” or the notion of external conflict, centered on the idea of spreading the faith (Church 112).