Muslim MPs Were Right to Vote in favour of Gay Marriage

gaymarriage

A number of Muslim MPs voted in parliament last week in favour of the Marriage (Same Sex Couples) Bill. The House of Commons voted in favour of the Bill with the final tally being 400 in favour and 175 against, giving the Bill a large 225 majority.

The Muslim MPs have come in for expected criticism from more traditional quarters. I even received a text message allegedly from one UK-based ‘Shaykh’ saying that the Muslim MPs needed to repent and renew their faith!

Sadiq Khan – the Labour high-flyer who is the Shadow Secretary of State for Justice – felt it necessary to issue a statement on his website outlining his reasons for voting in favour of gay marriage. Here is the key passage:

“I voted in favour of the legislation because I believe that this is fundamentally an issue of equality. The last Labour Government made a number of important changes to improve equalities legislation, including the introduction of Civil Partnerships in 2004 in face of considerable opposition. Civil partnerships now have widespread support and I believe it is the right time to take the next step.

“I firmly believe in marriage. Marriage is an important statement of love and long term commitment, and has long been the main way that the state recognises and shows support for loving relationships.  I believe that couples who love each other and want to make that long-term commitment to each other should be able to have a civil marriage regardless of their gender or their sexuality. Same sex couples should have the same recognition from the state as everyone else.”

Sadiq’s reasoning seems entirely sensible and fair-minded. Sadiq has a distinguished background as a human rights lawyer and I recall that he was one of the Labour MPs back in 2005 that courageously defied the then Prime Minister Tony Blair when he tried to increase the pre-charge detention period for terror suspects from 28 days to 90 days. Sadiq Khan came in for a lot of criticism from Labour whips at the time who told him that his Labour career was effectively over. Thankfully they were very wrong!

So, Sadiq Khan should be really congratulated for defending an important principle: people should not be needlessly discriminated against just because of their religious background or sexual orientation etc.

It is not hugely surprising that the main UK religious institutions, including the Catholic Church, the Muslim Council of Britain etc came out opposed to the Bill. Religious organisations are often rather conservative and do not have a great record when it comes to supporting the right of all human beings to be treated equally under the law. I tried looking for the reasons why the MCB, for example, opposed the Bill and found an announcement on their website which says the following:

“The MCB stands opposed to discrimination in all its forms, including homophobia. Although the government base this bill on grounds of ‘equality’, it does not require us to define different things by the same term. Marriage has always been between a man and a woman and is something that does not need to be redefined.”

I don’t really understand the argument why marriage should not be ‘redefined’. Why should it not be redefined to include same sex couples? Why is it anybody else’s business if two people of the same sex want to get legally married? 

The last couple of decades have seen major progress being made in the UK to further equality and safeguard minorities – including faith groups – from discrimination. There is no reason I can see why gay people should not also be treated fairly under the law.

Update: Mail on Sunday – “Death Threats to UK’s Top Muslim MP Who Voted for Gay Marriage”

This entry was posted in Islam and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

176 Responses to Muslim MPs Were Right to Vote in favour of Gay Marriage

  1. Pingback: "Muslim" MP's vote for same sex marriage. - Page 3

  2. Pingback: Inayat Bunglawala: Muslim MPs Were Right to Vote in favour of Gay Marriage

  3. azhar says:

    It looks like the Barelvi’s have declared takfir on those muslims supporting gay marriage. What are your thoughts on that Innayat?

    • My thoughts? Thank God we do not live in a state where religious ‘scholars’ have any real power!

      • azhar says:

        Yes most scholars are ridiculous. They have a good point here though. You said the Quran is an authoritative text. Gay marriage and homosexuality clearly contradict what the Quran says. Why then as a muslim do you support it?

        Or maybe we should just call a spade a spade. Islam is anti homosexuality. Muslims like you are trying to twist every possible element of the religion to assimilate into this culture.

        • You have every right to believe that gay sex is sinful. Whatever your private beliefs they are really no one else’s business. Unless, of course, you try and discriminate against other people on the basis of your beliefs. Then it becomes the concern of society. In the case of the UK, our parliament has decided that gay people should have the same right to have a civil marriage as straight people. That seems very reasonable to me. I think trying to end different forms of discrimination against minorities is very commendable. In that sense, modern secular states are a substantial improvement over religious states which often enshrine discrimination against minorities in law.

          • azhar says:

            Pedophiles are also a minority. Some researchers have come to the conclusion that it is a sexuality, that cannot be changed and nor should it. Pedophiles cannot help but be attracted to children. Therefore, social workers, police and law makers should change their attitudes to it in order to put in place provisions to support pedophiles so they can manage their sexuality responsibly. Because trying to change pedophile sexuality is oppression and impossible. However, that would include changing the attitudes of society. Society has a phobia of pedophiles and they persecute them, even the non offending types, thereby making them go underground where they can become a danger to children. Unless the age of consent is lowered which a lobby group in Norway tried to do in the last decade.

            I’m sure as children become ever increasingly sexualised and assertive, there will be people like you and those mp’s bowing to the pressure to conform. Enjoining the bad and forbidding the good.

            Furthermore, this law has basically given the green light to mosques and churches to discriminate against homosexuals by giving them the quadruple lock. It basically says your not accepted, just like B&B owners who do not want gays sleeping in their homes. The next step would be for muslims like you and those mp’s to pressure and mislead the community to accept it in the mosques. Of course when your parliament makes it law.

            Also, homosexuality is not universal, it has not been consistent in its manifestation across history or culture. What is considered Pederasty in the subcontinent and middle east is bunched in under the homosexual label. Thereby normalising abuse and perversion.

            Lastly, it’s dumbfounding that a minority group identifies itself through it’s sexuality, even gays agree with this. I would love to see the day when we are all starving and the instinct to survive and reproduce would make these ‘identity gays’ and gay culture obsolete. Then you wont have anything to do Innyat, Rushnara and Sadiq – maybe make some chai for the saab?

            • Parliament made clear that freedom of religion was being protected because religious institutions will not be compelled to hold same-sex marriages if they do not wish to do so. At the same time, it advanced gay equality by permitting them to have civil marriages. Do you see why a secular state is generally a better idea for protecting minorities than religious states which often enshrine bigotry and intolerance against minorities in law?

              • azhar says:

                Religious states do not exist as the men who lead them confine themselves to study of Islamic theology and say things like “do not seek knowledge that Allah hasn’t commanded you to seek”. Ayatollah Khomeini said that economics was for donkeys. That says it all really. When Mullah Omar, after liberating Afghanistan of the rapists and the looters declared himself Ameer Ul Mumineen, the vast majority of scholars rebuffed him as he was illiterate and unqualified. But, we as muslims accept these same scholars and leaders as enlightened people when they are not.

                Also, do not think to yourself that the west and the east will become reconciled and we will live happily ever after. There will be a clash of civilizations or the east will become like the west and forego all of its cultural and religious heritage. Just like Japan has more professional Elvis impersonators then the west. We will take on the characteristics, values and traditions of those that will dominate us.

                Also, what you consider bigotry from religious folk is rooted in Islam. Homophobia is an oxymoron. Its not an irrational fear but can be rebutted and even refuted and classified as a mental disorder such as pedophilia is. Thus, discrimination becomes meaningless. If the homosexual lobby wasn’t so narrow minded then better research can be done.

                Do you not see that this law which you celebrating actually pits the religious and the gay against each other and discrimination becomes inevitable. Protecting religious freedom comes at the cost of gay equality and vice versa. It is ridiculous.

                I’ll give you something else to ponder. After studying feminism i came to the conclusion that Islam is sexist, it goes against the understanding of gender equality. That’s if you consider gender equality as the complete equality between the sexes, whereas Islam emphasizes the differences between the sexes and put provisions in the form of rights and responsibilities for the different sexes. My point being, accept Islam as it is and not as what you want it to be. Islam and only Islam will liberate muslims.

                Lastly, equality as a term is difficult to comprehend. If we both had a cake then you may think that the best way to share this cake would be to half it. But what if i just wanted the icing which is 1% and you wanted the sponge which 99%. Hey, but the law says it’s 50/50 or your a frigging bigot.

            • Musaafira says:

              Well Said bro Azhar, Jazaakh’Allaah Khayr and Alhamdulillaah for Muslims like you.

            • Logical Muslim says:

              What is the difference between homosexuality and paedophilia? Nothing.
              What is the difference between homosexual relationships and paedophilic relationships? Consent.

              1. Persons whom are defined as being equals and having a consensual relationship. This applies to persons of any sex.

              2. Persons defined as not being equals and having a harmful relationship. This applies to any gender combination as the only relevant dynamic is the inability to give consent due to the lack of maturity of the unequal. Should the age of consent be lowered? Perhaps. But that is a separate issue.

              Exploiting and harming a child physically, psychologically, or both is a crime. Just as it should be. People whom are deemed to be sufficiently capable of presiding over the interests and affairs of their own person should not be discriminated against in any way, shape, or form.

              It is an equal rights issue, and nothing more.
              Religion should not be infringed upon and forced to accept homosexuality.
              Society does have to accept it, because discrimination is illegal.

              Religion can continue their teachings on sexuality and family values unaltered.
              But within the socioeconomical sphere of public life and business affairs, there should be no discrimination. That is illegal.

              Example:
              Can a religious institute deny a person membership and entry to their house of worship based on discriminatory grounds? Yes. If we are talking about a legitimately recognized Church, Synagogue, Mosque, etc.
              Can a business refuse you service or deny entry to their public store based on discriminatory grounds? No.

              Society and the government should not dictate your religion. Your religion should not dictate the government and society. Understand?

            • Child Brides in Islam says:

              Errr….as a Muslim…you really don’t want to draw attention to pedophilia…ahem…
              At what age can a girl be married in Islam …..oooopppssss….

  4. Khalid says:

    People quote scientific evidence to support homosexuality , stating that people are born homosexual rather than adopting that particular lifestyle. That stance clearly contradicts islamic teachings which forbids such behaviour. How do you reconcile your islamic faith with science in this regard? Would you oppose those who take islamic teaching literally and advise them to accept scientific findings? Please explain. Thank you.

    • This is not about science (in any case I am not really aware of science having anything to say about homosexuality). It is about equality and minorities being free from discrimination.

    • Jamal says:

      I would just point out that religion is a protected class and religion can be changed. However, we do not require people to change their faith or be banned from marriage.

  5. Khalid says:

    Who are we to define marriage when God was the one who ordained it for us in the first place? Marriage belongs to Religion not for man to manipulate it to his liking. Out of the main religions such as Islam and Christianity where does it condone same sex marriages?

    So i hear you say: ‘These people may be atheists, they do not need to believe in God nor do they need faith to dictate what they can and can’t do regardless if they have faith or not.’ – Then simply they should not use the term ‘Marriage’ but rather call it a ‘Civil Partnership’, then we wouldn’t be having this controversial debate and raising eyebrows.

    ———————–

    Form the Quran
    An-Nisa 4:1

    O mankind, fear your Lord, who created you from one soul and created from it its mate and dispersed from both of them many men and women. And fear Allah , through whom you ask one another, and the wombs. Indeed Allah is ever, over you, an Observer.

    From the Bible:
    Genesis. 2:18, 21-24

    The Lord God said, ‘It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him’…and while he was sleeping, he took one of the man’s ribs and closed up the place with flesh.

    Then the Lord God made a woman from the rib he had taken out of the man, and he brought her to the man. The man said, ‘This is now bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called ‘woman,’ for she was taken out of man.’ For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh. (NIV)

    ———————–

    As you say Inayat I too believe in equality:

    “Why is it anybody else’s business if two people of the same sex want to get legally married?”

    I agree it should not concern everybody, however it only becomes our business when ‘they’ try to manipulate and demand what is ‘forbidden’ in our faiths to conform with their forbidden desires – when neither of our faiths will accept such a relationship.

    No man is in any position to redefine ‘Marriage’, let’s not sugar coat this; redefining marriage is like redefining the words of God whatever religion you belong to.

    Yes we have seen major progress in the UK for equality and safeguarding minorities and i wholly support this. I also agree with you that Gay people should be treated fairly as after all they are human beings just like everybody else. If they want to marry the same sex then we should let them be; but they should not be allowed to interfere with faith. We should give them what they want which is a ‘Civil Partnership’ and not ‘Marriage’.

    As a hetrosexual i too have rights which need to be protected. I too have a faith which needs to be respected and understood. Therefore we should not be imposing ‘Gay Marriages’ or gay rights in our Churches and Mosques which not only contradict our beliefs but also cause great offence.

    Rather same sex couples should not associate with any religious group or body and most importantly it should not be called ‘Marriage’. Unfortunately Gay couples cannot have it both ways, they need to choose whether they want faith involved and have a hetrosexual marriage or if they want a civil same-sex partnership with no involvement from any faith.

    They can perfectly have their relationships legalized under ‘Civil Partnership’ because ‘Man’ can change what it has created along with it’s laws. However i would like to reiterate again – man cannot change the orders from God which is what a lot of people are sugar coating and are trying to pull the wool over our eyes under the pretence of ‘Equality’, ‘Discrimination’ and ‘Freedom’.

    Fortunately for me i have Gay friends who respect my views on this and i wouldn’t be surprised if more homosexuals agreed with me too. Then there will be those who will disagree, those who have a more radical approach forcing their ‘Gay rights’ into our faiths; Mosques and Churches.

    Khalid

    • Khalid: No faith group will be ‘forced’ to conduct same sex marriages in their places of worship if they do not wish to do so. Read Sadiq Khan’s statement that I linked to above in my blog. He says the following:

      “I appreciate that some people and religious groups take a different view and I agree that no Church, Mosque or other religious organisation should be required to hold same-sex marriages if they do not wish to do so. Freedom of religion is extremely important and it is important that faith groups should be protected. Freedom of religion is therefore rightly written onto the face of the legislation, meaning that no Church, Mosque or other faith group will be obliged to hold same sex marriage ceremonies if they do not wish to.

      “Decisions on whether to celebrate religious same sex marriage should be a matter for faith groups, and the Bill explicitly rules out any Church or individual Minister being required to perform same sex marriages. The protection of religious freedom is rightly set out on the face of the Bill, which includes a ‘quadruple-lock’ for faith groups who do not wish to celebrate same sex marriage.”

      That sounds very reasonable, does it not?

      • Khalid says:

        My only qualm remains to be with the terminology that is used when it comes to legalizing same sex partnerships. It is not a ‘Marriage’ but rather a ‘Civil Partnership’ – there is a very clear difference in the two as i have highlighted at the beginning of my earlier post. (I will not go into the differences)

        But to give you an example of what i mean and I don’t mean to go off topic; of all people you would know better when it comes to Islamophobia especially in our mainstream media. Headlines like ‘Muslim Terrorists…’ or ‘Muslims Extremist….’ is very misleading. Extremism is extremism and terrorism is terrorism – what has it got to do with Islam or Muslims? Likewise same sex-couples and our politicians need to revise this new legislation and should refrain from using the word ‘Marriage’ with something which is actually a civil partnership only recently passed in parliament by MPs.

        It actually causes offence to people like myself who actually know their faith – not just by name like some of our MPs but by practicing what God has asked of us.

        We need to differentiate what is from man and what is from god. Civil partnerships only recently legalized and Marriage (A relationship between two different sexes) legalized by God from the very beginning.

        My only request for MPs, Gay rights groups and Homosexuals who support this form of ‘equality’ is to stick with the term ‘Civil Partnership’ and refrain from using the word ‘Marriage’ in respect for people who belong to faith groups and have religious ceremonies such as Marriages.

        Thanks

        • Khalid, it’s a “tomato” or “tamato” issue, depending upon how you pronounce it, but the meaning is the same…no, the meanings are not the same. Marriage for those who meet certain standards within Islam as in secular societies…and gender has nothing to do with it…Surah 24:30-32. If you don’t want a gay marriage, please don’t have one, but leave it to those who do the freedom to do so under the law. Not a difficult task to accomplish.

        • Jamal says:

          Marriage does not belong to religion. Religions in the UK can officiate weddings with legal standing as the government allows them to. The legal power is derived from the state.

          Your line of reasoning means athiests would not be allowed to marry.

          Gay marriage has existed even in ancient times.

          Marriage was invented by man and has been redefined by man, otherwise muslims would not be able to get legally married in the UK unless they did so in a christian church since that is how things used to operate in the UK unyil we redefined marriage laws.

  6. Amorphous says:

    I presume on this basis Inayat, you would also support those who wish to legalise polygamy?

    • Yes, definitely! Polygamy has long been practiced by many societies and has much going for it. Nobody else’s business really.

      • Philip says:

        So then if polygamy is legalised would that also mean you would support the rights of groups of gay men to also marry each other in a same-sex polygamous marriage?

        Are you sure you have really thought this through, Inayat? Or could it be that you have decided to sacrifice your religion, culture, morals and values for the sake of future career advancement and acceptance within liberal British society?

    • Jamal says:

      Gay marriage challenges the gender requirement of one spouse vis a vis the other.

      Polygamy challenges the number of participants or marriages which can be entered into at any one time.

      The ban against polygamy could consistently stand. History overwhelming proves that one does not lead to the other.

  7. Ahmed says:

    What do you think Muslim MPs have gained by voting in favour of this bizarre law that will only ‘benefit’ a fringe minority within a minority? How are they going to spend their presumed new shinny pieces of influence with their party masters? Thats the real question that the Muslim community has a right to know.

    The outlook is ominous. The trouble is that the community that made many of these Muslim MPs, supported them blindly with votes and money just because they advertised themselves as fellow believers of Islam, is now unlikely to derive any benefit from them being in positions of power. Why? Because pretending that you’re voting out of personal principle and consciousness (when your publicly acclaimed faith is Islam – which can never endorse such a deranged concept for anyone!) rather than for real politikal gain simply exposes your personal hypocrisy.

    When you’re acting like a hypocrite, can you still be trusted? Even by your parliamentary colleagues that you are so keen to please?? In the short term perhaps, for some unknown gain. But in the long run it is the recipe for professional and personal ruin. May Allah (swt) guide them.

    • Why do you presume only the worst? Could it not be that these MPs (or at least some of them) voted in favour of the Bill because they genuinely believe that it will help lessen discrimination and bigotry in our society?

      • Ahmed says:

        That is possible yes. But then they should cease and renounce their support from Muslim community voters, lobbyists, philanthropists and organisations on the basis that they are a ‘Muslim’ MP out to protect Muslim / Islamic interests! Thats the impression they are peddling when happily receiving Muslim-bloc votes and donations. Continuing to do so would be utterly hypocritical – I’m sure you would agree with that??

        • No, I am not convinced they all do that. Certainly not Sadiq whom I know a little. He was a committed human rights lawyer before he became an MP. His opposition to 90 days pre-charge detention and his support for gay marriage is quite consistent with his human rights background and we are fortunate to have someone like him in parliament. If only there were many more like him.

          • Ahmed says:

            Well it seems you know something that we don’t about Sadiq Khan in particular. I.e. his value for the Muslim community and protecting its interests. Would you care to enlighten us? I for one as an ordinary Joe Public Muslim am not privy to such concealed matters and would like be interested in knowing (as many are now doubting his and others worth).

            PS. I am a different Ahmed to the other one incidentally!

            • If you are unhappy with the way Sadiq Khan has performed as an MP then I suggest you vote him out at the next election and try and replace him with someone who better represents your views. That is democracy.

              I personally find him to be a decent and likeable bloke. I hope his constituents agree.

  8. April says:

    Inayat you are seriously out of step and don’t even understand the basics of islam. We are a fed up with you so called “muslims” who have twisted the deen to forfili your own political agenda’s. Shame on you if you understand the concept of shame.

  9. azhar says:

    Whatever your agenda. It is a joke. Your an enigma, like your lost in the dessert flip flopping on which direction to take. You have gone against very basic Islamic principles.
    You could of actually become a voice of reason against extremists in our community but instead you chip away at your own credibility as an islamic or muslim apologist. You sit there celebrating something obviously haraam yet provide no defense of the actual subject i.e. homosexuality. Your like that nutty Taj Hargey. Seriously, even Asghar Bukhari is more reasonable then you.

    • I don’t need to provide a defence of homosexuality. The law does not care about your views on homosexuality as long as you do not discriminate against other people on account of their sexual orientation.That is surely a good thing and something which Muslim countries could learn a lot from. After all, discriminating against others on account of their ethnicity or religion is also deplorable, so why tolerate discrimination based on sexual orientation?

      • azhar says:

        “I don’t need to provide a defence of homosexuality”.

        That’s a joke right! Your proudly proclaiming how you have campaigned for muslims to accept homosexuality as a human right. You advocate for the Gay community. You laud the “muslim” mp’s who recognise and support homosexuality and similarly applaud them for voting for homosexuals to be included in the religious rites of marriage. Yet, you don’t have to provide a defence. Why? because you cannot defend what is abhorrent to Islam. Something which goes against the principles of Islam. If you did, then your heresy will be blatantly obvious.

        You and your ilk have basically opened the doors for mosques and churches to be hounded to accept homosexual marriage in their institutions. When it comes to the next vote i’.e. Should religious institutions be forced to accept homosexual marriage. You and your “muslim” mp’s will be happilly going along with it. When the muslim masses riot against it, you will be calling them extremists and backwards. Thank god they dont have any power right?

        And the joke of it all is that you have deluded yourself into thinking this would lessen bigotry, intolerance and discrimination.

        • azhar says:

          “The law does not care about your views on homosexuality as long as you do not discriminate against other people on account of their sexual orientation.That is surely a good thing and something which Muslim countries could learn a lot from.”

          Do you see the language you use. The law does not care as it has been decided, it cannot be discussed or debate honestly and openly.

          By your logic of not discriminating against someone’s sexuality, you must be accepting of all sexualities and not just celebrate one perverted strain.

          Hosni, Ben Ali, Saadam, King Hussein, bath party blah blah have all learned the secularism you advocate and it has only brought misery and violent reactions from the Islamists. The arab spring has repudiated people with your views, forcing your enlightened bullshit into the religious sphere and the muslim masses. Soon you will be advocating the legalisation of pederasty in muslim countries, under the banner of gay liberation.

          • What a useless argument! Do you think Iran, Sudan, Afghanistan under the Taliban, Saudi Arabia are model examples of religion-based governments? Then why choose Saddam Hussein etc.

            Let’s face it, human beings (regardless of their religious background or ethnicity or sexual orientation) have more freedoms and rights in secular Europe than they would in any form of religious state.

            • azhar says:

              Its a useless argument because you are advocating something, and promoting it in the muslim community – which you are not defending at all.

              The last religious state was the Ottoman empire. That is what i am advocating, a civil unified muslim state spanning all muslim countries. This will allow the unification of secularism and Islam, science and theology. There is no point in you continuously citing saudi etc as a standard bearer of religious states. Even the extremists agree, they are enemies of muslims. And, you forget the advancement, the past muslim empires afforded to minorities. We do not need to accept every single minority as some cause great harm to society.

              Innayat, i know you have changed your mind on many, many issues. I know changing your mind on these issues would be far more difficult as they go against the liberal elite, who are fond of you. But truth clearly stands out from error. This society affords us a great opportunity to learn what works and what doesn’t. A right to be gay and out isn’t greater then the rights afforded to us by Islam. Rejecting Islamic arguments or vice versa only polarises and causes divisions. Go back to studying Islam, i’m sure you will find answers.

              • azhar says:

                What a useless argument! Do you think Iran, Sudan, Afghanistan under the Taliban, Saudi Arabia are model examples of religion-based governments? Then why choose Saddam Hussein etc.

                Sorry i dont think i answered your question in the above post.
                Saddam was great – he liberated women and gave them many western rights. They were not model states but they were going in the right direction to modernise the country. The fact is secularism solves many problems but causes many at the same time. Secular states do not really care about the whole of society as some need to do the blue collar jobs – so it lets them have any rights they want even if it causes them massive problems.

          • Azhar, it appears you have more issues to deal with than the right of gays to marry. Do I sense a personal issue here?

  10. Ahmed says:

    Inayat…Inayat, when shall thou come back to us??

    Sadiq is a career politician…he has again proven he will stab the community in the back at the drop of a hat. Don’t make excuses for him, otherwise you will have to make excuses for all the below as well…we expected more from him.

    -He voted for Introducing ID cards which would have disproportionatley affected our community

    -Voted for the Glorification of Terrorism and Control Order legislation even though his former colleagues at Liberty have labelled some of these measures an affront to civil liberties

    -He voted in favour of anti-terror legislation which has gone on to affect and unjustly imprisoned people

    -Voted for the deployment of troops into Afghanistan

    -Voted against an investigation into one of the 21st centuries worst lies and breaches of international law which cost the lives of 1 million Iraqi’s

    And stop going on about these ‘conditions’ the Bill imposes to protect religous institutions, this ‘quadruple lock’ that Mr Khan keeps mentioning is folly, because I guarantee you in 20 years they will find a ‘quadruple key’ and this is what essentially makes man-made law with an absolute disregard for divine guidance (ie secularism) so fickle…

    Sadiq has done a huge dis-service to our community, just three weeks after a major Labour/Muslim community re-engagment event organised at the Islamic Cultural Centre (by grass root activists) where he took much of the limelight/kudos, to climb a few more steps up the ladder with his political masters and with lots of ‘Bismillahs’ and mentions from the Qur’an. He has made the job of encouraging our community to be principled participants in the political process all the harder. There are 8 Muslim MP’s, if they feared the day of Reckoning, when their voting records will be judged by the Almighty, they would have voted against this as many MP’s (ironically from the Conservatives) like Sarah Teather did so, or at the minimum (as this was a free vote) they would have abstained.

    Once bitten, twice shy, no problem, we need to go back to the drawing board, we will make sure the community has a long memory on this one.

    • Ahmed: If you want an MP who will vote the way you want on every issue that is important to you then you will have to stand as an MP yourself and get yourself elected. Otherwise, you have to work with what is out there.

      • Mohammad says:

        You have had not answer my question!, would you allow your son if he was gay to exercise his freedom under your own roof with his male partner?

        Would you also have any objections for him to marry his male partner under the bill your promoting.

        I apologise Inyat, we muslims are barbaric, have no mercy for others etc.

        From your logic I take it you have no issues with extra-martial sex for either sex, in that case would you allow your mother, daughters, brothers, sons and sisters to exercise their freedom.

        • Mohammad, you’re projecting and now I’m wondering why all the honor killings in the UK? other Muslim states? Seems to me mothers, daughter, fathers, brothers, sons and sisters are exercising their freedoms…maybe not in public, but exercising the old “in and out” all over the place. Makes you go ‘hummmm?

  11. Ahmed says:

    The gay rights movement will not stop at this law. This is just another battle in their war against religion. Do you seriously think that these safeguards are enough to protect religious institutions from being forced into conducting gay marriage? The UK and European courts will no doubt force it eventually, and even if that doesn’t happen then the government will do it anyway 10 or 20 years down the line.

    This law:
    -Forces teachers to promote may marriage alongside normal marriage to children.
    -Forces hotels to serve gay ‘married’ couples even if they want to sleep together in the same bed.
    -Forces registrar officers to conduct gay marriage even if they conscientiously object.
    -Forces counsellors to conduct marriage therapy for gay couples.
    etc. and these are just a few examples.

    When one wants to normalise a particular behaviour in society you do not do it all in one go. Instead you do it in small increments and allow people at each stage to become conditioned to accept it.

    1. First they legalised homosexuality in 1967. The Government assured everyone that this law was only aimed legalising the practice in private and any homosexual activities in public would remain illegal and not tolerated.

    2. Then the gay rights activists harassed the psychiatrists, invaded their conferences and protested outside their workplaces until they succeeded in convincing them to declassify it as a mental disorder in 1970s.

    3. They brought in civil partnerships in 2005. The Government and the opposition parties all assured the public that this would not be a stepping stone to eventual ‘gay marriage.’

    4. Despite all previous assurances that no one will be forced to accept homosexuality, equality laws passed in 2007 forced adoption agencies, even those run on religious principles, to consider gay couples on equal terms with heterosexuals. Most of the Catholic adoption agencies have NOW BEEN FORCED to close down.

    5. Anti sexual discrimination laws are passed in 2008. These are used to silence people around the country who wish to speak out against homosexuality. In 2012 three Muslims are JAILED for distributing leaflets that merely state the Islamic position on homosexuality.

    6. Now in 2013 they legalise ‘gay marriage’ and provide new assurances that this won’t be a stepping stone to eventually forcing religious institutions to conduct them.

    7. 2025. Under continued pressure from the gay rights lobby the Government passes legislation to force religious institutions to comply with equality laws and removes the safeguards passed in 2013. In similar fashion to the Catholic adoption agencies, mosques are forced to withdraw marriage contract services in order not to fall foul of the law. Marriage contracts in the Islamic community are now done privately and unofficially between the married parties and the couples later visit their local registrar office to have the civil marriage done.

    Inayat Bunglawala – If you are really a Muslim can can you support ‘gay marriage?’ It completely
    perverts one of our religion’s most important tenet, marriage. The Qur’an clearly states homosexuality is wrong, the hadiths clearly state it is wrong and the ulama all state it is wrong. Marriage is defined as a contract between a man and a woman for the purposes of legal sexual relations and the procreation of children, both in Islamic teachings and in thousands of years of practice and beliefs in other cultures.

    Anyway do you really think the gay rights activists/human rights activists who are pushing this law are really interested in marriage equality? I personally think most of them see it as another way of undermining religion and its institutions such as marriage. Few of them will even get married and most of the ones that do will be probably do it just to make a stand, as civil partnerships already provide the same benefits.

    • Ahmed, please do not lie, the Quran has nothing to say about homosexuality. It does provide that there are men who have no desire for women, as well as speak about mates without gender identity…but what you are referring to are unsubstantiated ahadith that has been used for centuries to make an analogy that homosexual sexual acts are the same as heterosexual acts that are not under the marriage contract. Correct that error by allowing all to marry and let Allah be the determiner of who is just and who is not. I think your behind is not broad enough to sit on Allah’s throne of judgment.

      • Musaafira says:

        Are you Gay? or do you not read the Quran? or shall I say you heavily rely on the translations to provide you with answers.
        Your Gay, that’s fine not a problem, but when you start changing and twisting what Allaah azzwaJal has made forbidden then I and many other Muslims have a problem.

        Either speak good or remain silent ‘Golden advice’, take it on board and don’t make your akhirah more difficult.

        Lahola wala Quwata illa billa.

        • Abu Mus'ab says:

          daayiee abdullaat is gay, in fact he’s the arch-homo, he’s got a video on youtube about his first husband, it’s so sick that i had to scrub my ears out after listening to that clip.

          He conducts gay marriages as well, and he seems to think he’s some authority on the deen spreading all his kufr.

          • Mus’ab, getting under your skin or are you close to a heart attack??? You know, truth has a way of doing that…making people feel uncomfortable when the obvious is made clear and the light bulb comes on. As to you having to scrub your ears…they needed cleaning out all of that wahabi-gook anyway…but as a learned man of various disciplines that relate to understanding Quran and Islamic theological thought, as well as other disciplines that aids in understanding our world today, don’t get too upset that (1) as a Muslim I have the right to speak my mind even if you don’t agree with it; and (2) don’t blow your top that I am speaking truth to power, no matter how corrupt it turns out to be.

        • Musaafira, thanks for your letting me and millions of sexually diverse people exist and live our lives fully…now that’s taking a very peaceful stance on samesex marriage. To respond to your questions…I am gay and have read Quran in Arabic and a number of other languages and by various authors/interpreters whether they are salafis, sufis or progressives. I am also versed in several disciplines as a linguist, lawyer–western and Islamic–and a progressive social activist, so my background and experience speaks to a wide array of how Islam works in our world. Where you have it wrong is that there is no monolithic, one-size-fits-all understanding of Islam and alternative interpretations have always existed and continue to exist…even the 5 schools of Islamic theological thought should be primary evidence that there has never been one and only one school of thought. Islam is expressed differently in each culture it has entered over the past 1500 years, again another example that there is no one way. It has been my experience that those who are most uncomfortable about diversity in views is speaking truth and it is good even when those who want to believe their point(s) of view is the “right” or “only” one…and that’s not truth on its face. The MPs did the right thing in a secular state, and for those who desire to see things as they do in few Hijaz and Gulf states, they are welcome to relocate and bask in their way of life. One day we will all know Allah’s determination, but to what I have seen some write here, Islam is not spread by the sword, but by the way of truth and understanding.

      • Asim says:

        I find it quite funny for you to accuse Ahmed of lying on the topic of homosexuality, so your basically accusing 1400 years of an established islamic thought and all the scholars and muslims involved as liars?
        The only difference of opinion within islamic scholarship in islamic history has been how to punish the one who commits the action, whether to stone, throw of a cliff (as is the view of Imam abu hanifah rah) the one who has been convicted in an islamic state of homosexuality, or to lash them.

        “Do you approach males among the worlds
        And leave what your Lord has created for you as mates? But you are a people transgressing.” Surah Shu’arah

        Dont try to twist these verse, had this been my own words you would a 100% understand these verses (had it been my own word) indicate a hatred and disgust towards homosexuality, stop being such a twisted “trasgressor” (Qur’an)

  12. masri says:

    Accepting that homosexuality should have a legal voice and believing that judging by other then the rule of Allah is better will make you a kaafir. There is no “difference of opinion” as you people like to spout out. This is by consensus. Well done for putting yourself outside of Islam. I always knew you was a munafiq!

    • Thank God people like you have no power in this country.

      • Abdullah says:

        Actually, Masri is entirely correct.

        If you sin, you may still be Muslim although a sinful one. (Allah knows best the condition of our hearts). If you actually believe what you are doing in halal (permissable) even though it is haraam (forbidden) then you have disbelieved because you have rejected the message of Islam. Of course I can provide many proofs from Qur’an and other sources of Islam but I fear that you will simply mock them so I will not share them with you.

        May Allah guide us all.

    • Masri says:

      I’m not in England. Munafiqeen like you can love England as much as you want. Consume yourself over there. You are just a house negro. Nothing new. Another MI5 paid munafiq.

      • Thank God you are not in England! I am sure you are busy transforming whatever country you do live in into a peaceful, tolerant state. Or perhaps not.

        • Masri says:

          Tell the people that being homosexual is wrong. Clear the air so we know where you stand.

          • Masri, I am a black man, I am gay, and your calling someone a Negro indicates you have a dislike for blacks and your words are to demean. Now what stereotype describes you best??? Let me ponder???

            • Masri says:

              I am also black of West Indian origin. Guess you didn’t see that one coming. As for you being Gay, May Allah guide you to what is correct and remove you from this heinous crime against Allah and humanity . I am still waiting for Inayat to come out and say whether he thinks being homosexual is sinful or not and if he believes it is not then I would like some evidence from both the Quran and Sunnah as well as who, from the famous scholars of the Muslim Ummah both past and present, agreed with his stance on this affair. I await patiently

              • Masri, thanks for writing, but first, name-calling and playing “guilt by association” is not very mature in either one’s approach to a query nor a way to prove your points of view. Also, and very important to the discussion, Allah has not sent a memo stating you are his replacement for judging what is and is not “correct” and making judgments in the realm where it does you no good, only shows that you could do great harm to someone and that means to me your humanity is lacking. It further reveals you are limited in your understanding and have inculcated a lot of pablum-oriented views and depend upon false fallacies, i.e., the number fallacy where more folks supposedly think like you do and thus your point of view is correct. Being taqlid by following what others have said without your own in depth study and review of original sources does not guarantee understanding or enlightenment, brother–at best a difference of opinion. If you’re black and of West Indian origin, that doesn’t give you any form of “uppersonship” dude, it just says you’re from the same hemisphere, have a similar history like black americans and coming into Islam was a transition…nothing more. What the MPs did was the right thing to do for all British citizens. But thanks for you comments.

              • Asim says:

                😀 Ouch ” Guess you didn’t see that one coming”
                That certainly left a little someone with little to say 🙂

                wassalam brother

  13. azhar says:

    Oh don’t call him a munafiq. He’s a new age modernist muslim. Him and his mates are trying to engineer a new British Islam, which our children will accept to integrate into this society. He thinks he fits in. He’s finally found his enlightenment.

    These people criticise mutawattir hadiths as unreliable, against science and written by fallible beings, they say these things willy nilly because it doesn’t fit in with their understanding of evolution. Bearing this in mind, i just read a gay muslim advocating for Nikah and for mosques to accept this as an Islamic right. What is ironic is that he used hadith’s and verses from the quran to justify his position. I can just imagine Innayat being a new age apologist on the big questions, explaining how Muhammad (saw) was peaceful, loving and righteous, all the while using sahih hadiths. Maybe he already has.

    Innayat – I’m sure you will come back to us like a yo yo. Inshallah. Maybe when they start really hating brown people again. Think about it – doctors and lawyers paved the way to exterminate their fellow country men. Jews who had integrated – Jews who even had the right skin colour. Yet the brightest, most scientifically enhanced society tried to exterminate their fellow citizens. It started with legalising the murder of disabled children. In essence, it started with haraam and they thought they were doing a righteous deed. Truth clearly stands apart from error.

    • At least you did not call me a kaafir or a munaafiq!

      I really don’t see how it is anybody else’s business if two gay people want to get legally married. Remember that the same type of discriminatory arguments you have been using were used in the 1990s by the Tories to prevent Muslims having their own government-funded faith schools.

      People should not be discriminated against just because of their religious background, sexual orientation etc. In that sense, the new Bill is a step towards greater equality and a fairer society.

      • azhar says:

        Your thinking is very very simplistic. The great liberal Bentham wrote a paper advocating the decriminalization of homosexual acts. At, the same time, he wrote that it shouldn’t come into the public sphere and there are laws that deal with it. I don’t believe Islam wants to go gay bashing, it just wants it out of the public sphere. It recognizes that boys, in the certain situations are prone to committing homosexual acts. It provides methods to avoid these situations.

        What’s happened in the west, is that they have made halal a haraam. By doing this, they have engendered a sub culture which is based on something as pathetic as sexual identity. This is a new, western-centric manifestation of homosexuality, it is not universal. While, ethnicity and gender are generally universal. You cannot bunch us all under a minority, cos then you would have to include other sexual deviancy under the same group. Just, look at the history of homosexuality, you will find interesting bits on how muslim governments deal with it in the past. They then play politics within this culture and have stupid arguments such what is it of your business what we do. Well, it is our business, when you indoctrinate our children in schools, without actually allowing them to examine it critically. When, they infringe on our religious rights by appropriating a religious act such as marriage. When, you force us to allow you to sleep in our homes. You really must justify homosexuality, if you cannot, then don’t ask us to except it.

        You haven’t answered any of my my question with regards to pederasty, pedophilia and other sexual deviancy bunched under the umbrella of sexual orientation. Nor have you answered Ahmed’s question on the “quadruple Key”.

        Innayat, its a virtue to admit your wrong, it’s not a fault. Your helping to pave the way for a quadruple key and your misleading people.

        Furthermore, the Tories and the patriots of this country should discriminate against the Islamic faith, Islam changes society and its systems. It makes harram, what is halal in those societies. If i was a Tory, i would have discriminated against Islam from getting a foothold in this country. As the converts grow in this country and Islam becomes indigenous, you will see the clashes between a hedonistic, decadent culture and Islamic values. One has to change. And your trying to change Islam. Just look at how Turkey is failing in doing this. They are incredibly discriminatory and have a democracy which has to be held up by the military.

        • No one is asking you to accept homosexuality. You are free to believe that the practice of homosexuality is sinful etc. What you cannot do – and rightfully so – is discriminate against others because they are homosexual. Isn’t it better to live in a society where people are not discriminated against due to their sexual orientation than one where they are? Wherever in the world we find the latter type of society we find that many other basic rights are trampled upon too. They are not very nice places to live.

          Regarding the question of the Quadruple key, at present the Bill says that religious institutions will not be forced to conduct same-sex marriages if they do not wish to do so. I think that strikes a very fair balance between upholding non-discrimination against gays and upholding freedom of belief. If the state were to try and coerce religious institutions into holding same-sex marriages then I would oppose that move. However, there is no evidence of this happening.

          As for your statement: “Furthermore, the Tories and the patriots of this country should discriminate against the Islamic faith, Islam changes society and its systems” – well, I think that just shows where your ludicrous line of thinking leads you too.

          • azhar says:

            Your parroting the same lines without even providing a proper defence of what your advocating. What the heck is sexual orientation and why not discriminate against it?

            “You are free to believe that the practice of homosexuality is sinful etc”. Do you not believe it is sinful? I’m assuming you don’t or you don’t have the bottle to say it is sinful.

            Wherever in the world we find the latter type of society we find that many other basic rights are trampled upon too. They are not very nice places to live.
            That’s very subjective. Malaysia is a very nice place to live and so is Iran and so is Morocco. Gay rights is for rich countries not poor countries. Men and boys sell themselves to rich people and tourists for money in these countries.

            Please, also explain where my ludicrous line of thinking leads to? Islam is diametrically opposed to some of the values this country institutes and generally absolute secularism as a whole. Just look, the Barelvi’s declared takfir on those mp’s, lets not even think about the Salafis. These groups are united in there opposition to this bill and homosexuality. This country will have to to discriminate against Islam like Turkey – in order to safe guard its secular rule. You will see when the quadruple key comes and it doesn’t matter if you oppose it or not because there will be no Tory to oppose it.

            What actually makes me laugh is that you actually think your from this country and you share its heritage.

            • Malaysia? Where the former Deputy Prime Minister Anwar Ibrahim was arrested and beaten up in police custody and then thrown in prison for a number of years on trumped up charges of sodomy? Just imagine: if a high profile person like him can be so terribly mistreated what protection is there for the common person?

              Iran? The country where vice police arrest women if too much hair is showing on their heads?

              I really think we have far more equality and protection in law in the UK than in any Muslim majority countries, They can learn a lot from Europe.

              • azhar says:

                That is a useless argument. You started with the subjecting crap bashing under developed muslim societies, where corruption is bound to happen like this shit doesnt happen is secular India or Bangladesh. Malaysia & Iran are very nice places to live. That’s why loads of people live there and do not run away to the gold paved streets of London.

                “I really think we have far more equality and protection in law in the UK than in any Muslim majority countries, They can learn a lot from Europe.”

                That is very true. It doesn’t mean we should institute all of their laws and culture. It doesn’t mean we should decriminalise homosexuality or accept the western version of equality. See, that’s what you have done, you rightly advocated a more forward thinking, critical, scientific and religious manner in which to deal with evolution yet you pissed it up the wall with your crap about a fringe minority.

                I actually want to defend you against the prude people who call you a kaffir and munafiq like your worse then an Israeli shooting a Palestinian child, but i cant when you talk utter rubbish about sexuality. It’s almost like your next step is to be a politician because that’s how you come across.

                Good luck Inayat, you have taught me a lot. Can you take me off your mailing list, as i keep receiving emails when you post something new.

      • Asim says:

        People are already discriminated according to what actions they do, its called crime, thats why even though bestiality (with consent i.e. Animal pre empting it) or incest is criminalised, even if with consent, why? because a human being has limits to what perversity they can accept, and that too includes your new found co religionist, secular liberals, morality is not something which you can deduce from your mind, and measure to see whether it is good or bad, its an attitude/feeling towards a particular action, otherwise if you really wanted to behave rationally, whats the point of morality (unless you believe there is some sort of accountability afterwards), whether you do good or bad you’ll have the same fate, and that is the dust, if someone can do a crime and get away with it, then would it not be “rational” (taking away attitudes and feelings which have been inbuilt in all human beings, muslim, non muslim, straight or not) to do that action if it benefits you….thats rationality, its different to morality (having a particular feeling/bigotry that something is bad, i.e. “I cant kill this person even if it benefits me, why? because its evil (attitude, what is evil or not is not something you can see or scientifically prove, its based upon the feeling of a person towards an action)) .

  14. Ahmed says:

    Everybody Inayat is right and you are all wrong….how dare you try and challenge the intellect of one of this communities most advanced thinkers, a reformer who will lead this religon from the medieval darkness to the enlightened utopia of free love and free thinking, where everyone is open to do as they please…

  15. Khalid says:

    Inayat,
    By all means believe in evolution if you want to but beware, in the process do not EVOLVE out of Islam. That would be a terrible tragedy . Your comments on Hadith and views on homosexuality worry me. Take care bro.

  16. The marriage bill is a LIE that its proposal will not bring about equality. What it will bring about is people bashing of heterosexuals that speak out the truth about the real definition of marriage in religion. The religious freedoms will be silenced. If someone believes that two people of the same sex should not be allowed to marry in church or Jewish or Muslim place that should be respected, that individual who is normal should not be victimised, harassed about their religious belief or forced to accept to recognise two people of the same gender as married because they cannot consummate to produce a child naturally. It will undermine them and the majority that think like wise. Like wedding photographers, bed and breakfast places, small businesses and indivule will be affected. the civil partnership act 2004 already exists for equality this is really the conduct of the government shows how politically compliant part MPs are which indicates a morally corrupt nature of how this gay marriage bill is being rushed through. The real issue here is tax implications and benefits’, why does the government not just give these rights to civil partnerships update the 2004 act? Problem solved. The gay marriage bill definite undermines religious freedom of individuals with strong religious beliefs about a man a woman in marriage, there will be no more Mothers or Fathers days in UK schools, but parent 1 and parent 2. Has anyone considered the scenario of a teacher who dares to say that they believe in traditional marriage of a man and women? They risk being SACKED

  17. The real issue here is tax implications and benefits’, why does the government not just give these rights to civil partnerships act 2004 it just needs updating? Problem solved .

  18. Lets see what allah says in the quran and also what prophet muhammad(saw pbuh) says:-

    1)ALLAH(God) SAYS IN THE Quran 4:063 (the sharia does not defend gays who ever says it does will be answerable on the day of resurrection). If a law is made on defending a gays the quran which is the words of allah destroys that law that defends a gay.

    2)There will be muslims plotting agains other muslims to prove them wrong on the topic of GAYS homosexuals just watch those that speak against me on here ?God has given everyone a brain it is called free will we should use it in accordance with the quran and sunnah, not our own desires learn to lower our gaze etc and control our minds, Homosexuals have a choice they can control their minds. Its does not create steroptypes or hatred,Muslims do not hate gays,they let the gays do what they want you will understand in bit why muslims are TOLLERANT is simply FEAR, The consequences of the law that victimises muslims and oppresses them into submission, to be tolerant to towards GAYS or loose their jobs etc etc muslims want PEACE so they submit to gay rights .It has becomes acceptable out of fear not because they want too ,they are forced under duress to submit in employment contracts or they have no job meaning no income. How the media twists things, muslims follow the quran and sunnah, the quran is what ALLAH SAYS and the sunnah is the example of the prophet those that disregard this fall outside the scope of representing muslims.

    3)Gays can can easily become heterosexual one.Whenever they want too. very simply if their minds become just more spiritual, if they can become strong enough in IMAAN to say NO to iblis (satan). * “ (17:32) its is a lack of understanding of faith amongest the muslims becuase of some factors like environment/circumstances and access to certain resources that help with ( ILM) Knowledge ,unless muslims want the human race to become extinct by not breeding natuarally, allah created male and female , Allah tells us how humans are created from a single sperm and placed in womb,can a GAY day do that?.It is not inherited they are not born like that. no one will gaurd us on the day of Judgement ALLAH SAY IN THE QURAN.

    4)Also from the sunnah I can go on and on.

    a)Volume 8, Book 82, Number 820:Narrated Ibn ‘Abbas:

    The Prophet cursed the effeminate men and those women who assume the similitude (manners) of men. He also said, “Turn them out of your houses.” He turned such-and-such person out, and ‘Umar also turned out such-and-such person.

    b)Sunan Abu-Dawud.book 31, 4007.

    Narrated AbuSa’id al-Khudri: The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: A man should not look at the private parts of another man, and a woman should not look at the private parts of another woman. A MAN SHOULD NOT LIE WITH ANOTHER MAN without wearing lower garment under one cover; and a woman should not be lie with another woman without wearing lower garment under one cover.

    5)A gay persons thoughts and actions and defending gays is an insult to Islam,Christianty and Judaism(Islam does not accept homosexuality ,no faith does). Did you know once the general community has understanding of the quran and the sunnah(prophets sayings) . This can lead to fiqh that can lead to islamic law/ sharia ,here are some schools (Madhhabs) that agree on similar issues around gays and how to deal with them in the countries you are born/reside/live There are punishments prescribed that vary 1. Sunni Hanafi,2. Sunni Hanbali,3. Sunni Maliki, 4. Sunni Shafi’i aswell as 5. Shia Ja`fari,6. Shia Zaydi,7. Ibadi,8. Zahiri scholars & jurists agree on punishments,it would baffle you & make you paranoid further, but I don’t want to write everything, Even Christian and jewish people have punishments for gays. read the Books Sahih Al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abu-Dawud, and Malik’s you will learn about Punisments & homos*xuality.

    6) Allah says in Quran Chapter 4 – Surah An-Nisa. verse 16 on punshiment and how to deal with two people that sin when it comes to committing illegal s** .it is not my views or opinions but the words of allah. May I also ask you to read what allah has said in. sura 7, verses 80-84, Sura 11,verse 77 to 83,sura 21 verse 74. Sura 26 verses 160 to 173.Sura 27 verses 54 to 58,sura 29 verses 28 to 35.Sura 7 verse 81.read what allahs says in the Quran Chapter 27 – Surah An-Naml (THE ANT)Sura 27 verses 54 to 58(about the people of lot).

    7)ALLAH says in the quran:-4:109 Ho! ye are they who pleaded for them in the life of the world. But who will plead with Allah for them on the Day of Resurrection, or who will then be their defender?

    8)ALLAH SAYS IN THE Quran 4:063

    Those men,-Allah knows what is in their hearts; so keep clear of them, but admonish them, and speak to them a word to reach their very souls.

    Allah says in the quran 4:60;=Have you seen those (hyprocrites) who claim that they believe in that which has been sent down to you, and that which was sent down before you, and they wish to go for judgement (in their disputes) to the Taghoot (false judges, etc.) while they have been ordered to reject them. But Shaitan (Satan) wishes to lead them far .

    (19:71) Every single one of you must see it; this is an irrevocable decision of your Lord.

    Do not forgot allah words in the quran : [Those who vex the messenger of Allah, for them there is a painful doom] (9:61) and [Lo! those who malign Allah and His messenger, Allah has cursed them in the world and the Hereafter, and has prepared for them the doom of the disdained] (33:57).
    (This is just a summary of what I am making people aware). Itjihad has to be rooted in the Quran and Sunnah, if there if there is no Itjma, But we have Itjma, it is clear in the Quran and Sunnah.So why people rejecting the Quran and Sunnah? When in doubt return to the Quran and Sunnah. Or have they forgotten the following?those who want to do itjihad on their own, Now when they do their Itjihad as a Muslim let’s see what you come up with by rejecting the above words from Allah and the sunnah examples of my beloved prophet Muhammad(saw pbuh).

  19. azhar says:

    Green-Frog Prince – I will reply for Inayat. Thank god people like you do not have any power in our country. LMFAO.

  20. Firoz Khan says:

    Muslim MPs voted for Gay marriages in the name of ‘Equality!!’ One must say that they are more loyal than the Lion himself. Inayat is conveniently silent on Pedophiles. They too are in minority and well, of course, deserve equality, right Inayat? Why should we have laws,police and justice system? I think, the better ways to make ll Gays and Pedophiles in charge of law enforcement system.

    • Several of you have raised the issue of paedophiles. It appears that you may believe that opening the door to legalising gay marriages may also open the door to legalising paedophilia. There is a huge difference when it concerns sex between consenting adults and the sexual exploitation of children.

      Homosexuality was decriminalised in the UK in 1967. According to CNN “Same-sex marriage is already legal in eight European countries, including the Netherlands and Spain, as well as in Argentina, Canada, South Africa and some states of Brazil.”

      http://edition.cnn.com/2013/02/08/opinion/opinion-gay-rights-marriage/?hpt=hp_bn7

      Is there any evidence whatsoever that any of these countries are planning to legalise paedophilia? I certainly have not seen any evidence. On the contrary, they appear keen to ensure that children are protected from sexual predators. I think you have actually got the argument totally backwards. The countries which offer the least amount of protection from sexual predators appear often to be the ones that describe themselves as ‘Islamic’. As you may know, the age when girls can be married off is as low as nine years old in Iran and Saudi Arabia.

      • azhar says:

        It’s not whether they do or do not legalise paedophilia. Paedophilia is a sexual orientation similar to homosexuality. The argument is, just because paedo’s have an obsession with children, they shouldn’t be given sexual rights. Whether that’s a muslim country or not. You assume, given homosexuals rights and religious rights, somehow we become a more tolerant society. Rather, we become a decadent, sex obsessed society based on subcultures as pathetic as sexual identity. Let me be clear, homosexuality has no place in Islam, it is not universal and shouldn’t be treated as a right to be legislated across all cultures and religions.

  21. YeChoseTheDevil says:

    Mr Bunglawala you know clearly that Sodomy and Homosexual relationships are forbidden by the Al-Mighty.

    Rejecting God’s laws is apostasy. Picking and choosing which laws you want to believe in and which ones you don’t is apostasy. There is no room for interpretation as much as you’d like it. This is the religion of Islam not the watered down religion of Christianity.

    You are know longer fit to call yourself a muslim until you publicly denounce your view and say the testimony of faith again.

    To be a muslim you have to accept Islam in its entirety – Either take it or leave it.

    • It does not bother me whether you think I am a Muslim or not. You are not my God! It would bother me though if any one like you was anywhere near power in the UK. Sadly, a number of other Muslim countries are not so fortunate. Witness the senseless slaughter of shia’s in Pakistan and the intimidation and threat and violence carried out against anyone perceived by halfwit mullahs to be ‘deviating’ from Islam. How sad.

      • Khalid says:

        Your comments about Shia’s in Pakistan shows your ignorance about the situation in Pakistan . Let me say this that there is no conflict between ordinary Sunnies and Shias in Pakistan. That’s why you see ulema from both sects coming together in condemning the terrorism from groups of terrorists who have no support in either community. Terrorism reflects the weakness of the state to deal with miscreants effectively due to break down in law and order situation. Pakistani Sunnies ans Shias are not against each other but both are victims of terrorism . I hope that you understand the difference.

      • YeChoseTheDevil says:

        Unfortunately for you your brand of ‘muslims’ are rapidly dying out. Walk down the street and you will see practising muslims everywhere – in all walks of life and in all professions.

        Watch TV, read articles and you will see the native British are accepting Islam – in its entirety, whereas our backwards people from Pakistan – who suffer from major inferiority complexes – will be doing the opposite.

        Be proud of your religion and do not be embarrassed if any of our tenets conflict with liberal secular views, we are becoming the majority and soon enough the majority will have its way – whether or not the spineless liberals in the south like it.

        As basic to be a muslim you have to accept all God’s laws and tenets, if you dislike or disagree with a particular law is an entirely different matter between you and God and something you should not publicise.

        So turn to Allah Al-Mighty – He is Most-Merciful – before its too late.

        • I find secular liberal countries such as those in Europe to be far more forward-looking than the Islamic state that you seem to want. I too started out as an advocate for an Islamic state many years ago. Reality convinced me that it was a sure path to tyranny.

          So believe in whatever religion you want. Just don’t try and discriminate against others just because of their religion, ethnicity or sexual orientation. That seems to be to be a much better and humane approach than that adopted by supporters of the ‘Islamic state’.

        • Brother, if you want to live under such governmental rules then planes leave western countries daily to take you to where you should love it…and if you hurry, you can make the next one. Bye-bye and don’t forget to write. Oh, and we’ll ship your stuff right away.

          • YeChoseTheDevil says:

            Another Sodomite.

            Don’t hold your breath lassy your gay marriage isn’t going to last. It will be you soon enough who will be claiming refuge in the Antarctica because there will be country on earth that you mincers will not be ‘persecuted’ in.

            Never forget these verses:

            “We also sent Lut: He said to his people: Do ye commit lewdness such as no people in creation (ever) committed before you? For ye practice your lusts on men in preference to women: ye are indeed a people transgressing beyond bounds. And his people gave no answer but this: they said, “Drive them out of your city: these are indeed men who want to be clean and pure!”” (Qur’an 7:80-82)

            Accept you’re a sinner like the rest of us and you might stand a chance. Do not blaspheme God and His religion by saying that he has permitted gay relationships. You’re calling for trouble if you continue.

            • The real truth is you’re frightened the world is changing around you and scared your wahabi views are destined to failure as your own children run from you. On-line copy-and-paste scholarship is a dime a dozen and you get a baker’s extra for buying into the dozen. Furthermore, name-calling is the first sign that you have nothing to offer to a discussion except your neanderthal beating of chest and you’re going to murder someone…and you think gay people will let you slaughter them at your whim…what an imagination. Since you think all gay people are some caricature of your high school days…know that we are military warriors and more than capable to handle whatever you think will do your dirty work. But note that the FBI already has your information and I’m sure will cyber track you down. Talking about threatening, you better watch out, drones are silent watchers, and you might be next.

              • YeChoseTheDevil says:

                Forget Wahabbi’s even the most deviant Sufi’s would not go as far as you do. You gays have to learn to accept that your relationships are forbidden by the Al-Mighty.

                And militant sodomites. Don’t make me laugh.

                Its clear you’ve got the message because you’re starting to feel insecure. The verse quoted is crystal clear in its message and no sodomite can twist its meaning.

                If you want to be a muslim accept Islam in its entirety but do not insult our religion.

                • Tinky-Winky, your threats do not phase me–You’re not Allah and no one to fear. As so many of you who beat their breasts, talk all big and bad on the internet, you won’t show your face will you? No, you won’t and you’ll continue to hide with your tail between your legs…you’re probably gay and closeted. I’m sure you’d think several times before you attack a gay person with abandonment, it won’t be as easy as your imagination projects.

                  • YeChoseTheDevil says:

                    I just googled your ugly face, you’re a fat nasty bender with corruption all over your face.

                    Sodomite if you were to ever insult my religion infront of me I wouldn’t hesitate to set you ‘straight’ – literally. I’m sure you’d think several times before stating your views in an actual mosque or infront of a crowd of muslims. Theres only so long you can hide behind your Youtube videos. Why don’t you actually come out the closet and tell your local muslim community that you carry out gay marriages? Make sure to post up the reaction on youtube.

                    • But you have not shown your face, dear sir. Why don’t you admit you want to see people put to death who don’t agree with your narrow way of seeing the world. You want uniformity and you can’t even phantom unity…the true essence of tawhid…, just your concept of collecting like things together…big difference, brother, very big difference. You need to go play in the kid’s sand box where “my religion is better than your religion” and leave the deeper depths of humanitarianism to adults who are better qualified to bring more justice, compassion and mercy to the world…like Allah commands.

  22. Abu Mus'ab says:

    Mr bunglawala, i’m sure you’ve heard this quite a number of times already, but I feel it is still my duty to write this post.

    As Muslims, we are Muslim first, then anything else, there is no place in islaam for a person that is first british then muslim, or first american then muslim etc, you are either muslim or you’re not.

    Everything we say and do in life is governed by the laws of Allaah and His Rasool Sallallaahu `Alayhi Wa Sallam, so it’s not for anyone to give his own personal opinions on stuff, let alone judge in favour of the law of the kuffaar over the law of Allaah.

    I have read this post of yours as well as the one you wrote when you were with the mcb, and to call a spade a spade, there is so much major kufr in those posts that i cannot begin to list it all.

    For instance your claims of a secular state being better than an islaamic state, is sufficient on its own to expel you from islaam, that’s not even counting your view on allowing gay marriages and claiming that Allaah’s law of not allowing homos to marry is discriminatory and all the rest of it.

    You may say as you said before “Thank god people like you do not have any power in our country”, but know that you will not live forever, and when you do die, then it is not me or the next scholar that you will answer to, rather you will have to answer to Allaah as to why you discarded the religion of Allaah in favour of kufr just to be more in tune with what the kuffaar want.

    If you are upset by scholars declaring you an apostate, then all you have to do is avoid those matters that makes you apostate.

    • I tell you what. You live your life the way you want, and leave me to live mine the way I want. How about that?

      • Mohammad says:

        Inyat, if you have a son( I’m not sure you do) and he became a homosexual and had a male partner, would you allow them to exercise their freedoms under your own roof?

        Would you have any objections for him to marry his partner under the same bill you are promoting?

        • Once he reaches the age of maturity and the age of consent, what he does is his business and he will be answerable to God for his actions. I hope that I would be an understanding father!

      • Abu Mus'ab says:

        Fine, the qur’aan speaks to people like yourself and says: Lakum deenukum wa liya deen.

        For you your religion and for me mine.

        My religion being Islaam and yours being kuffaar worship.

        • Can you imagine what a country in which you had any power would be like? You would threaten, intimidate and – I have no doubt – physically attack those you thought were insufficiently ‘Muslim’ in your eyes. In short, it would be an oppressive and intolerant failed state. Compared with you and your vision, secular Europe, for all its faults, is a much nicer place to live and think and work.

  23. Faisal says:

    I have an idea, I’m a policeman, why don’t I dress up as a firefighter and go into work? Surely how I choose to dress is my freedom, is it not? Is that a sound argument? Just like being a policeman has certain rules I must adhere to and obey without questioning, so does Islam. I cannot worship idols and call myself a Muslim, or can I? Yes I have a choice before I sign on the dotted line whether I want to join the police force and in signing I have to accept fully its codes and conduct. When we proclaim ourselves as muslims we have signed on the dotted line that we will accept Allah and His messenger’s way, no one can force you to accept, however when you do, then you are bound in following its rules, regulations, values etc. or can I pick and mix just like wearing my firemans outfit as a police officer?

    • Are you saying that if a Muslim votes in favour of gay marriage they are not a Muslim anymore? Well, to you your interpretation of Islam and to me mine. I rather like my interpretation better!!

      • Faisal says:

        I agree with what Saud has written below, I think the issue is not of sexual orientation etc. I think it’s a much deeper issue about the understanding which you hold regarding Islam. Due to your perception of what an ‘Islamic state’ should / shouldn’t be based on the western value system you are trying to fit the two in. You are really on a very dangerous path. My advice would be to, study Arabic (if you haven’t already) and actually study Islam for yourself and see what Islam really is. Stick with the classical scholars which the majority of the ummah over the past 1400 years have stuck with to develop your understanding and you will very quickly realise who is radical/extreme etc. I don’t know what else to say other than feeling sorry for you. May Allah guide us all, Ameen

        • It’s apparent you have swallowed the bablum in great gulps. Consensus to which you claim exists is an exaggeration of Islamic history and has more political subtefuge than actual juristic foundation. Surah 24:30-32 gives a very clear view about whom one should marry…the single among you…

          • Abu Mus'ab says:

            You daayiee abdullaat are the last person that has a right to talk on islaam, you should watch this video between your friend and a mufti:

            • Mus’ab, I’ve seen it numerous times and just because the lie is repeated over and over again does not make it a truth…thus the pablum does not satiate the appetite you wish to quench. Depend upon Quran and not ahadith and just maybe you’ll lose the idolizing so many Muslims have towards ahadith. But remember, Mus’ab, Surah 24, ayyat 30-32 explains a lot in relationship to what your hero/murderer above has to say…and those men who have no desire for women…and that ignorance about vigor before Viagra is nonsense…ask any woman how many older mean make lurid comments to them, so the desire is still there not the ability to get a hard-on.

          • Faisal says:

            I wasn’t talking about fiqh, I’m going a step before that, ie the actual belief system.
            Anyway Abdullah, I didn’t get the point, maybe you could elorabate?

      • Abdullah says:

        Inayat,

        This is the problem. You have already chosen your liberal stance and now you just try to justify it by offering your interpretation which does not fit in with mainstream Islam. I regret to use such a term ‘mainstream Islam’ but for the purposes of this discussion it must be used. Tell me; do your views comply with the teachings of Qur’an, the Prophet Muhammad (S.A.W.) and the blessed Prophets (A.S.) that came before him?

        I think what has happened is you have lost faith in Muslims because of the condition of many Muslim states in recent times. You always criticise the idea of a Muslim state even though you solely base your understanding on the poor examples we have in the world today. Do I support the leaders we have today who chase wealth and forget our deen? No. Do I support the idea of an Islamic state where Muslims are free to practise Islam and spread justice? Yes. I recommend a great text ‘Saviours of Islamic Spirit’ by Abul Hasan Ali Nadwi. When you learn about people like Abu Bakr As-Siddiq (RA) and Umar ibn Al-Khattab (RA) you will learn what a true Muslim state would be like.

  24. Firoz Khan says:

    Dear Mohammad,
    I am sure Mr.Inayat, the advocate of Homo will surely answer ‘Yes’ to your question in the name of the equity. These people are sick suffering from mental disorder. I am sure none of them have read and understood Quran. And even if they do they are expert in subverting the meanings of ayaats to suit their logic. Perhaps they don’t know about Loot (AS) and his ummat.

  25. Mohammad says:

    What’s fascinating is that he claims to be Muslim. I can appericate if he rejects islam then no one would blink an eye lid.

    Allah clearly mentions regarding those who believe in parts of the book and rejects others so this should not concern us.

    In my opnion either he is promoting the agenda of the west which to me renders him a puppet and a sell out or he sincerely believes in same-sex marriage and its so called equality in that case he needs to reevaluate his iman.

    I hate to say this but Wallahi by looking at his face he looks dishonest and cursed.

    Allah disgrace you Ya Inyat and show us your disgrace in this world and in the hereafter… Ameen

  26. Mr Ali says:

    most of the muslim electorate who voted for these MPs will be horrified that they voted in favour of the bill. It clearly states in the Quran that homosexuality is a grave sin, and these politicians are outside the boundaries of their faith by voting for this. These MPs just want the limelight or further power or recognition in their miserable lives.

    • Firoz Khan says:

      Muslims who voted for them in the last elections should think twice before voting them again. If you have ‘Right to Recall’ please use it. These MPs have lost the trust of their voters.

      • Saud Ahmed says:

        Inayat,

        Your reasoning for providing a defence of homosexuality or this supposed equality bill just does not make sense with even basic Islamic teachings.

        Do you not believe Allaah is Al-Aleem and Al Khabeer? Does He not know the future? Did He not know what is best for His slaves , whether they choose to submit to Him willingly or not, in the year 2013 , when He decreed laws over 1400 years ago?

        Perhaps you think Allaah decreed laws that are unfair because He does not love His creation? Even though He is Al Wadood?

        Your comments and thoughts go against the points listed above? If Allaah created people, does He not have the right to decree what is right and wrong?

        Your point about Muslim countries not being just etc….it’s as if you are using a non Muslim’s logic when they say ‘look at your own countries before you speak’….yes but we know that these Muslim countries are not representative of Islam.

        I think, Allaah knows best, that the pressure that is on all of us especially since 9/11 and 7/7 to ‘conform’ and ‘integrate’ etc has got to you. Like most of us you have compromised yourself. But you put yourself in a vulnerable position by putting yourself in the public eye. Just like that time on ? An evening standard conference a few years ago you reluctantly condemned the hadd of stoning for adultery.

        Inayat if you can’t stand the heat, get out of the kitchen, cos the fire of hagan am is 70 times hotter. Brother save yourself and your family before its too late. The suntan and the love of the people just ain’t worth not being able to see Allaah directly.

    • Or it could be that some of these Muslim MPs recognise that just as it is morally wrong to discriminate against others on the basis of their religion and ethnicity, it must also be wrong to discriminate against others just because of their sexual orientation. One does not have to endorse gay sex, to recognise that gay people should have the right to civil marriages if they wish. Presumably you do not accept that Jesus is the Son of God, but you presumably do not have any objection to Christians getting married, right? So, why do you want to prevent gay people getting married?

      • saud ahmed says:

        Inayat, you did not address any of the points i made in the post.

        Firstly, there was a speeling mistake i made.. it should have read ‘the dunya and the people are not worth…’ and not ‘the suntan’.

        Secondly, the analogy between Christians and gay marriage has nothing to do with this discussion. You know that people are free to believe whatever they want, whether it be in Christianity or paganism. However, Allaah has laid down boundaries for both muslims and non-muslims, of what it allowed and what is not allowed.

        The mistake you are making is that you are trying to wholly change and turn these boundaries upside down. If you were advocating a minority opinion, or using Qiyaas or other Islamic principles of Fiqh to arrive at a a conclusion, that is one thing. But you are trying to turn something on its head.

        You say it is morally wrong to discriminate others on the basis of their religion… well, thats what we do when Allaah tells us that people who have not believed in Him or His Messengers, or the Last Day or any other major tenet of Islam, whilst the knowledge has reached them, is going to HellFire.

        Is this ‘morally wrong’ as well?

        I think that the main problem you have is not actually this gay marriage thing. I think, as i said before, just like all of us, the immense pressure has got to you and you have wilted. Muslim professionals and those who come from privileged backgrounds feels it more than others, but at the end of the day, Allaah tests each person with a test that they can bear.

        Its still not too late brother, save yourself.

        • Saud: I have come to reject any idea of a state ruled by ‘God’s Laws’. The fact is, even though God is Merciful, I have found that His followers – who would be in charge of drafting and enforcing the laws – are very often, intolerant bigots.

          In your vision of an Islamic state, would you, for example, allow Christians to build churches and promote their religion and beliefs?

          In your vision of an Islamic state, would you allow the people to vote for a law you regarded as being opposed to ‘God’s Laws’?

          In your vision of an Islamic state, how would you treat a gay couple that said they were married to each other?

          Hence, my preference for a secular liberal state than an ‘Islamic’ one.

        • It is not morally wrong to believe that your faith is correct and that of others is incorrect. However, It is morally wrong to discriminate against others – ie not accord them the same civil rights as others – simply because of their religion.

      • Saud Ahmed says:

        Ok I just read your last comment after posting twice by mistake.

        I think you have made your feelings clear in your last post. I cannot add anything.

  27. Nazir says:

    Inayat how much you have changed over the years; what a shame!

    My question to you is since you believe Adam (as) had parents that were apes and those Ayahs of the Quran that state otherwise should not be taken literally…

    Do you believe that homosexuality is permissible ??

    • I don’t believe Adam’s parents were apes. I don’t interpret the story of Adam literally either. I see it more as a metaphor for the evolution of consciousness and free will in homo sapiens.

      I used to believe homosexuality was a sin when I was younger. In more recent years I have become decidedly more liberal in my views. Now, I no longer judge others based on their sexual orientation. I prefer to let God judge. I don’t see it as any of my business.

      • Nazir says:

        Evolution question is going off topic so i will not want to say anything about that but just conclude from what i understand you do believe that Adam (as) had parents but free will i.e humans like today started from Adam (as)…

        You said: “I used to believe homosexuality was a sin when I was younger”

        does that mean you don’t consider it a sin any more??

        By the way it was just a simple question, instead i get a politicians answer 🙂 i’m not asking you to judge people based on their sexual orientation. I don’t judge homosexual people and nor do i expect others to; but i do consider it a sinful act…

        of course you dont have to answer as your personal beliefs are your business between you and your Lord, but it would be good to know where you stand in regards this topic from the outset….

        • 1. I don’t believe that there was a person called ‘Adam’ who appeared from heaven and was placed on earth. I regard the story of ‘Adam’ as a metaphor as stated previously.

          2. No – I don’t regard homosexuality as a sin any more. My beliefs continually evolve too!

          Hope that is clear.

      • Abdullah says:

        Inayat,

        When you say you “used to believe homosexuality was a sin…”, does that mean you no longer believe its a sin? Please speak plainly.

        I cannot understand why people say its none of our business. This “none of our business” principle cuts both ways: Why is it your concern what Muslims say? Why do you care what Muslims and the whole Ummah is united on? If you are liberal then I’m sure you would appreciate ‘freedom of speech’ so why can’t Muslims be free to practise Islam which includes delivering the message to others?

  28. dellis says:

    Why do hide behind the word ‘metaphor’?
    You openly admit that Adam (as) didnt exist.
    That is sufficient to take you out of Islam because you have denied many verses of the Quran that are very clear, very basic and non-metaphorical.

    All the rest of your dis-beliefs matter not, because you are no longer a Muslim.

  29. Najib Yusuf says:

    Not sure what all the fuss is about. The practice of homosexuality is haram – according to Islamic teaching. Sex outside marriage between a man and a woman is also haram. However, this does not mean that we should discriminate against those who say they are homosexuals or those who commit adultery, in our daily lives – jobs etc. We do not live in a society where Islamic Law is applied. What the punishments or otherwise are for these actions is debatable – and are a topic for discussion elsewhere. I am sure the Almighty will make His own decisions, in the hereafter.

    However, the legislation that went through Parliament has nothing to do with Muslims. Hence, if I were a MP – like Sadiq and the other Muslim MPs – I would have abstained. This was a piece of legislation giving legitimacy to the practice of homosexuality – in other words, an act of haram – not a piece of equality legislation to a minority group. Not sure what Sadiq and the other Muslim MPs were thinking when they voted for.

    At the same time, the emails, tweets etc threatening Sadiq and the other Muslim MPs, must be strongly condemned in no uncertain terms. Sadiq and the others were wrong in voting for – but that was their decision – let it go.

    • dellis says:

      Then you do not understand ‘democracy’.
      Those muslims that vote for these MPs are also responsible for the decisions of their candidate, because these decisions are made ON THEIR BEHALF.
      It is like a Contract between 2 parties. The MP is the front man making decisions on behalf of his voters. Therefore such muslim voters must also take the blame.

  30. Faisal says:

    If a brother and sister would like to marry would that be ok?

  31. Abu Haashim says:

    Inayat,
    Regarding your statement “I don’t regard homosexuality as a sin any more. My beliefs continually evolve too!” How much more will it continue to evolve? Where will you draw the line? As Muslims we believe that which Allah (SWT) has forbidden (or for that matter decreed) is inviolable. The line is drawn for us. The nature of democracy is that there is no fixed line. It moves backwards and forwards according to whatever whim and fashion. If enough people want it, they can vote for it, and it become law. Will you draw the line on Pedophilia? Incest? I mention these as there are groups that are advocating both to be lawful. When they become “norm” of the day, will you evolve and accept it as lawful? You see what I’m getting at? Where will you draw the line?

    • I am unsure why you are concerned about where I will ‘draw the line’? I am responsible for my own views and actions and will be answerable to God for them. I am hopeful that He will accept my efforts to continue to learn and become a better person as genuine and sincere, insha’ Allah.

  32. Gulum says:

    It’s allahs business inayat.

    • So then let’s let Allah deal with it. It’s certainly no business of ours if two gay people want to have a civil marriage..

      • Abdullah says:

        Inayat,

        Do you realise the weight and severity of the words you are saying: “Let Allah deal with it”. Do you recall what happened to the people of Prophet Lut (A.S.), or do you have an alternative Inayat Bunglawala translation for the verses in the Qur’an that relate to Prophet Lut (A.S.)?

        Also your logic fails because when you say “its none of our business”; because if that is the case why did Muslim MPs choose to support the change in legislation instead of abstaining from the vote? I believe (and the Muslim Ummah is united on this except a few misguided fools) that they should have rejected gay marriage proposals; but if that was too hard they could have remained silent at least.

        I agree with others that you have already made up your mind. Clearly you will do/say whatever you want and look down as others as ‘old-fashioned’ and backwards. I have read many of your articles and you show NO RESPECT for the Ulema and learned people. You think the Qur’an is there just for you to offer any translation that fits in with science and other ‘modern’ thinking.

        I humbly ask you to reconsider your views. May Allah guide you.

  33. Firoz Khan says:

    I think there is no point in arguing this matter with Inayat. He has already and unfortunately closed his mind. He is in no mood of repenting and reversing what he has been saying so far.

    • Abdullah says:

      Brother Firoz,

      I am inclined to agree with you. I read a lot of Inayat’s blogs/articles and what is clear to me is that he has an answer for everything. It doesn’t matter what the Mufasareen say; he has a better, ‘sensible’ translation of the Qur’an. It doesn’t matter what Imam Bukhari or Muslim record as Hadith because he rejects Ahadith if they go against ‘common sense and science’. It doesn’t matter what the beloved Sahabah (R.A.) understood the Qur’an and example of our Prophet (S.A.W.) to mean; Inayat knows better than everyone.

      He also doesn’t believe in a Muslim state and he doesn’t believe that Muslims should reject gay marriage. He also doesn’t accept anything that Muslims say in response to his blogs because we are all old-fashioned. Just look at what he says about the Ulema:

      “Muslims are rightly taught to respect ulama (“people of knowledge”). In practice, however, those regarded and treated as ulama are only those who have spent years studying ancient books in Arabic in traditional Islamic seminaries.”

      “The question of human evolution is undoubtedly a scientific one and it makes little sense to go to a religious scholar who lacks scientific training and hope to get a sound answer.”

      “Islam must engage with science, not deny it”, Inayat Bunglawala, March 2011 (Guardian)

  34. Ahmed says:

    Inayat, very dissappointed bro, where you started and where you stand today. And no I am not a bloody extremist, I am an Islamic movement worker who believes in a modern, equitable, open, democratic Islamc state. Anyway I am not going to bang my head, I can see your not adding any more comments, this is intended to be private anyway. I think it would be prudent and only fair to arrange for your wiki profile to be updated so that you are no longer referred to as having something to do with MCB. I was speaking to someone in the Masjid the other day, trying with great difficulty to advocate what may have drivenyou to take such a stance in not considering homosexuality to be a sin and he individual shot back with a comment that stood out, he said HT had their Majid Nawaz, the Salfai’s had their Usama Hasan and now you have your Inayat Bunglawala. I pray that Allh (sw) guides us all and keeps us steadfast on Siratul Mustaqim. Yor Brother. Ahmed

  35. Faisal says:

    Maybe Inayat is about to come out of the closet himself!

    • Ho-ho-ho! So, if someone supports gay rights, they must be secretly gay themselves, right? Your logic explains why much of the Muslim world is in the splendid state that it is.

  36. Adeeb says:

    Hi Innayat. Hope you’re well. I’m just trying to understand more about your position if I may. Would you describe yourself as a moral relativist? For example would you agree with say the state permitting 2 gay brothers to marry if they wish?

  37. IK says:

    Shocking to read what Inayat has been saying…and the so called Muslim MPs…the secular society wants more Inayat’s in this world…modern muslims!!!

    I pray that Allah (s.w.t) guides us all on the straight path. ameen

  38. Abdullah says:

    Inayat, you have mentioned in the comments that you think that it is commendable for the government to support minorities. What, in that case do you think of the government legalising incest and marriage between siblings. What is wrong, according to you, with a father marrying his daughter or a mother marrying her son; who are we to come between their mutual affection?

    • Daayiee Abdullah says:

      Abdullah, salaam. I find it quite amazing how some ignorant Muslims are so easily blinded by traditional interpretations of the Lut story that has not rhyme nor reason as being related to homosexuality. It’s about straight men like yourselves who lust after power and control over everything you believe you should be in control, i.e., women, government, religion, the secular world, and even people’s sexual lives…I presume you truly believe you can sit on the throne of Allah and give out judgments too…oops, as the song says, send in the clowns and you’re already there. When people who are different from the majority groups in the UK, you know, those brown people, get angry at difference, how can they complain when they are prosecuted for being different…oh, I have it, as long as there is a heirarchy and they are not on the bottom (forgive the pun) they can stand tall as such great men protecting the ways of the faith. If you really believe in the omnipotence of Allah as our Creator, then Allah does not need the fumings of taqlidi-oriented human beings to call themselves protecting Allah. Look out, though, the heel of oppression can easily add more pressure to your own gruop of sheeple…and going baa-baa-baa will not get you home again.

      • Abu Mus'ab says:

        You know what i find amazing? What amazes me is how fudge-packers like daayiee abdullaat think they are some authority on the qur’aan, when they’ve never even read the qur’aan in their lives, for if they had then they would never have thumb-sucked this so-called “interpretation” of theirs.

        • Daayiee Abdullah says:

          Abu Mus’ab, name-calling is the first sign of a mind that has nothing to say, and by confusing which head one thinks with, it amazing is that you know what fudgepacking is…must have some experience in the “act” of having your fudge packed, but let me not presume too much and you can explain it to us yourself. You may not like the fact that Islam is OUR religion and not your religion, so what you think is “the way” isn’t necessarily so, when there are many paths to Allah. So you were saying what about interpretations?

          • Abdullah says:

            Daayiee: I don’t have time to reply to your rantings, but only intend to clarify what Allah has said, so that you and I and the rest of those that read will know the Truth, not from me or you, but from the Creator.

            You said: ‘ignorant Muslims are so easily blinded by traditional interpretations of the Lut story that has not rhyme nor reason as being related to homosexuality.’
            Allah says: “And [We had sent] Lot when he said to his people, “Do you commit such immorality as no one has preceded you with from among the worlds? Indeed, you approach men with desire, instead of women. Rather, you are a transgressing people.””
            The prophet said: “There is nothing I fear for my ummah more than the deed of the people of Loot.” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 1457; Ibn Maajah, 2563. This hadeeth was classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani (may Allaah have mercy on him) in Saheeh al-Jaami’, no. 1552).
            He (Sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) also said: “Whoever you find doing the deed of the people of Loot, kill the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.” (Narrated by al-Tirmidhi, 1456; Abu Dawood, 4462; Ibn Maajah, 2561. This hadeeth was classed as saheeh by Shaykh al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Jaami’, no. 6589). 

            I would request from you to give evidences of your accusations where you claimed that I:
            1) lust after power and control over everything I believe I should be in control
            2 )truly believe i can sit on the throne of Allah and give out judgments too

            But to be honest, I’m not concerned with those allegations as they are against me, as I am but a small weak individual that is in need of the mercy of Allah.

            I would rather like you to clarify what evidence do you have so that we can see if what you say has weight with Allah, His Messenger and His Religion, so that we may retract our statements if we erred, and so that we may be sincere with each other to work towards righteousness and piety.

            • Daayiee Abdullah says:

              Abdullah you do yourself an injustice to pretend that your postering makes you a weak person and humble in tone and tenor…stop breaking your arm to pat yourself on the back, for you are in a part of that group who state they know Allah’s religion and make judgments from Allah’s throne. As I stated below, if you had read the discussions you would know what my position is about the Lut story…in short, it is about heteroseuxal men who used homosexual acts to commit rape and not about loving male-to-male relationships. When your attempts to turn a sexual act into a sexual orientation, then you also make the sexual act of heterosexual couples of coitus adaptable to who commits the act and under which condition. When a rapist uses the same sexual act of coitus, under your line of thinking, then the conclusion is that all males are rapists. Are you a rapist Abdullah? And that issue about lust, men have lusted for many things beside sex, i.e., religion, governmental power, money, domination over another such as women and children, slavery and the list goes on. So stop playing the game that lust is only about sex. Secondly, Islamic scholars have said repeatedly Prophet Mohammad never had a case of homosexuality as religious leader or as governmental leader, and as such either they are liars or the texts written decades and centuries later are lies. Islamic scholars of later centuries also stated the same thing that their contemporaries made-up things to suit their needs at the time, i.e., to please the staus quo and to rally political support. So Abdullah in your attempt to provide the reading audience your tale of being misunderstood, I’d give it to you that you would make a good actor on stage, but I won’t be clapping in adoration for realism of performance behind a mask of piety.

          • Abu Mus'ab says:

            Mr faggot, i’m not the one who had a boyfriend that died – or rather committed suicide – after engaging in sick perverse acts, you are, so you can stop trying to bring peope over to your queer side because thankfully we are real men who have wives, not sickos who have husbands.

            But all that aside, why do you keep skirting the issue? time and again you’ve been asked to answer a simple straight forward question and until now you are yet to give an answer.

            Your queer (mis)interpretation of the story of sodom and gomorrah is that they were engaging in “male to male rape”, and you claim to get this from the qur’aan, now you’ve been asked over and over again for your proof but all you seem to be able to talk about are “behinds” that are not broad enough, so please leave your homosexual obsessions and fetishes at home and just answer our simple straightforward question.

            Let me re-pose this question to you:

            In the Qur’aan Allaah mentions that Lut `Alayhis Salaam said: “Indeed, you approach men with desire instead of women.”

            And in another verse: “Do you approach men with desire instead of women.”

            Keyword: “with desire” in arabic “shahwah”.

            Now we’d like you to explain this in light of your “male rape” claim.

            Let me just answer you in advance anyway.

            1: If you claim this “with desire” refers to “male rape”, then logic demands that “female rape” is permissible, because the verse says “instead of women”, now if you know the english language then you’ll know that whatever comes after the term “instead of”, that is the natural norm that people should be doing, while all that is before it is incorrect and abnormal that should be avoided.

            This is simply from one angle.

            Let us look at this from another angle.

            In another verse of the Qur’aan Allaah mentions that when the townspeople came then Lut `Alayhis Salaam told them: “O people, here are my daughters, they are purer for you so fear Allaah…”

            Once again we come back to your “male-rape” claim, if you (mis)interpret these verses as being “male rape”, then not only are you permitting but you are actually encouraging female rape.

            Because according to your (mis)interpretation then, in this verse Lut `Alayhis Salaam was calling the people to rape his daughters just as long as they don’t rape his male guests.

            I could go on and on, but I don’t want this to become an essay that you just skim pass with the excuse that it’s “too long” to go through.

            So basically all I’ve asked here is for you to respond to one simple matter, surely it can’t be that difficult to do?

  39. Abdullah says:

    And yes you are correct, no one has a monopoly over the Religion of Allah, even though brother Abu Mus’ab didn’t claim that. According to you there are ‘many ways’ to Allah and interpretation is open, so according to your own principles, Abu Mus’ ab has every right to say what he said and you shouldn’t have a problem with that, because that is he’s interpretation, right? If you attempt to claim that our interpretation is extreme and we think we are correct and others are wrong, then isn’t that also your methodology? You seem to have no hesitancy in saying that we lust for power, believe we sit on the throne of Allah (we seek refuge in Allah from this), that we are blind-followers, etc. Be just.

    • Daayiee Abdullah says:

      Abdullah, glad that you agree that no one has a monopoly over Allah and Allah’s religion, though you are misreading Abu Mus’ab’s statement, for his tone and tenor does claim to know better than anyone else what is Allah’s religion. Just the fact that there are several major schools of Islamic theological thought clearly indicates there is no one size fits all theological rule Abdullah…and that is something pretty obvious to those who take the time to reason. Yes, he has the right to say what he wants to say and so do I without being ridiculed through name-calling and obvious attempts to shame the LGBTQ Muslim communities worldwide. His extremist views are present when his commentaries take the position that others are wrong…and that is obvious throughout this discussion he takes that stance…but that is not my methodology for I have through the discussion pointed out that there are alternative views and there is no one-size-fits-all thinking when it comes to Allah’s religion. Of course, that is not the postion that the majority of people in this discussion has taken. Or may I ask, did you not read all the commentaries before leaping in the frey? Abu Mus’ab’s commentaries does reveal he is lusting for many things more than just power, but also control over other Muslims, and through that process of making such judgments he and others like him seek to sit on the throne of Allah to make judgments that are Allah’s alone. So don’t attempt to switch lanes and try to say that I am the one promoting a position seeking control and power over the discussion when the truth is before you…keep your eyes open and ears tuned and it will be clear as the sun who said what and who attempted to position himself on that throne. So your urging to be just should be directed to those who are being unjust, and I thiink you need to point the finger in the direction of Abu Mus’ab and his ilk if you seek to find fairness. As to those taqlidiis who depend upon others to interpret Quran or them…those are blind followers and they do as their forefathers and foremothers just because it was their way…apt example of what Abu Mus’ab promotes through his commentaries.

      • Abdullah says:

        First of all the first three generations, the four main schools of thought and the early rightly guided leaders of the Muslims all were upon the same creed and theology (Aqeedah in arabic) it was in matters of jurisprudence (fiqh) that they had differences. And this matter of LGBT (may Allah destroy them as He destroyed the people of Loot) is one of creed – and the Qur’aan, the sunnah, the consensus of the companions of the prophet, and those that followed them from the rightly guided leaders of the Muslims, all of them had the creed that homosexuality is forbidden in Islam and is one of the worst of sins after Shirk (associating partners with Allah in worship). We have clear overwhelming evidence for that. What they differed in was how the capital punishment in the law of Islam should be carried out (some of the sahabah said to burn them (Abu Bakr), some said to throw them off the cliff, and the Imaams said to stone them, etc)
        That is not coming from me, so a warning before you let your tongue loose – this is from the revelation of your Lord, the message of your Prophet and a flurry of authentic narrations from the people who the Prophet of Allah was reported to say that they are the best of people and to stick to their methodology.

        • Daayiee Abdullah says:

          Abdullah, you are a person who acts very silly when you do not have anything to proffer that does not inculcate some taqlidii madness. You do not scare me with your charges of “shirk” when I have stated that Quran is my book of guidance, and my shahadah that “there is no God but God”…so where is there shirk old fine fellow? I have never said there is no God, nor have I ever associated anything with Allah…so again I ask you where where is the shirk??? It appears you have a fear of the unknown when you can’t brow-beat another muslim to be as mindless as you say you are on these subjects. It is apparent you have not heard one thing I have said or written in this discussion have you? You keep repeating the same old baby salafist and wahabi pablum you have been fed for decades. If the story of Lut is about heterosexual men raping, and Prophet Mohammad had not one legal or religious case on homosexuality, then there is no precedent to follow. What you are following are the made up associations of ancient scholars who equate athar of the Sahaba to sunnah, which do not in any way, shape or form reach the status of Quran or the sunnah of Prophet Mohammad. Then you try to say such a concensus is as good as sunnah, when Islamic scholarship says it is not anywhere close. If you do believe in Quran and the authentic sunnah of Prophet Mohammad, why are you stuck on reports written 150 to 200 years after the death of the Prophet and accept those fumings of human beings who supposedly came to a human concensus as to what to do about something that is not even in Quran? It is legal shananigans, you know it and you are afraid to admit it for it makes your position groundless. You keep moving around the comments made and you refuse to put forth a worthy response to my comments without a bunch of hearsay commentaries. So I have to presume you don’t have one and that you return to the mythology of ancient scholars that numerous ancient and modern scholars have clearly stated are made up ahadith and legal flip-flopping. Sorry you are not getting it, but the facts are the facts. When you guys find something to talk about that does not repeat that same old tired and hackneyed “proofs” get in touch.

          • Abdullah says:

            Alhamdulillah, unfortunately when we get our emotions into these things, we tend to loose our minds that we don’t even sems to understand what the other person is saying.
            I said: ‘all of them had the creed that homosexuality is forbidden in Islam and is one of the worst sins after Shirk’. My intention was to be just by making it clear that homosexuality is one of the worst sins – but Shirk is the worst – hence my saying ‘one of the worst sins AFTER shirk.’
            I did not in no shape or form accuse Daaiyee of shirk. So he unnecessarily made himself look foolish and emotional when there was no need.
            Also may I point a few more errors that he made about the religion of Allah not because I am better than him or have more right to do so, but because the truth is greater than us all and is always clear from falsehood. If Daaiyee sees an error in me that is in contradiction to islam, then let him come with evidence, and if it is according to the methodology of the best of generations (as mentioned by the prophet) then I will happily accept and renounce my error.
            Daaiyee said: ‘there is no God but God’
            I know that he intended the correct meaning, but since we only want to clarify the truth for those sincere readers, I must say that this translation of the shahadah is not befitting. There are other ‘Gods’ that people have set up in worship of other than Allah, so it is consensually agreed upon that the meaning of the shahadah to is ‘there is no deity WORTHY OF WORSHIPPING except Allah’ – as that was the core message of all the messengers of Allah as Allah says: “Worship Allah alone, and do not set up partners with Him in worship.” And He also says: “and verily we have sent to every nation a messenger (calling their people to): worship Allah alone and abandon all false deities.” Also the word ‘ilaah’ according to the most known and relied upon Arabic dictionaries is that which is worshipped and that which is believed to be deserving of worship (please look to Lisaan al-Arab). So that is the correct meaning of the first shahadah – and I know that is what the brother intended, may Allah guide him and us, but it was needed to be made clear.
            At the time and place of the Prophet, his people were deviated, but did not fall into such sexual perversion that they would turn to homosexuality. So the Prophet never had to deal with a homosexual in his life (but told us the ruling and punishment of it) rather it was something that first occured after his death in the first caliphate, when Islam was spreading.
            With regards to the claim that the ayah refers to heterosexual men raping men – then there is no evidence for this, but what is apparent is that Allah says: “And [We had sent] Lot when he said to his people, “Do you commit such immorality as no one has preceded you with from among the worlds? Indeed, you approach men with desire, instead of women. Rather, you are a transgressing people.”
            To the respected readers, those who read this statement of Allah with a clear mind, will see there is no indication of them being heterosexual – rather what is apparent is that they chose homosexuality.
            Daaiyee has some guts on him to simply dismiss all the great work of the great scholars of Islam such as Imam Ahmad, Imam Abu Haneefah, Imam Maalik, Imaam ash-Shaafi’ee, and many others who were widely accepted by the Muslims up until today.
            Nobody claimed that the consensus of the companions or the rightly guided early scholars is equal to the Qur’aan. Making this claim is nonsensical as they did not have a consensus on any affair except that it was based on the revelation. At the same time, it is one of the most fundamental principles of jurisprudence in Islam as the Prophet said: “My nation will not unite upon falsehood.”
            We must also understand the weight of the scholars as the Prophet said in an authentic narration that they are the inheritors of the Prophets and that which they inherit is the knowledge of Islam. That’s not to say they are infallible or that we should do taqleed (blind-following) of them. Rather we should refer to their accepted rulings that they derive from the revelation as they are qualified to do so, as Allah says: “And when there comes to them information about [public] security or fear, they spread it around. But if they had referred it back to the Messenger or to those of authority among them, then the ones who [can] draw correct conclusions from it would have known about it. And if not for the favor of Allah upon you and His mercy, you would have followed Satan, except for a few.”
            Here is an example. I am not a learned person. Is it right for me to speak about medicine according to my whims rather than with the knowledge of medicine? No, a doctor has studied that field and specialises in it, thus he is of more right to speak about it and what he says takes precedence of what I say. This is with worldy sciences and knowledge, so how about knowledge from above the Heavens from the Creator? It is not some fairy tale that any average person can read and decide to make his own judgements. Rather those that have studied the religion intensively, they refer to the Qur’aan, sunnah, companions and rightly guided earlier scholars; they are the ones who should be taken from as opposed to us coming with our own conclusions, as they are the inheritors of the prophets.
            With regards to all the other rantings and comments made by Daaiyee, they were either personal or arguments that have no basis (and introduced firstly by the enemies of Islam from the disbelievers) which have been refuted in depth by the scholars, that the likes of me would do injustice to their masterpiece by attempting to comment on it, rather if the brother would like, I could send some articles via email written in Arabic and some in English by scholars that have done their masters and doctorates in this field.
            Again, I reiterate, this is no personal attack on our brother Daaiyee, it is just to let sincere readers read the truth from their religion in rebuttal of the claims of this deviated group of ‘Muslim’ LGBT. And Guidance is from Allah alone, we ask Him alone to guide us and them to the Truth and to His Religion.

            • IbnKhattab says:

              Brother, don’t waste your time with this sodomite, he knows the truth but will never accept it, he is set in his ways. Unfortunately the state of US muslims is dire, hence very little opposition to his views.

              His blasphemy is the equivalent of saying Allah has permitted sodomy. He should know that he would be executed in an islamic state if he dared voice such words over there. His statements alone would warrant the punishment regardless of whether he engages in such filthy practices.

              • Daayiee Abdullah says:

                Ibn Khattab, why is it so many muslims of your tone and tenor are incline to name-calling and character assassination when someone challenges their point(s) of view. I find it amusing you are a mind-reader and knower of all things, as well as to who accepts Allah and who does not. So are you a soothsayer or a deviner of rods or shells? Obviously, you have a bias against US muslims…but you do not elaborate as to why. Is it the vast amounts of freedom to speak and articulate opinions that you could not for the people in your communities would shame and extricate you? You claim US muslims are dire, but from what I am seeing from this discussion, the UK muslims are in even worse shape because many orthodox cannot imagine an understanding of Islam outside the proverbial salafi/wahabi box that limits their views to the opinions and traditions of long dead men and women who could never phantom our world today, let alone have appropriate responses to our needs of today. Now those who do not agee with you are blasphemers, but you have not proffered anything different as to what potential meaning of Quran can be on the subject of homosexuality…by the way there is nothing in Quran…but there is plenty about heterosexual men who lust for power over men and women, you know what I mean, those do as you’e told kind of people. As to execution in an Islamic state, having lived in Saudiyya for several years, I agree that such madness that goes on there continues to kill innocent people for various reasons based upon perceived blasphemous comments. But there is never any true justice melted out that would have some of those same leaders face the same punishments they promote. While you live in the UK I presume, thus your desire to put someone to death would bring full retaliation upon your own behind…including a prison mate that just might want to have some control over you…and probably much deserved. But thankfully, only Allah would know that for sure. But I ask why do you fantasize of a world where you could murder people who disagree with you and your ilk of mindless sheeple??? Allah is very just and you just might get what you ask for, but it won’t be the necks of those you seek to have killed in the nooses…it could be your very own. Gives you something to ponder, does it not? May Allah continue to guide and bless us all, Ameen.

  40. Faisal says:

    This guy who I have trouble calling ‘brother’, is really a sick and perverse individual who only seeks to provoke a reactions in muslims. Just look at the nature of his responses totally unfounded claims and absolutely hollow arguments. He dresses his perverse ideas and claims in sophisticated type of language to purposefully misguide those who might not know. These types of individuals are from the similar group who rejected zakat after the death of Rasool Allah, whom Abu Bakr (ra) sought to inilate during the Riddah wars. My advice would be to not get wound up by this wretched individual and just pray that Allah guides him and if guidance is not in his qadar then remove him from misguiding others. Many like him have come and gone and will continue to come unfortunately.

    • Daayiee Abdullah says:

      Faisal, just curious if you are referring to me or someone else, for you did not indicate to whom you speak. As usual of individuals who have difficulties or as you stated “trouble” referring to another muslim that you disagree a “brother” and then attempting character assasination is the highest formulation of being a muslim,…or is it? I think not. When you do not understand someone that does not mean that the person speaking is devoid of knowledge that you may not even know about or ever sought to possess, or could attempt to contemplate because of your limitation and “trouble” accepting difference(s) of opinion, which is the foundation of the Islamic schools of thought…is that not true? You analogies of claiming individuals of today are “duplications” of what was 1500 years ago is a fallacy and since you prefer to believe in a pristine imagry of perfection…something the Quran does not support for even Prophet Mohammad was admonished by Allah, you give great prowess to long dead men and idolize these human beings rather than Allah…not unlike the Quraish of that time period did. So who is misguiding who? Allah is great in His wisdom and judgment, so on the last day we shall see what the final outcome shall be won’t we. May Allah continue to guide and bless us all, Ameen.

  41. Daayiee Abdullah says:

    So glad the vote came with great success, so hopefully, those who wanted to impose their shari’ah mindsets upon all people can appreciate that secularism gives all people an opportunity to not fall prey to a theocratic state, and did not accept the bait.

    • Abdullah says:

      Yes! What a victory for secularism! Just like they eradicated the honour and freedom of the Muslim women in France, they have become successful once again by passing another law in opposition to the Creator. That is the meaning of freedom?
      But Muslims in the West should be patient, they shouldn’t protest, nor should they go out rebelling against their governments or cause chaos, because that is not befitting of the character of a Muslim; rather they should be patient and call towards the message of Allah in a respectful and dignified manner with politeness.

  42. Abdullah says:

    Daaiyee, answer the following, so we may see clearly where you stand:
    1) Do you denounce and disagree with Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) when he ordered to fight those that refused to pay the Zakaah – and declared them apostates?
    2) Do you believe that Islam is complete? Or is there some principles and matters that Allah missed out or the Messenger did not propogate completely?
    3) Do you believe that we should not follow the interpretation of the first 3 generations of Islam (ie the companions and those who followed them) and that we should reinterpret the Qur’aan?

  43. Faisal says:

    It appears that this perverse sick individual does not accept ahadith and constantly tries to derive his own queer (excuse the pun) interpretation the Quran. He clearly has issues with the Sahaba and the four established imams how they perceived the issue of homosexuality. People of his orientation who like a pic n mix type of Islam will soon make pork, alcohol, etc all permissible. I suppose he will invite us all for a toast to his gang bang party soon!

    • Abdullah says:

      The sad thing is after reading your comment he will not even see what’s wrong with all that!

    • Daayiee Abdullah says:

      Faisal, do you ever learn from your errors in judgment??? I am not sick, and yes, I do not accept ahadith that are contradictory that even a blind man can see the lies there in. If my interpretation of Quran is *queer* as you so stated, it is based upon the same Quranic text, by the standards of Quranic interpretation, it stands true to the Quran, right??? Obviously, you swallowed the blue pill from the matrix so you have gone back to sleep and enjoy the supposed pristine images of a perfect Islam of yester centuries, when history contradicts your salafist point of view. As to pork, don’t eat it, alcohol, don’t consume it, and wanting to gang bang you or anyone else is not my style of male-to-male relationships–I do have standards– I require a nikah, so you’re defintely off the halaal list…damaged goods. Faisal and Abdullah, admit it that you are in a same sex relationship and want to wed. Do you need a best man or an Imam to do your nikah? I’ll check my schedule and send you several alternative dates.

      • Abdullah says:

        Alhamdulillah, we have no longer a need to reply, the evidence has been established, people who are sincere about their Deen will see that you have no standing in this Religion, thus you turned to your emotions and slander people – a clear sign of defeat and fustration. Don’t bring your whims and desires in to this perfectly complete Religion.

        • Abdullah says:

          Also since you reject ahaadeeth completely, how do you perform a nikaah? Do you have a Walee? And who is the Walee for? The more effeminate man? I seek refuge in Allah from your evil and filth.

  44. Solayman says:

    Wa la hawla wa la qawata illa billa. I stumbled upon this page in error whilst looking for something else but Alhamdullilah the Almighty exposes the hypocrites and filth in strange ways. I am simply amazed at the verbal acrobatics Inayat and his sidekick “Dayiee Abdullah” have used to justify a kufr which has never been in dispute not just in 1400 years of Islamic history but the entire history of all the Ibrahimi (as) traditions. I would like to thank the brothers who have put forth clear, logical and well-reasoned arguments to these two individuals who have then exposed their own kufr, at least in word if not intent, by their replies.
    Sadly many Muslims, me included, whilst having certain reservations about Inayat believed him to be sincere in what he did and a positive voice for the community. Allah azwa ajal has now Alhamdulillah removed that smoke screen and exposed him for what he is. A shameless charlatan who has prostituted his soul to the highest bidder in his quest to be thrown some scraps from his masters table. For the record, before Inayat goes off on some bizzare rant on how “European (Kufr) societies are better for man kind” he might want to have a little read into how these same societies produce wonderful people who rape 14 year old Muslim girls before dousing them and seting them alight (Iraq), incinerate entire families at weddings from 50,000 feet and kidnap young children to be used as blackmail and coercion fodder. (Dr Afiyah case may Allah hasten her release).

    How on earth did we allow ourselves to be duped into voting these quislings into power? May Allah forgive us all for our shortsightedness. Ameen

  45. Solayman says:

    Just to clarify I am not calling anyone a kafir. It should have read “at least in word if not belief above and not intent. The words uttered are undoubtedly ones of disbelief (to say homosexuality is not a sin) but that in itself does not make one a disbeliever. Only Allah knows what is in the hearts. However I think a brother above said it best when he mentioned these statements by Inayat are either pandering to his western overlords or a sincere belief in his statements. We of course should seek repentance for both of these trajectories.

  46. Pingback: The Usama Hasan email | The Islamic Far-Right In Britain

  47. Child Brides in Islam says:

    Anti gay rights Muslims here are using Pedophilia as an argument…apparently without irony!
    Quiz – who was the world’s first Muslim child bride?

    • i’m a christian. The typical mortality rate during the 8th century was several times higher than today. The average period of fertility was about 15 years- approx age 13-29. The age of mortality varied from age to age– but it was no more than late 20s. Females did not go to college– they had a home education, cooking, preparing the home, serving the family. Their education was compressed in pre-adolescent years.
      A girl at 13 may be well considered middle aged back in the 7th century. She may be betrothed leading up to then. It was not uncommon in European society for this to occur… whether during christian reign or pre-christian pagan society. A little learning will do a lot to clear away any bigotry. I’m no friend to the koran- I find in it several problems. But all respect to the vast majority of moslems who seek peace. The immigrant moslems to the UK for the most part do not participate much in the prevalent culture…and who can blame them? The british prevalent culture is so so lost! The don’t see it, but they’re killing their unborn– thousands every week!
      But the moslem population which is much higher than the 3.4 million on the census (more like 5 million) are not well represented. All the moslem MPs and mayors are in alliance with the left and pander to the rampant liberalism on issues like abortion and gay marriage. One MP I spoke to said that she did not care that Britain was killing their young and promoting “death-sex” because evil chooses its course and its always self destructing!!!

  48. Child Brides in Islam says:

    Soooo…any fatwas againt the Pakistani Council of Islamic Ideology?

    http://dailycaller.com/2016/01/15/anti-pedophilia-bill-rejected-in-pakistan-as-anti-islamic/

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s