Ayaan Hirsi Ali is one of the women I admire most, not only because of her involvement in the movie "Submission". Having suffered herself the hatred of her family, who married her off against her will and forced her sister into suicide, even after the cowardly murder of Van Gogh she continued to stand up against macho "culture" and inhuman traditions. And I agree fully with her on the gay issue, it shows how similar islamist and christian fundamentalists are. Although gay guys are really lovely.
Great woman. God bless her.

Posted by: hooligangirl at April 23, 2006 9:10 PM

I am totally upset and stupified by the reaction of gays, I was called a bigot and NAZI on a forum by an Australian gay for my posts from the Qur'an and Sunnah, and for mentioning that Iran has executed (at that time) about 400 homosexuals.

They are in denial. I think they don't believe it because it is in their face, and Pat Robertson, Dobson, and the so called Christian Right is in their face, thus they see the Muslims as just another victim of irrational prejudice and religious inspired bigotry (which is what the Christian campaign against and demonization of gays amounts to). So they naturally ally themselves with what they perceive as another underdog and victim of Christian intolerance.

Perhaps the solution is in appealing to the minds and hearts of the Dobsons, Falwells and Phelps to change their hearts, minds and rhetoric and stop using gays as a scapegoat and whipping boy, to turn out votes and fatten collection plates.

Just a thought. When they (the paleo cons, the So called conservatives change and make amends) then we can set about saving Western Culture (by first admitting that is is secular and humanist, not religious and Christian).

Liberals want no truck in the Battle for God. I know because I argue and fight with them constantly.

Posted by: Nariz at April 23, 2006 9:25 PM

"This claim follows the comments made by Dutch immigration minister Rita Verdonk who claimed that gays did not face persecution in Iran as long as they were discreet."

That means as long as they don't get caught, right?

Posted by: Dingo at April 23, 2006 9:49 PM

Or accused, I suppose. I'm not all that impressed with Sharia jurisprudence.

Posted by: Dingo at April 23, 2006 9:51 PM

Hooligangirl, you many not like the fact that Christian fundamentalists do not approve of homosexuality, however it is just sloppy thinking to state that they are "similar" to Islamists. Anyone concerned with gay rights must be much more concerned with the murder and legal punishment that occurs in not only Islamist society but Muslim society in general than in Christian fundamentalist society. Morality is all about making distinctions between what you might consider undesirable and the really evil.

Posted by: Papa Bear at April 23, 2006 9:52 PM

Papa Bear,
it's true, there are differences, but I think they use the same arguments to condemn homosexuality. And even though there are no laws (any more) to persecute gays anymore in western countries, Christian fundamentalists esp. in the States do their best to discredit them, and if you're under social pressure, lose your job, your reputation and maybe even the love of your christian family, you might lose your existence eventually. One of my friends is gay, and he might lose his job if they knew. It's still a long way till they have equal rights. And I believe many christian fundamentalists work against western values too, like women's rights, e.g.

Posted by: hooligangirl at April 23, 2006 10:09 PM

Hgirl is right about Christianists and Islamists being birds of a feather. I admit there is a large difference in terms of propensity towards violence, and the extreme nature of the position of the Islamists. However, when you live in a nation like the US that CONTINUES to deny gays and lesbians many rights they should have (note that I am not even referring to civil partnerships/marriage) because it is driven by powerful Christianists, then there is really little difference. After all, it is not the Islamists that hold power in Washington, eh? Just how different is Imam Farewell from a cleric. Need I remind you all that he stated that 9/11 was caused by gays. Is that not outrageous? Is it not just as dangerous to blame an innocent segment of the US population for such crimes to incite hatred, as what the likes of OBL spew out?

As for liberal and gay denial about Islam, I am very aware of it and condemn it in the strongest terms possible. I am doing everything I can to educate my friends about Islam. I don’t expect them to have read the Koran and Ahadith like I have, but I expect some knowledge. They know nothing.

But one must also remember that the liberal position has to do with many other societal factors. Firstly, Christianists continue to be far more powerful and are thus seen as the continual oppressor (in many cases they are). It is also the devil we (they) know – we suffered under Christianists – so we are very familiar with their particular brand of ridiculous and irrational guilt based on “sacred texts” that many of us don’t accept. So we have heard it all before, or so they think. The truth is they have not heard it all, as Sharia is so extreme that its very extreme nature will be its undoing. Liberals also have the racism/captalism/expolitation-of-the-3rd- world oppression thing to contend with as well. Under that theory, Moslems are seem as victims.

Posted by: Kafir Nonbeliever at April 23, 2006 10:13 PM

What a joke - lets all be tolerant shall we? But hey if you disagree with what “we” believe on gay issues (eg like a Christian does), then hey we won't tolerate you!

Hypocrites! Your attempts at moral equivalence between Christians and Muslims is pathetic. How about I compare the similarities of the Islamic world with that bastion of atheist government – socialism/communism?

Some of us believe that there is a right and wrong. That morals do exist. You people on the other hand believe that you can make your own morals as you go along in life. Chaos.

And yes I know - I'm intolerant. But hey, so are you guys for not tolerating Christian beliefs.

I'm also still waiting to see homosexual sex produce living offspring. After all it's natural isn't it?

Many a "fundamental" Christian does more to combat Islam than most lefty pinko "we tolerate all (except those who disagree with us)" gay apologists.

Oh and like you "tolerant types" above condemning Christianity - I have had gay friends. Unlike you they tolerate my beliefs (that is hate the sin, not the sinner).

Homosexuality is a lifestyle choice, just like Islam, unlike race/sex which is determined by DNA.

Hence via the democratic process we Christians have the right to make moral laws regarding homosexuality, just like you atheists do.

Posted by: 3rdtimelucky at April 23, 2006 10:31 PM

You're right lucky, you're really intolerant.

Posted by: hooligangirl at April 23, 2006 10:44 PM

hooligangirl - at least my country did not tolerate Hitler.

Prove to me that it is in one's DNA, with real science. Then I will turn from my "intolerance".

Christians have used the democratic process - not the beheading one. And when laws have been made against their beliefs via that process they have respected them, yet fought against them in non aggressive means. When some Christian has taken the law into their own hands they have been taken to task via the law. We are VERY different from Muslims.

Gays on the other hand use the courts, not the democratic process. Muslims do the same in the west.

Oh and hooligangirl you too are intolerant - as you label me intolerant. I bet the Sweedish Christian pastor who was thrown in jail by Euroarabia for preaching against homosexuality shares you views of tolerance???

Posted by: 3rdtimelucky at April 23, 2006 11:30 PM

I can only shake my head at you, lucky. I bet you found it funny when christian fundamentalists shot abortion doctors and threatened to bomb clinics. In my book, that's terrorism too. - And many germans didn't tolerate hitler either, there was a large resistance, and without the usa, they would have gotten rid of him anyway.

Posted by: hooligangirl at April 23, 2006 11:36 PM

"I bet you found it funny when christian fundamentalists shot abortion doctors and threatened to bomb clinics. In my book, that's terrorism too. - And many germans didn't tolerate hitler either, there was a large resistance, and without the usa, they would have gotten rid of him anyway."
-- from a posting above

"Christian fundamentalists" did not shoot
"abortion doctors." There was one attack in upstate New York, another at a clinic in Boston, and possibly one other in the south. That makes three attacks, by three admittedly crazy people. They were condemned, they were seized, they were sentenced. The terrorism directed against Infidels by Muslims has never been punished by Muslims themselves, most of whom are quite enthusiastic about attacks on Infidels. It is only those attacks on Jordanian hotels, or on sites in Saudi Arabia, or in Egypt, where the victims include Muslims, or are mainly Musilms, or have as their ultimate target, even if Infidel tourists or workers are killed, the local Muslim rulers, that are deplored by some Muslims. Attacks on Infidels, as Infidels -- never.

As for the bizarre claim that "many germans didn't tolerate Hitler" -- where does this come from? There were a total of a few hundred people, no more, rounded up after the one attempt to kill Hitler, and also in the White Rose movement. There was almost no resistance within Germany (a few Germans, such as Willy Brandt, escaped and fought the Nazis from outside). The Germans were enthusiasts to the end, and fought more fanatically than even the Japanese. This should not be forgotten. Perhaps this poster, who lives in Germany and is apparently a female Muslim of indeterine, possibly Western, origin, has swalloed all the post-war apologetics and rewriting of history in which so many in Germany have indulged.

As for the claim that "without the usa, they [the Germans]would have gotten rid of him anyway" -- again, a crazed claim, with no evidence to support it. Had the Red Army not taken millions of casualties and yet remained to inflict damage (those who were young in Russia during the war recall that in some schools, 80% of the students would not return from the war), ha dthe British not withstood the bombing of London, had the American army not come in and moved up the Italian peninsula, and then through Occupied France, and then headed to Berlin where the Russians racing from the east met up with them at the Elbe, had Hitler won the war, there is not the slightest evidence that the Germans would have "gotten rid of him." This is fantasy.

And fantasy this absurd can only waste time, and must end. And it will.

Posted by: Hugh at April 23, 2006 11:56 PM

Muslims are hypocritical about gays since muslim men like men/boys probably as much as they like women/girls.

I think with Christians, it goes against what they believe and they speak out about it, but for the most part they don't kill them.

My hairdresser is gay and I've known gay people and unless they are very swishy, I don't usually notice. If they are swishy, I have a tendency to laugh.

Posted by: freewoman at April 24, 2006 12:29 AM

freewoman - thanks for bringing some sanity to this "lets hate the Christian via the Muslim" debate.

Posted by: 3rdtimelucky at April 24, 2006 1:10 AM

Hugh - your comments are very reasoned also.

I think some here need to look up the old definition of 'tolerance' as opposed to the New Age version of "tolerance" which leans towards "Acceptance....or else"

Posted by: 3rdtimelucky at April 24, 2006 1:15 AM

Christian "fundamentalists" are similar to Muslims in their attitude about homosexuality, in the same way that a candleflame is similar to the surface of the Sun. Yes, both are hot. I would love to see hooligangirl follow her logic and try to enjoy a dinner on the surface of the Sun.

Posted by: Television at April 24, 2006 1:23 AM

The impassioned hatred and fear of homosexuality is, unfortunately, a lasting legacy of the Tanakh in Western societies. Jesus did not qualify his statement to love thy neighbor with the caveat "unless he is gay." The only thing I can think of to explain the attitude of early Jews about homosexuality is that it was somehow so disruptive and destructive of their close, primitive clan society that its persecution became codified. I don't know enough about other primitive societies, but I do know that the same murderous attitude did not prevail, for example, in certain Native American cultures.

Any tendencies I have toward Western/Judeo-Christian supremacism is always tempered by thoughts of Mea Shearim in Jerusalem, where they still shave womens' heads and throw rocks at cars on Saturdays, and the sleek, fat ministers of our Protestant megachurches, who promise God's financial assistance to the masses of poor faithful so long as the votes are there on abortion. Yes, we arrested and punished the clinic assassins and bombers, but there weren't surging masses of Catholics in the streets declaring these acts to be wrong, were there? Check out www.ewtn.com sometime, the Questions and Answers subsite, and the Right to Life forum. You'll see some absolutely breathtaking spin from Judy Brown about abortion-related violence there when the questions come up.

I'm not doing equivalency here. There is none. Personally, I believe that Islam -- in itself, in its core teachings, in the "example" of its murderous, amoral Prophet -- is the enemy of everything decent and good that we've managed at great effort to create. But fair is fair.

I'm still deciding how I feel about the term "Christianist." While it annoys me, the poster may be on to something.

Posted by: Marwan'sDaughter at April 24, 2006 3:36 AM

Marwan's daughter. You are welcome to your opinion; mine is that you are an opinionated fool. Luckily we both are still free to say it exactly as we see it.

Most of this thread is a complete abuse of the heroic Hirsi Ali. While we know that she is an atheist (and I personally have criticized her views on occasion), what she was saying in this interview is the very reverse of the intolerant moral equivalence promoted by the homosexualists here. One thing you will not find in her writings is a demand to shut up Christianity because it is too "politically powerful" (i.e. too many voters give their democratic consent to Christian-inspired politics). Stalin and Hitler did something useful about Christian political power - and some of you sound like you regret they did not complete the job.

Posted by: Paolo at April 24, 2006 4:34 AM

As a Christian I believe that the Bible is true. This does not, however, mean that MY understanding of it is perfect. Therefore, I cannot impose my understanding of the truth on others (I may share it until everyone is sick of the sound of my voice but we're not talking about chopping anything off anyone here). There are many Christian homosexuals and Churches that cater for their specific needs - I've seen their websites and they have their own reading of Scripture which, as I said, I can't concretely call better or worse than my own.

I'm ashamed of many of the things that my co-religionists say and do (just as I'm ashamed of a great many things that I have said and done) but the general frame of ethics that Christianity provides has offered homosexuals (and many other traditional pariahs of Western society) in their thousands a spiritual refuge and a meaningful relationship with God. The all-encompassing, uncompromising rulings of Sharia offer no similar sanctuary to such as these.

Posted by: Razorskarr at April 24, 2006 5:30 AM

Do they show Queer Eye for the Straight Guy on Dish Network in Iran? How about the 700 Club?

Posted by: JanuaryMan at April 24, 2006 9:05 AM

I'm a gay Anglican Christian and I worship at two mainstream Anglican churches and both congregations and vicars know that I am gay and nobody seems to have any problem with that. I don't need special gay churches although perhaps some do.

Ms Hirsi Ali is probably right and we have to remember that many societies persecute gay people or simply deny them legal status or some legal rights. The very worst offenders are moslem societies. Christian based societies can still preach hatred but seem to be more aware that the law should not be religiously based but independent and objective.

Jesus fulfilled and ended the old testament and started a new one and gave us a new commandment 'to love one another, for love is of God'. He gave us the freedom to write new law and not to be bound by the prescriptions of the old. That's not gay teaching on the that's mainstream teaching. It's Christian love and tolerance and acceptance and peacefulness that marks us out from the moslems. We don't shed blood until we absolutely finally have to.

Anyway, get over it. It's just sex between two people who love one another. Whats the big deal.

I've met many straight people and I quite like them. If they're a bit holier than thou I just laugh.

Incidentally 3rdtimelucky being gay is not a lifestyle choice. I didn't choose to be gay. It is what I am and the way God made me. There never was a time in my conscious life that I was ever anything else or had a choice. I knew that I was gay from the very first awakening of my sexual side although at that tender age I didn't have the words to express any thoughts on any kind of sexuality. They came later. All the gay people who I know say the same thing and I know many gay people, naturally. Yes I'm sure there are a few people who think it's cool to experiment or dabble but that is wrong and they shouldn't do it. If I had had a choice do you think I would have been stupid enough to choose to be gay in our society today. No of course I wouldn't.

This is the way I am and the way I was made and my mother tells me that she knew I was gay from when I was about eight years old. As for the genes thing the science is in its infancy. The evidence is coming in slowly that gayness is buried somewhere in there and is probably passed down the female line. Let's just wait and see what the scientists will find and as far as I know there is only one guy working on human sexuality at the moment because it's not rated as important compared to diseases and other such stuff and that is probably quite right.

So there you have it straight (pardon the pun) from the horse's mouth. Give the c--p about lifestyle choice a rest and listen to the people who are gay and weigh their evidence instead. Listen to my mother and countless other mothers of gay children who say the same thing. But please stop insulting my intelligence and assuming that for some perverse reason I would willingly have made such a disasterous (in this society) choice had I had it to make.

Ms Hirsi Ali is bravely trying to come to the aid of gay people who are persecuted in the many places including the moslem world and she is to be honoured for at least trying. Being discreet is one hell of a way to lead your life. Living in fear that someone will kill you for having sex. Good God. That's just mad like so much else in the moslem world.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at April 24, 2006 10:57 AM

BTW as a gay person I'm not worried about people like Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson either. But I am worried aboud islam and the imams who preach death not just for gay people but for women and non-believers and hosts of others. Christianity doesn't preach death and any Christian who does is rapidly held up to the contemt of the world by the real Christians that's why I'm not worried about Falwell and his ilk.

The worrying thing is what their preaching on all topics does to impressionable minds and what could happen next.

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at April 24, 2006 11:11 AM

Gay activists should consider carefully what Hirsi Ali is saying and more; for instance, they should take the time to carefully read the official positions of Muslim Student Associations across North America.

Typically MSA Web sites claim that the Qur'an is the final, perfect relevation from Allah and that following the examples of Mohammad in the Sunnah is necessary for all true Muslims. What do these beliefs imply about behavior toward homosexuals? Homosexuals are 'minority groups' on campus who are entitled to protection by university administration when basic rights are threated by hostile individuals and groups. Muslim Student Associations are normally official clubs that are obliged to follow university rules. What right is more basic than the right to life? Do MSAs, at the very least, call that the right to life for homosexuals into question by endorsing the Qur'an and Sunnah as final, authoritative guides for conduct? Shouldn't some gay rights group point out the problem here, and the very real implications of these Islamic beliefs for gays throughout the Muslims world?

Posted by: JTF at April 24, 2006 1:48 PM

Would anyone "choose" to be a persecuted minority, looked down upon by the majority of the world's religious dogmas and its normal peoples?

All for a little mirror-image erotica?

Sounds silly, as a theory, to me.

Non-straight people I know are clearly (99.44%) genetically attuned to homosexuality. Desires chooses you, not the other way around.

And I'll take anyone in the battle against intolerant Imperialistic Islam who is in favor of greater freedom, greater compassion, greater respect for human rights, and a greater intelligent grasp of our nature, and our future.

Their specific goals are not mine (e.g.- "marriage" is not to be played with as a societal concept just to please people who want to change the time-honroed meanings of words in order to feel "included"... "civil unions" are sufficient), but, in general, I'm glad to have them, as creative allies against a theocratic tsunami of anti-humanism called "Submission".

The self-induced genetic changes of the near future to our species are going to be so disruptive, we need to have some central meaning of humanity to hold onto through the DNA maelstrom. The "normal" may seem quaint, biologically, shortly.

Meanwhile, I'll proudly stand shoulder to shoulder with Hirsi Ali anyday. Courage, brains, and lovely as well.

(And, if she ever wants to revert to the common fashion, she can contact me though this site. My Dutch is a little rusty, but I know the essentials:- Je bent ook een liefertje, hoor, en zo mooie als een prachtige zwarte vlinder!)

Posted by: profitsbeard at April 24, 2006 2:29 PM

(And, if she ever wants to revert to the common fashion, she can contact me though this site. My Dutch is a little rusty, but I know the essentials:- Je bent ook een liefertje, hoor, en zo mooie als een prachtige zwarte vlinder!)

-Above

Profitsbeard:

I generally avoid using the word revert at all anymore, since Moslems are so fond of it.

Regarding the homosexuality and predisposition, frankly I don't care if it is immutable or not. The fact is it is part of humanity. Even if it were not, people have the right to live how they wish. However, science is cleary 'on our side'. For those who must have proof in order to allow us to live in peace, I call your attention to numerous studies that have pointed to a strong link between nature and homosexuality.

I am not sure if this is correct and I had to use a dictionary to do it. Here goes in my English/Romanian/German/Spanish best:

Enige van mijn dichtste vrienden zijn Nederlands//
Is that right?

Posted by: Kafir Nonbeliever at April 24, 2006 7:54 PM

"Muslims are hypocritical about gays since muslim men like men/boys probably as much as they like women/girls." Freewoman, above

They are breath-takingly hypocritical. A gay acquaintance of mine did the hippy trail from Istanbul to Kabul in the early 70's and told me that, in his experience,east of Athens, everybody was bisexual. Richard Burton wrote any essay on the what he called the 'sotadic zone' claiming as much: it's a pity his wife burned his diaries which would probably have settled the matter once and for all.'By discouraging contact between unrelated members of the opposite sex, Mohammedanism, quite unintentionally, promotes homosexuality.' If Gavin Maxwell's book on the marsh arabs is to be believed, a lot of them practice it in a tip-toeing about in the middle of the night, mum's the word sort of way.

Posted by: wallyUK at April 24, 2006 10:54 PM

Kafir Nonbeliever - there are pleanty of studies that show the exact opposite.

And necessitasnonhabetlegem - I have met gays who are no longer. It is a choice. It is NOT determined by DNA. We choose who we have sex with.

Frankly I don't care what adults do in there own time, preferably behind closed doors.

But I do care when gays want "equal rights" to innocent kids.

Social experiement on adults who consent - fine - none of my business. But leave kids out of it.

Posted by: 3rdtimelucky at April 25, 2006 11:25 PM

The arguement that because something exists in soceity therefore is OK is stupidity.

Gays exist in soceity - and? so what? So to does Islam.

Posted by: 3rdtimelucky at April 25, 2006 11:30 PM

Dear 3rdtimelucky,

I think you're wrong and I think I can prove it. It strikes me you just want to believe your own myth about gay people. We could have a very interesting discussion about this if you want to. Email me at necessitasnonhabetlegem@hotmail.co.uk if you want to. I promise that I will be careful with your email address if you do.

Gay people are not paedophiles and your remarks about kids are just spurious and hurtful. Each society decides for itself what its age of consent is. Anyway the vast majority of child abuse is perpetrated by family members in the child's own home yet I wouldn't claim that the family unit is wrong and should be abolished.

As for gays who aren't any longer gay that is well known phenomenon amongst younger men. Part of puberty involves a gaylike 'phase' for many youngsters who will actually be straight in the end and it seems that that phase can last for some years - sometimes into their twenties before the body sorts it out.

The so called 'healing ministries' are just abuse and follow up studies have always shown that there is no long lasting change. These 'ministries' crop up from time to time and claim to be able to 'cure' gayness. The men involved always end up more confused than when they started and always go back to being what they naturally are.

Please, please read my previous posts again and see if you can find it in your heart to believe at least some of what I say. It's my first-hand evidence for you so you don't have to rely on speculation and rumour and just what you want to believe instead of what is.

I've just re-read all this post and it sounds a bit nasty so please believe me when I say that I don't mean it to be nasty I just can't think of any other words. Anyway I'd rather be allied with you in the fight against jihad coz at least you will discuss and talk rather than just kill and it's that sort of world we are all both fighting for isn't it.

Anyway let's do any more talking about this by email before Robert gets angry with us for not staying on message. I'm posting this in my lunch hour (late one, again, *sigh*) so I have to go now but I'll check in again when I get home.

Lots of love to you and yours,

Dominic.

Posted by: necessitasnonhabetlegem at April 26, 2006 9:20 AM