Jeff Goldblum said: “Is there something in this religion that is anti-homosexuality and anti-woman? Does that complicate the issue? I’m just raising it and thinking out loud and maybe being stupid.”
In response, he is being denounced as “Islamophobic.”
This is just the latest example of a recurring phenomenon: any criticism, any questioning, the slightest hint of anything negative about Islam will get you excoriated as racist and bigoted. Meanwhile, criticism of Christianity will get you celebrated as “brave.”
And Jeff Goldblum raises perfectly valid questions. Can they not be asked at all? But then what about the people who are victimized because of Islam’s death penalty for homosexuals and institutionalized mistreatment of women? Do they not matter?
The Qur’an contains numerous condemnations of homosexual activity: “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.’…And We rained upon them a rain [of stones]. Then see how was the end of the criminals.” (Qur’an 7:80-84)
Muhammad specifies the punishment for this in a hadith: “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said, ‘Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Loot, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.’” (Sunan Abu Dawud 4462)
The Qur’an teaches that men are superior to women and should beat those from whom they “fear disobedience”: “Men have authority over women because Allah has made the one superior to the other, and because they spend their wealth to maintain them. Good women are obedient. They guard their unseen parts because Allah has guarded them. As for those from whom you fear disobedience, admonish them and send them to beds apart and beat them.” — Qur’an 4:34
The Qur’an likens a woman to a field (tilth), to be used by a man as he wills: “Your women are a tilth for you, so go to your tilth as you will” — Qur’an 2:223
It declares that a woman’s testimony is worth half that of a man: “Get two witnesses, out of your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women, such as you choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can remind her” — Qur’an 2:282
It allows men to marry up to four wives, and have sex with slave girls also: “If you fear that you shall not be able to deal justly with the orphans, marry women of your choice, two or three or four; but if you fear that ye shall not be able to deal justly, then only one, or one that your right hands possess, that will be more suitable, to prevent you from doing injustice” — Qur’an 4:3
It rules that a son’s inheritance should be twice the size of that of a daughter: “Allah directs you as regards your children’s inheritance: to the male, a portion equal to that of two females” — Qur’an 4:11
It allows for marriage to pre-pubescent girls, stipulating that Islamic divorce procedures “shall apply to those who have not yet menstruated” — Qur’an 65:4
Also, a Muslim wife may not refuse sex. A hadith depicts Muhammad saying: “If a husband calls his wife to his bed [i.e. to have sexual relation] and she refuses and causes him to sleep in anger, the angels will curse her till morning” (Bukhari 4.54.460).
And: “By him in Whose Hand lies my life, a woman can not carry out the right of her Lord, till she carries out the right of her husband. And if he asks her to surrender herself [to him for sexual intercourse] she should not refuse him even if she is on a camel’s saddle” (Ibn Majah 1853).
Islamic law stipulates: “The husband may forbid his wife to leave the home…because of the hadith related by Bayhaqi that the Prophet…said, ‘It is not permissible for a woman who believes in Allah and the Last Day to allow someone into her husband’s house if he is opposed, or to go out of it if he is averse” (Reliance of the Traveller m10.4).
“Jeff Goldblum is BLASTED by RuPaul’s Drag Race viewers for being ‘anti-Muslim’ after asking queen Jackie Cox about her hijab runway look,” by Roxy Simons, Mailonline, April 25, 2020 (thanks to Jill):
Jeff Goldblum has been hit by criticism from fans for being ‘anti-Muslim’ after his appearance on RuPaul’s Drag Race.
The actor, 67, was a guest judge on Friday’s edition of the show, and had asked drag queen Jackie Cox about her Stars And Stripes runway look which saw her wear a star-spangled hijab in reference to her Muslim background.
First asking if Jackie was ‘religious’, Jeff went on to comment on Islam and how the religion treats LGBTQ+ people like the Iranian-Canadian star, 34.
Of her ensemble, Jackie said: ‘This outfit really represents the importance that visibility for people of religious minorities need to have in this country.’
Jeff then asked: ‘Is there something in this religion that is anti-homosexuality and anti-woman? Does that complicate the issue? I’m just raising it and thinking out loud and maybe being stupid.’
While RuPaul commented that ‘drag has always shaken the tree’, Jackie became teary-eyed as she said it was ‘a complex issue’ and had her ‘own misgivings about the way LGBT people are treated in the Middle East….
Going on to talk about the U.S. travel ban that prohibited the entry of people from Muslim-majority countries, Jackie continued: ‘When the Muslim ban happened, it really destroyed a lot of my faith in this country. And really hurt my family. And that’s so wrong to me….
Criticising Jeff for his questions, fans took to Twitter to let their thoughts be known as they hit out at the Jurassic Park star….
Another commented: ‘Now would Jeff Goldblum have asked a Christian queen that same question that he asked Jackie? That was really ignorant.’
While one viewer hit out: ‘I am REALLY not here for Jeff Goldblum’s casually islamophobic critique of Jackie Cox tonight.’…
Jim Austin says
It’s not like anybody would seriously answer “No” to Goldblum’s question. It’s that such people consider it a problem only if they become consciously aware of it. Thus they denounce anybody who’d make anybody aware of it.
Ultimately, those slamming Goldblum regard consciousness as the enemy and prefer to remain unconsciousness.
PRCS says
Bingo!
gravenimage says
Good analysis, Jim.
Liza says
Yep
william carr says
These ‘critics’ miss the point, intentionally I am sure. There would be no need to ask the question of a christian as although there are those in the christian sphere who are fundamentally against LGBT etc. they do not throw them of buildings or hang them from cranes
PRCS says
+1
gravenimage says
Exactly, William.
OTTER says
Mr. Spencer,
The question you addressed yourself to the other day whether Islam is waxing and waning also needs to take into account this whole scale silencing of any criticism of Islam. Taking this pervasive phenomenon into consideration and the fact that the purveyors of ‘Islamophobia’ have now very influential actors on their side, including the whole of the press, universities and the media, one cannot be come to the depressing conclusion that Islam is waxing not waning.
Mass servitude and the new medieval age is only decades away at the most. Alas, what a sad prognostication, but one from one I have no escape.
Kepha says
I suppose I should welcome signs of intelligent life on Planet Entertainment World.
MALLIKARJUNA SHARMA says
There should be great social and theological reform movement among followers of Islam akin to that happened in Christianity or among Hindus. The Martin Luther and Calvin reform movements [albeit their respective excesses] that completely changed the orthodox and rigid positions of the then Christianity and made it more liberal, amenable to free thinking and more rational are known to everybody. Likewise the various reforms among Hindus also. For example, at one time it was a sin for widows to be remarried; for girls to be not married before puberty; and polygamy was common – at least in Islam only 4 official wives were allowed, but among Hindus there was no limit to wives one could keep, etc. All that changed now. and the present Hindu law is one of the most progressive and pro-women personal law in the world. I think until such radical reform movements come up within Islamic communities the world over, and at least strong even if dictatorial reformers like Kemal Pasha (of Turkey) originate in every Muslim country, the Muslims all over the world cannot progress sufficiently and have to languish in various miseries.
Wellington says
Islam is incapable of reform because it is, as Bertrand Russell pointed out a century ago, the one major religion which is totalitarian in both structure and ideology. And there is no reforming a totalitarian ideology. Think Nazism or Marxism could be “reformed?”
Moreover, I think you underestimate the vibrancy of medieval Catholicism and its many achievements, including first-rate thinkers like Erigena, Anselm, Abelard, Aquinas, Duns Scotus and William of Ockham. As Russell noted in his History of Western Philosophy, the best medieval Christian philosophers were truly original thinkers but the best medieval Islamic philosophers, examples being Avicenna and Averrores, were merely good commentators.
There is also the problem that the Protestant world created in the 16th century could itself be highly restrictive and repressive. Both Calvin and Luther themselves had fanatical ideas about what to do with heretics and let’s not forget that authorities in the Massachusetts Bay Colony in the 17th century tortured or killed Catholics and Quakers, which is one of many reasons why King Charles II, a remarkably tolerant man for his age (and quite the delightful rogue too), yanked the royal charter of Massachusetts in 1684—though this still didn’t stop the Salem witch trials in 1692.
Finally, there is nothing in the Christian theological blueprint which is a menace to liberty while the menaces to liberty by Islam are all over the place in its theological blueprint, including the requirement to wage war upon mankind “until all religion is with Allah” (Sura 8:39). There are at least 109 verses in the Koran calling for this while there are 0 verses in the New Testament mandating such action. This is in keeping with Islam being the one major faith which is totalitarian, as Russell noted and others too (e.g., Winston Churchill). I’ll put it very plain like: Islam is hopeless and must be chucked; it cannot be reformed—many of its dictates like death for apostasy can be ignored but this is something very different from reformation.
gravenimage says
Fine post, Wellington. Thank you.
jimjfox says
Me too- I’d like to be able to express myself as well as Wellington [& be as knowledgeable] but alas we are not all as gifted. Kudos to him.
Mavra says
You are right, the menace to liberty by Islam is its theological blueprint to convert Christians and none Christians to Islam. Although they are totalitarian they can only be reformed by the power of Our Lord Jesus, as He is doing right at this moment. Iran, Indonesia and others, are having a personal encounter with Jesus. We as individuals are limited and many times offensive to them. But, through His Love they are transformed and are His mouth piece to their people.
Mohamet gained followers through fear and perversion, but Jesus is wining them by His Love. He is our consolation in these fearful times.
He is the King of kings and Lord of lords and He rules for ever and ever. Amen!
Liza says
Good luck chucking it. Especially in places like the backward Uk where it is blindly accepted and welcomed. It’s very sad to watch the demise of a once beautiful country and culture and to be able to do nothing about it.
Wellington says
Oh, I agree with you, Liza, on the difficulty of “chucking” Islam. My point is that it needs to be—and what needs to be done and is actually done are usually two very different things.
In fact, much of mankind’s history could read as a litany of what should have been done but sadly wasn’t, an example in modern times being the “eradication” of Hitler in the late 1930’s before he descended the world into the greatest and most tragic military conflict of all time.
faraway says
Another problem with trying to reform islam: there is so much that is vile and violent in islamic doctrine and law that if taken out, there would not be much left.
jimjfox says
That would be an ideal outcome!
william carr says
Let us not forget that christianity has had its share of totalitarianism. Many original thinkers were tortured and put to death, burning was the favourite to give the apostate a taste of hell; or otherwise persecuted and excommunicated. Excommunication was a very feared weapon in mediaeval times. When people believed in a real hell and damnation which the RC church used to frighten people into conformity. I think it quite unrealistic to think that over a billion people alive today are going to give up their faith in Mohammad any time soon, remember how so many enthusiatically welcomed ISIS. Maybe in the distant future there may be gradual change. An essential step would be to ban all religious based schools and you will not get even the Christians to accept that!
Giacomo Latta says
The Roman Catholic church reversed the condemnation that it had laid on Galileo who had dared to state that Earth revolves around the sun. In 1992! Pope Francis seems to be more in admiration of Islam circa 700 AD (or 2020 AD, same diff) than the era of brilliance lead by Galileo.While the RC church never supported slavery it did support indenture (again, same diff).
Wellington says
william carr: Any punitive or totalitarian initiatives by individual Christians was done IN SPITE OF the Christian theological blueprint which mandates no penalty in this world done by fellow Christians. Either the Christian God will punish people in this world or they will be punished in the next world. Islam has not only these two kinds of punishment in its theological blueprint but also the unique mandate that Muslims may also use force in this world to spread Islam or to keep it “pure.”
This is why Christianity was always capable of reform and Islam most certainly isn’t. It’s because of what I have called the “third threat” which is unique to Islam. The first two threats—punishment by a deity in this world or punishment in the next world—pose no threat to liberty in this world, though they are indeed threats (and which is one of several reasons why I am not religious). But that third threat of Islam which allows its followers, indeed demands that its followers, use force in this world is what makes Islam so terrible and so incapable of reform.
Comparing Christianity to Islam respecting people who believe in one of these two faiths is like comparing apples to oranges. There really is no comparison because of the damn third threat found only in the theological blueprint of Mohammedanism.
mortimer says
Reponse to MALLIKARJUNA SHARMA … who asks for a ‘reform’ of Islam. That ‘reform’ has already occurred in the 18th century under the leadership of Sheikh Muhammad Bin Wahhab, a religious scholar who was endorsed by tribal leaders who later became the Saudi Royal Family.
Wahhab is the Arab equivalent of Martin Luther … both men went ‘BACK TO THE BOOK’ or back to basics. (The problem with that is that Islam has a very bigoted and violent book.)
Wahhab’s ideas are a revival of the general principles of the Hanbali mahab (school) of Sharia (i.e. Muslim law) jurisprudence. Wahhab holds that sharia law is based exclusively on the Koran and the Haddiths and later ‘traditions’ are idolatry and ‘shirk’. These ideas are commonly referred to as Wahhabism, although a more accurate description would be Salafism (following the path of the pioneers).
At that time in the 18th Century, the Saudis launched a jihad, inspired by Wahhab, to conquer the whole Arabian Peninsula. They declared that any of their fellow Sunni Muslims who did not adhere to Wahhabism were in fact infidels, and should be killed. They would send a messenger into townships carrying a Koran in one hand, and a sword in the other.
The choices were clear: the Book or the Blade – either surrender to the Saudis and become Wahhabis, or be put to death as infidels.
The success of Wahhab’s approach is represented on the Saudi flag today – the sword and Koranic verses in the middle – a very uncompromising message: Book or Blade.
If Muslims don’t like ‘reformed’ Islam (Salafism), the only choice is to leave Islam.
PRCS says
Yes, Wahhabism was Islam’s ‘reformation’.
gravenimage says
Another excellent post, Mortimer.
jimjfox says
Seconded. Reading his wikipedia link, a telling phrase is–
Shi’i Muslims recognized “human reasoning and intellect as a legal source that supplements the Quran and other revealed texts”
human reasoning and intellect? Really?
Kepha says
It all goes to show that which book you read makes a very large difference.
rubiconcrest says
I agree there ‘should be great social and theological reform among the followers of Islam…’ But it won’t happen until those reformers know they are protected and can name who is threatening them and that there will be real consequences for the conspirators. We have to focus more attention on defending individual Muslim rights who live under democratic rule in the West. We have to give them cover. Merely pointing out Islams defects does not do that. Islam critics been successfully labeled anti-Muslim. Of course we know that is not the case but that is the narrative. We have to make Muslims feel safe enough to rat out the Imam who talks about jihad in the Mosque and we need laws that punish those who promote violent ideologies.
eduardo odraude says
Could Nazism be “reformed”? Some ideologies are too rigid at their foundations and thus can only break, not bend. To “reform” Islam properly, one would have to get rid of its core, namely Muhammad, who as theocratic leader recognized no distinction between religion and state.
mortimer says
RC: Islam cannot be reformed for a very different reason than you think. THEOLOGICAL reform is totally out of the question because of the CLOSING OF THE DOORS OF IJTIHAD in 1111 AD.
Kindly read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ijtihad and weep.
Islam is FROZEN IN TIME.
And anyway, you cannot reform what is ‘perfect, eternal and complete’.
gravenimage says
Both Eduardo and Mortimer are correct here. Islam does not allow reform for the reasons Mortimer notes; but Islam could not be reformed even without this, because as Eduardo notes Islam is evil to its core.
Richard Roy Blake says
Right on Eduardo. BTW I like Jeff Goldblum a lot better now
gravenimage says
Virtually every reform seeks to return to the pure form of the ideology, and strip it of accretions which are held not in the spirit of the original.
With Islam, what does that leave you with? The horrifying warlord, pedophile, slaver, rapist, and mass murderer “Prophet” Muhammed and his thug Companions.
The truth is that pretty much every Jihad terror group consider themselves to be reformers, and that even the local Muslim governments are not rabid enough in their imposition of the horrors of Shari’ah law.
Westman says
You are right, Mallikarjuna, Islam is facing a decisional crisis to either reform, or, continue on under increasing criticism and ridicule from the world while having no credible response except violence. My expectation is that violence will be Islam’s choice before reformation.
There is no going back for Islam. Unlike the 1960’s brief hippy exposure to Islam, modern comminication has fully exposed the world to Islam and fully exposed Islam to the world.
Woke Infidel says
I myself do not see Islam ever being able to reform itself in a way that truly changes it into a religion of peace. In order to do so, plain statements that originated with the founder himself would have to be stricken, and/or, totally reinterpreted to mean something that they simply do not. What’s “wrong” with Islam, and what sets it apart from other religions, is its demand for world dominance, and the punishment of death decreed for those who do not submit. Attempts to change these basic foundational premises would certainly be met with even more violence from adherents who are fully steeped in the belief that any change -perceived as apostasy – is deserving of death. Indeed, if the pillars of Islam could be loved for their most basic ideals – faith, prayer, alms, fasting, & pilgrimage – there might be no serious difficultly in reformation. It is unfortunately, however, much of what is encompassed in the faith (as laid down by Mohammad), which prevents change from going forward.
This is all very different from the reformation Luther spearheaded, which was predominantly concerned with power that had been assumed by the Catholic church. Not only did the church – incorrectly, when put to the test of scripture – claim that salvation could be acquired by works (good deeds), but the church itself was actually engaged in pardoning penalties for sin (called an indulgence). These things were coming to light in a period where the christian scriptures had been essentially withheld from the common man, having been transferred into the Latin Vulgate, so that few had access. Once the Bible became more easily studied by men, the flaws of Catholic interpretation became obvious, and men were eventually free to criticize, form their own understanding, and act upon it by forming their own church groups. No bloodshed was at stake, as Christianity is not a religion in which each believer is urged and empowered to take immediate judgment upon disbelievers, as is the case with Islam. (That the church – or, any church – did historically once seek to judge and punish it’s members is certainly to its shame.)
Tony Stark says
As this is a site devoted to countering Islamic Jihad, I kindly point out to Woke Infidel that, while Catholics such as Charles Martel, Charlemagne, Richard the Lionhearted, Gianandrea Doria, & Jan Sobieski were defending Europe from the scourge of the Scimitar, and while Catholic Saints like Francis of Assisi, Ignatius of Loyola, & John of Damascus risked their lives in attempting to convert Mohammedans to the Gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ, Herr Martin Luther praised Islam, and hoped it would defeat Rome. Your views of the Protestant Reformation, or ‘Revolt’ as GK Chesterton put it, are more than slightly skewed, sir. I humbly suggest you watch/listen to the testimonies of Steve Ray, Scott Hahn, Marcus Grodi, Tim Staples, Dave Anders, Peter Kreeft – all former Protestant Ministers/Theologians who became Catholic. They (and other ex-Lutherans who converted to Catholicism) have much to say about Luther and his ‘reformation’.
carpediadem says
Luther was so proud of his new reformed Christianity that he invited the Jews to convert to it and when they declined he immediately pushed for their wholesale extermination, wrote a book vilifying them and describing how to kill them and was a great inspiration for the Nazis.
So, no. No greatness, just a huge ego & a jealous pathologically hate-filled nature. Just like Muhammad.
mortimer says
Response to Westman:
You cannot reform what is ‘perfect, eternal and complete’.
Kindly read https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ijtihad and weep.
Islam is FROZEN IN TIME. The door to reform is closed and locked.
Beeko Review says
Islam Is Not A Religion, Allah Is Not God, And Muhammad Is Not His Messenger. Muslims Have No Place In America Unless They Assimilate Into American Society. American Society Will Not Allow Islam To Change How America Lives! We Fly Our Flag, We Respect Our Laws, And Sharia Law Is A Bullshit Control System Designed To Control The Uneducated And Disguised As A Religion.
gravenimage says
Noting that something is a religion does *not* mean that it is true. It just means that its followers worship what they believe is a supernatural entity.
Pam says
Amen indeed!
PRCS says
To expound on Wellington’s post, below, so long as Muslims believe Qur’an is Allah’s literal, infallible and unchangeable word, valid ’til the end of time’, reform just ain’t in the cards.
PRCS says
Above.
Westman says
That is most likely – no reform. Will that lead to world war with Islam since it cannot tolerate the criticism which will only increase with time and more jihad violence?
It seems that a stupid person resents being called stupid because he has no frame of reference to detect it nor wishes to accept the humiliation. Similarly, a backward religion is unable and unwilling to recognize its true self as modernity leaves it behind.
Daniel Triplett says
We’ve been in an Islamic World War for 1400 years, but at the moment, the Ummah is the only side fighting.
As Robert Spencer has articulated so well in his books, there have been times throughout the ages when regional groups of Kafirs organized and fought back.
Ironic then, seems to me, that today when we have unprecedented levels of Worldwide communication and knowledge, along with the most asymmetric technological and military advantages over the Ummah, we are at our weakest, most ignorant, and most impotent in this 1400 year zero-sum global war. We’re getting steamrolled and losing the war unnecessarily. The willful denial and ignorance is strong.
PRCS says
DT
“We’ve been in an Islamic World War for 1400 years, but at the moment, the Ummah is the only side fighting.”
IMO, the primary reason we play along, to comply with their beliefs and demands, is the failure of those of our national leaders who can tell them, up front–citing specific passages from their ‘holy’ books:–why we do NOT have to, that we’re NOT going to, and BTW: pound sand.
gravenimage says
Daniel, you are sadly correct about willful ignorance and denial.
Daniel Triplett says
Agreed. Unless and until the POTUS, and other heads of state, speak the full truth to the People and fight back, our situation will only worsen. It must come from the top, with encouragement from below. On 9/11, Bush 43 could have rallied all Americans and set the tone for the Western World against Islam had he spoken the truth, or at least paused to learn the truth, before falsely proclaiming his “Islam is a Religion of Peace, hijacked by a Tiny Minority of Extremists” speech.
gravenimage says
Sadly, George Bush believed what he was told about Islam.
mortimer says
PRCS is correct. The Koran cannot be changed or reformed. Muslims will leave Islam the moment they realize the Koran is of human origin.
gravenimage says
And how many Muslims has this happened to?
PRCS says
There are many ‘ex-Muslim’ groups around the world, GI, and an unknown number of individual who’ve left ‘the faith’ (in nations where that’s possible).
Giacomo Latta says
Show us all how it’s done. I believe the name Islamoholics Anonymous is there for your taking.
gravenimage says
PRCS, I am well aware that some brave and principled people have indeed left Islam, and I admire them for it. I have in fact noted this many times here.
That does not mean that Mortimer’s idea that all Muslims can somehow be “deprogrammed” by Infidels against their will is somehow workable, though.
eduardo odraude says
Could Nazism be “reformed”? Some ideologies are too rigid at their foundations and thus can only break, not bend. To “reform” Islam properly, one would have to get rid of its core, namely Muhammad, who as theocratic leader embodied a complete fusion of religion and state. He is the prime exemplar for Muslims, and his example and his teachings command expansionist theocratic rule to be established by Muslims all over the globe.
By contrast, a distinction between religion and state goes back to the statements attributed to the central figure of the New Testament. One can be an atheist and see that fact. While it took the Christian world a long time to figure out where the dividing line was supposed to be, and popes often tried to dominate kings, and kings tried to dominate popes, yet there was always at minimum a latent recognition in the Christian world that there was to be a “realm of Caesar” distinct from a “realm of God” and the Church. Jesus in the Bible is portrayed saying, “my kingdom is not of this world,” and “Give to Caesar the things that are Caesar’s, to God the things that are God’s.” Jesus is shown telling Pontius Pilate that the reason the disciples did not fight to protect Jesus from arrest was that Jesus’ kingdom is not of this world.
As for Hinduism, it could be reformed because its paradigm recognizes thousands or millions of different gods. It’s paradigm is profoundly pluralistic. Hinduism is thus compatible with pluralistic social systems and reform, in part because no one god has a monopoly and there is no one dogma in Hinduism. New gods and new gurus and avatars can come along (and have come along) any time in Hinduism and teach all sorts of reforms. By contrast, Muhammad arrogates to himself the role of “seal of the prophets,” in other words, in Islam there can be no further prophets, religion has been perfected by Muhammad. Islam (not all Muslims, many of whom know little of their own faith) is inherently totalitarian.
Majin Yojimbo says
Christianity’s ‘reformation’ is because the Catholic Church kept the Gospels in Latin. The Printing press enabled the layman to read the Gospels in English and see that Jesus wasn’t actually a fan of organized religion. Muslims don’t have that excuse.
mortimer says
IS ISLAM ANTI-HOMOSEXUAL ?
Here’s what Sharia law actually says about punishing homosexuals: flogging, stoning, thrown from high place, wall pushed over to crush, burned to death
Homosexuality is not only a sin, but a crime under Islamic law.
– Islam Question and Answer says: “The crime of homosexuality is one of the greatest of crimes, the worst of sins and the most abhorrent of deeds, and Allaah punished those who did it in a way that He did not punish other nations. It is indicative of violation of the fitrah, total misguidance, weak intellect and lack of religious commitment, and it is a sign of doom and deprivation of the mercy of Allaah.”
– In the Hanafi school of thought, the homosexual is first punished through harsh beating, and if he/she repeats the act, the death penalty is to be applied.
– In the Shafi`i school of thought, the homosexual receives the same punishment as adultery (if he/she is married) or fornication (if not married). This means, that if the homosexual is married, he/she is stoned to death, while if single, he/she is whipped 100 times. Hence, the Shafi`i compares the punishment applied in the case of homosexuality with that of adultery and fornication.
– In the Hanafi school, the two acts are differentiated, because anal sex [something that is prohibited, regardless of orientation] may also be involved, while in adultery [and fornication], the penis/vagina (which are reproductive parts) are involved.
– Some scholars hold the opinion that homosexuals should be thrown from a high building or stoned to death as a punishment for their crime, but other scholars maintain that they should be imprisoned until death occurs through starvation.
-Some of them (Islamic jurists) said that he should be punished in the same way as an adulterer, so he should be stoned if he is married and flogged if he is not married.
-Another view is that between two males, the active partner is to be lashed a hundred times if he is unmarried, and killed if he is married; whereas the passive partner is to be killed regardless of his marital status.
-Abd-Allaah ibn ‘Abbaas said: The highest point in the town should be found and the homosexual should be thrown head first from it, then stones should be thrown at him.
Ibn ‘Abbaas derived this hadd punishment from the punishment that Allaah sent upon the homosexuals of the people of Loot.
– It is narrated from Khaalid ibn al-Waleed that he found a man among one of the Arab tribes with whom men would have intercourse as with a woman. He wrote to (caliph) Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq (may Allaah be pleased with him) and Abu Bakr al-Siddeeq consulted the Sahaabah (may Allaah be pleased with them).
‘Ali ibn Abi Taalib had the strongest opinion of all of them, and he said: “No one did that but one of the nations, and you know what Allaah did to them. I think that he should be burned with fire.” So Abu Bakr wrote to Khaalid and he had him burned.
mortimer says
IS ISLAM ANTI-WOMAN ?
The following are the words of Mohammed from the hadiths :
– I think that women were created for nothing but evil
– Women have ten ‘awrat (vulvas). When she gets married, the husband covers one, and when she dies the grave covers the ten (of her shameful parts)
– A straw mat in the corner of the house is preferable to a barren woman
– Women are toys, so choose (your ‘toys’)
– The woman is a toy, whoever takes her, let him care for her [or do not lose her]
– Had it not been for women, God would have truly, truly been worshipped
– Men perished the day they obeyed the women
– Obedience to a woman’s advice causes regret
– Consult women and act contrary (to it)
– Sneezing, drowsing, yawning in prayer, also menstruation, vomiting and nose-bleeding are from Satan
– When…your affairs are in the hands of your women, the interior of the earth (hell) will be the better for you than its surface
– If a woman offered one of her breasts to be cooked and the other to be roasted, she still will fall short of fulfilling her obligations to her husband. And besides that if she disobeys her husband even for a twinkling of an eye, she would be thrown in the lowest part of Hell, except she repents and turns back
– Mohammed asked some women, “Isn’t the witness of a woman equal to half that of a man?” The women said, “Yes,” He said, “This is because of the deficiency of the woman’s mind.”
– I have not seen any one more deficient in intelligence and religion than you (women)
– I was shown the Hell-fire and that the majority of its dwellers are women.
– Bad omen is in the woman, the house and the horse
– After me I have not left any affliction more harmful to men than women
– Don’t wear false hair for Allah sends His curse upon such ladies who lengthen their hair artificially
– Treat women well for they are like domestic animals and they possess nothing themselves. Allah has made the enjoyment of their bodies lawful in his Qur’an
– Women, slaves and camels are the same
– Prayer is annulled by a dog, a donkey and a woman
– “Women are like cows, horses, and camels, for all are ridden.”
– “Hang up your scourge where your wife can see it”
CONCLUSION: Mohammed is the authority on Islam.
Maureen Chaloner says
Oooh give me 5 minutes with Mohammed…..
gravenimage says
Two spot on posts, Mortimer.
Maureen Chaloner says
Easy answer yes and yes!
Adrian says
I am puzzled why Western feminists can have a shred of support for this barbaric death cult .I can ony guess its a warped version of my enemy’s enemy is my friend.
gravenimage says
I believe in equal rights for women and I hate Islam.
Jay says
Why is it that Jeff Goldblum is not entitled to his own opinion? We still have free speech here in America! And why is any and all criticism of Islam is called
Islamaphobic? Such a dangerous double standard.
Muslims immigrating to the USA do not believe in acclimation only demands that we accept their culture over our own! Complete insanity! Protect our borders from all intending to destroy the USA! ????
God bless and save America.
Westman says
This reminds one of Robert Feynman, the great scientist on the committee to discover the cause of the Challenger disaster. Holding up an O-ring that he had compressed in ice water that didn’t return to its former shape, he said, “I believe that has some significance for our problem…”
Yes, Mr. Goldblum, what you said has some significance for our Islam-based threats and violence problem.
mortimer says
Response: Mr. Goldblum can easily search the internet and find the answer.
https://wikiislam.net/wiki/Islam_and_Women
Mr. Goldblum could also read and study one Koranic verse which may confirm the misogyny of the Koran …. namely Chap.4 verses 23-24: And all married women (are forbidden unto you) save those (captives) whom your right hands possess. It is a decree of Allah for you.
The Koran is the only sacred book that permits the rape of married captives. In the 21st century we call this policy of raping married captives a ‘crime against humanity’. It is a part of genocide.
If K.4.23-24 isn’t misogynistic, then what is?
Are you listening, Mr. Goldblum?
eduardo odraude says
I think Goldblum knows, he was just trying to tell the truth without making half or more of the world hate or want to kill him.
eduardo odraude says
I’m also betting that Goldblum knows that anti-Semitism is rife in the Islamic community because of statements in the Qur’an and Hadith.
gravenimage says
Yes–Jeff Goldblum’s being Jewish is another reason Muslims would hate and despise him.
Westman says
Mind not up to speed today. The the scientist was Richard Feynman(not Robert).
tedh754 says
There was a ban on travel from, what? 6 out of 57 countries?
gravenimage says
Even this has unhinged Muslims.
somehistory says
Some people…more and more, it seems…are incredibly stupid. Some like to “pretend” things that simply can never, ever, be true…not even if those people lived a million years “pretending.”
And this is so tiresome: “Now would Jeff Goldblum have asked a Christian queen …” Unless a Christian has the name “Queen” or married a ‘king,’ there is no such thing as a “Christian queen.”
True Christians would never do what these “queens” do, nor pretend such.
moslims get away with so much…their demands are met, their squeals and whines are mollified, they are treated like royalty and given a pass when others would be punished for behavior or speech with which the majority really disagrees.
But, then when someone questions a moslim, such as Mr. Goldblum did, out comes the false comparison that Christians would never be treated that way, there would be too much outcry if Christians were asked such a question, etc.
And the entire time, those making such claims know full well that moslims get special treatment: and generally too many are too afraid to ask questions..honest questions, hard questions. The ones who do, get blasted as Mr. Goldblum did.
And, although Christians recognize that God, the One written about in the Bible, condemns homosexuality, Christians are not authorized to do anything about it more than just inform others…as Jesus did when He said, “God created them male and female,” and then joined them in marriage.
But the people who condemn Mr. Goldblum…as though he committed some terrible crime…wish to bury the fact that moslims throw homosexuals off roofs, hang them, burn them, etc., while many, many males in that filthy devil-worship are themselves homosexuals. And they treat women as dirt. This fact, too is buried because it’s just too uncomfortable for the ones who have fear of being called the fake “phobic.”
If moslims had been in control in this country…as they are becoming now…back when women began to complain that they were seen just as “sex-objects,” their complaints would have been stifled. If moslims had been in control when laws were being changed to keep rape victims from being accused of “asking for it,’ and having their entire life history revealed before the Courts for how many boyfriends, husbands, or other male friends they had over their lifetime, and having their clothing presented as the “reason” for the rapes, laws would never have been changed. Rape victims would still to this day, be treated as the one causing the attack, if moslims had their way.
Many people may not like or approve of Christians and Christianity, but it sure beats the heck out of islam any day of the week and only the dishonest refuse to admit it.
Woke Infidel says
Yes, wonderful! “Christians are not authorized to do anything” ….Islam does give that authority. 🙁
Battle says
Jackie is really a Jack.
Pam says
I agree 100%.
James Lincoln says
“Of her ensemble, Jackie said: ‘This outfit really represents the importance that visibility for people of religious minorities need to have in this country.’”
Translation: muslims wear the hijab in the USA to show the importance of islam.
“Jeff (Goldblum) then asked: ‘Is there something in this religion that is anti-homosexuality and anti-woman? Does that complicate the issue?”
“Jackie became teary-eyed as she said it was ‘a complex issue’ and had her ‘own misgivings about the way LGBT people are treated in the Middle East…”
Translation: Jackie admitted that there is a problem – at least in the Middle East.
“Jackie continued: ‘When the Muslim ban happened, it really destroyed a lot of my faith in this country.”
Translation: even though Jackie is conflicted and is experiencing cognitive dissonance, that in and of itself is not enough for her to leave islam – or agree to prohibit at least some muslims from entering The United States…
somehistory says
You “translated” nicely. moslims won’t admit that there is anything evil enough about islam for them to leave it.
Since they were “raised” to accept the evil, to live with the filth of it, to be “hurt” by it and just allow the hurt to continue, they won’t give it up. And the females and the “pretenders” must wear the ugly representation of their “faith,’ knowing for the true females it is a symbol of their slavery to the whims and lusts of the males.
PRCS says
Like so many Muslims, she likely doesn’t know its mandated in Qur’an.
1. Qur’an 33:59
https://quran.com/33/59
To differentiate Muslimas from ‘from kuffar women’ in order to avoid ‘abuse’ at the hands of Muslim men: ca. 1400 years ago in areas where Islamic law was THE law. As such ‘abuse’ here would be prosecutable in accordance with man-made, secular U.S.law–not religious law–that garb is irrelevant here.
2. Qur’an 24:31
https://quran.com/24/31
One of Islam’s so-called ‘modesty’ edicts’. Of course, she can be seen ‘uncovered’ by her slaves
Another example of the sharia’s irrelevance here.
Woke Infidel says
I would like to think that Jeff Goldblum actually knew the answers to the questions he posed; and possibly asked them to increase awareness. It’s hard to believe that he is as “stupid” as he himself suggested.
Kelly Samyra Scamard says
His question was Sincere and far from Racist. When you see and here the daily abuse of Muslim women. Many women praise Jesus that they are not raised in that culture based on just that!
God bless you Mr Goldblum!
PRCS says
The video, via Twitter:
https://twitter.com/aliamjadrizvi/status/1254051025268375553
“Jeff Goldblum was correct and honest to ask this question.
If we criticize anti-woman and anti-LGBTQ attitudes and laws everywhere EXCEPT Islamic societies—where they are rampant—we are holding Muslims to a lower standard. And THAT is bigotry.”
mortimer says
A double standard that is lower for Muslims is the discrimination of lower expectations. The lower standard actually excuses Muslims of being more barbaric than other people.
The Left is actually saying, ‘You know … they can’t help being savages. We can’t expect them to be civilized. It’s their culture to be barbaric.’
PRCS says
+1
libertyORdeath says
Great point mortimer. The left has a long history of this type of insincere pandering to “minorities” while their actions nearly always contradict their statements. This has been the case here in the US when it comes to African Americans for decades at the least. We can still see it today when lefties like Turdeau and Ralph Northam spout “liberal” talking points while having no issues with wearing blackface. Or at least they have no issues until the act comes to light. It is all a part of the liberal desire to control and command while neglecting to apply their values to themselves and their followers. How can you be a liberal and tolerate the horrors of Islam at the same time? It’s easy if the rules only apply to the “other”, i.e. conservatives.
Jim says
No, Mr Goldblum, you are emerging from darkness and into light. It’s strange at first, but you’ll get used to it and like it. Don’t pay attention to your complainers, they are still in darkness.
tim gallagher says
Bravo, Jeff Goldblum. It definitely takes some courage for any person in the leftie-infested entertainment industry to step outside the orthodox, totally politically correct, left wing bullshit that usually emanates from that section of society. I’m sure there will be a big pile on by many people in the entertainment and news media brigade. Maybe Goldblum is old enough, with a substantial career behind him, to be able to be honest and raise the issue. Even though he only asks the question, I’m sure he knows the answer to his question. Younger entertainment types might put their careers at risk if they dared to say anything “Islamophobic”, that is, if they told the truth about Islam.
PRCS says
“I’m sure he knows the answer to his question.”
Probably true!
tim gallagher says
PRCS, I do think that younger actors, with their careers ahead of them, might not have the courage to do what Goldblum has done. The entertainment industry seems so left wing and politically correct. I don’t follow it all that much, but I do take a bit of notice if I hear of someone in that industry who is brave enough to be a conservative. I think James Woods, Kelsey Grammer and Angie Harmon are conservatives. In Australia, we had one hard rock and roll type singer, Angry Anderson, who came out with tough, conservative views a few years ago and I think even stood as a candidate for the conservative One Nation party. He was pretty old by then and probably didn’t give a damn what people thought. It is pretty rare though and takes some courage to go against the flow.
Majin Yojimbo says
and that’s just nitpicking. Islam despises all non-muslims – See Quran 98:6
gravenimage says
Jeff Goldblum slammed as “anti-Muslim” for asking if Islam is “anti-homosexuality and anti-woman”
……………….
Now just *asking* these questions is “anti-Muslim”?
Never mind that pious Muslims would throw drag queen Jackie Cox off the nearest tall building, star-spangled Hijab or no…
Good for Jeff Goldblum for speaking out!
Richard says
He could asked a lot more similar questions, such as does Islam allow men to treat women like dirt, beat them, and so on, does Islam allow Muslims to lie when it suits them, does Islam consider Muslims to be the best of people and all non Muslims worthy or tax, slavery or death… So many questions he could have asked.
Relic says
Jeff Goldblum
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j8fOCY4jwBs
jimjfox says
What to learn here- that you are just another islamic moron?
Or have I got it wrong??
jimjfox says
Not watched the video…
gravenimage says
Jim, Relic is *not* a Muslim. He often posts songs and music videos here–sometimes they are obviously on topic, sometimes less so. But he has always been a staunch Anti-Jihadist.
Mike says
Islam is gay friendly . There are a gay pride parades going on every Friday as gays goes down from the 7th floor to the ground in 5 seconds .
Joey says
America in s being colonized by Muslims through political and population jihad
Battle says
Jackie is really a Jack.