Conservative Christians and Muslims United against gays

[Ian David]

Fundamental union

When it comes to defining family values, conservative Christians and Muslims are united against liberal secularists, writes Brian Whitaker

Tuesday January 25, 2005

Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi is a controversial Islamic scholar who approves of wife-beating and believes in traditional family values. The Mormon church, having abandoned polygamy more than a century ago, believes in traditional families too.

With that much in common, they have joined forces to "defend the family" and fight progressive social policies at the United Nations.

Other members of the holy alliance include Cardinal Alfonso Trujillo, who campaigns against condoms on behalf of the Catholic church, and Mahathir Mohamad, the dictatorial former prime minister of Malaysia who sacked and jailed his deputy for alleged homosexuality.

They all met in Doha, the capital of Qatar, last November for what was officially described as a conference to celebrate the 10th anniversary of the UN's Year of the Family. In reality, it brought together some of the world's most socially conservative religious forces.

Opening the conference, Sheikha Mousa bint Nasser al-Misnad, the wife of Qatar's ruler, announced that the well-being of the family was in peril. She warned against trying to "redefine the concept of family in a manner contrary to religious precepts" - though there was little danger of anyone at the Doha conference doing that.

In common with many Muslim states, Qatar rejects basic family rights legislation such as the international Convention for the Elimination of Discrimination Against Women (Cedaw), using "religious precepts" as an excuse.

<snip>
Almost 90% of America's 4 million Mormons voted for Bush last November and Utah, where the Mormon church is based, gave him the biggest majority of any US state. Indeed, Bush was so sure of winning Utah that he didn't even bother to campaign there.


More:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/elsewhere/journalist/story/0,7792,1398055,00.html

------------

Also:
Mass. religious leaders issue statement supporting marriage
http://www.rcab.org/Pilot/2004/ps040213/Marriage_statement.html

Following is the text of a statement issued Feb. 7 by the leaders of several
religious communities in support of the proposed constitutional amendment
defining marriage as the union of one man and one woman.

Today, the Roman Catholic Dioceses of the state of Massachusetts joined with
over 3,000 other religious communities within the state to offer a joint
statement in support of a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union
between a man and a woman. The list of names appended to the statement shows
how truly broad-based support for this amendment is among the mainstream
religious communities of the state of Massachusetts. The ongoing reference in
the media to leaders or congregations supporting same-sex marriage has created
a myth of religious support. Our signatures speak otherwise. The racial,
cultural and theological make-up of the communities represented by the
signatories lays to rest any argument that support of a constitutional
amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman is limited to
only a few faith communities. It is our hope that the Legislature of the state
of Massachusetts will respond to this petition from its constituents and vote
to allow this amendment to come before the people.

Among the signers are the leaders of Vision New England (2,053 churches in
Massachusetts), the four Roman Catholic Dioceses of Massachusetts (about 1,000
Catholic churches), the Orthodox Churches (about 100 churches), the Islamic
Council of New England (representing 25 Islamic Centers and Mosques), the
Black Ministerial Alliance (about 80 churches), Jewish congregations and
various Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist and Episcopalian communities as
listed. We anticipate other signers will be notifying us of their desire to
endorse this statement as well.

Statement

We stand together today as religious and academic leaders and as citizens of the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts to affirm a common and deeply-held conviction:
Marriage must be defined in our civil law as the union of one man and one
woman. Each of the traditions we represent has long upheld the institution of
marriage as a unique bond between a man and a woman, a bond which is the very
foundation of the family and of our society.

This understanding of marriage is not, however, primarily a religious doctrine.
It is based on common sense and human reason. It has been shared by every human
culture for thousands of years. The marriage of one man and one woman is the
basis for family life, into which children are born, nourished and educated.
This understanding of marriage and family predates and precedes the authority
of the state.

Should the Supreme Judicial Court’s decision to redefine marriage as any
voluntary union of persons become the law of the land, it would have an
enormously negative impact on our society. The citizens of the Commonwealth
know that such a law, which places all voluntary relationships on the same
level as marriage, would inevitably lead to far-reaching changes in the
institutions of our society, more importantly those which educate our children
and grandchildren.

The court’s re-definition of marriage explicitly divorces the institution of
marriage from the procreation and education of children. Despite the
experience of all human cultures and the empirical data of sociological
studies, the court ignores the fact that the stable, permanent relationship of
a husband and wife is the optimal basis for child rearing. The court’s
decision will harm our children, who are entitled to be able to count on their
parents’ marriages as the secure foundation of their family lives.

John Adams, when writing the constitution of the Commonwealth, enshrined in it
the principle of the separation of powers, executive, legislative and judicial.

Four justices of the Supreme Judicial Court have overstepped their authority in
redefining marriage. We believe that the people of Massachusetts have a right
to vote to maintain the definition of marriage as the union between a man and a
woman. Therefore, we urge the members of the Legislature, in the strongest of
terms, to allow the citizens of the Commonwealth to vote on this most important
issue. We also ask that Senate President Robert Travaglini allow the amendment
to come before the legislators in the joint session scheduled for Feb. 11.

We encourage all members of our religious traditions to offer prayers concerning
this issue, to be active in the public debate and to encourage others to be
active as well. This matter is crucially important for the good of society as a
whole. In the spirit of unity, let us stand together for the good of our
families, state, country and all humanity. All eyes are on Massachusetts; may
they see our courage and resolve to safeguard the fundamental institution of
marriage.

More:
http://www.rcab.org/Pilot/2004/ps040213/Marriage_statement.html

----------

Also:


Queer allies

By Evan Gahr




The little-noticed alliance between gay marriage opponents and alleged terrorist sympathizers

The Massachusetts Supreme Court decision to legalize homosexual marriage in the Bay state re-ignited the culture wars. The Religious Action Center of Reform Judaism, perhaps the preeminent liberal Jewish organization in Washington, DC, applauded the ruling. Religious-minded conservatives, however, were horrified. They are determined to stop the gay rights movement in its tracks. At what price?

JewishWorldReview.com has discovered that prominent religious conservatives — Jews, Catholics and Evangelical Christians — are allied with a radical Islamic group to stop gay marriage. Pushing a constitutional amendment that would restrict marriage to heterosexuals, they work with the Islamic Society of North America. What is ISNA? According to terrorism expert Steve Emerson, ISNA:

* has held fundraisers for terrorists (e.g., after Hamas leader Musa Marzuk was arrested, it raised money for his defense, claiming he was innocent and not connected to terrorism)

* has condemned US seizure of Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad assets in the United States after 9/11

* has consistently sponsored speakers at their conferences that defend Islamic terrorists. Recently, a leader denied in an interview with an NBC affiliate that ISNA took any Saudi money but that was a brazen lie as evidenced by a recording of an ISNA conference in which it was revealed that money came from Saudi Arabia.

"ISNA," says Emerson, "is a radical group hiding under a false veneer of moderation."

More:
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/1203/marriage_terrorists.php3?printer_friendly


-----

Leaders and members of more than 3000 churches, mosques, and synagogues issue
joint statement in support of constitutional amendment initiative

2/8/2004

Today, the Roman Catholic Dioceses of the state of Massachusetts joined with
over 3000 other religious communities within the state to offer a joint
statement in support of a constitutional amendment defining marriage as a union
between a man and a woman. The list of names appended to the statement shows
how truly broad-based support for this amendment is among the mainstream
religious communities of the state of Massachusetts. The ongoing reference in
the media to leaders or congregations supporting same-sex marriage has created
a myth of religious support. Our signatures speak otherwise. The racial,
cultural, and theological make-up of the communities represented by the
signatories lays to rest any argument that support of a constitutional
amendment defining marriage as a union between a man and a woman is limited to
only a few faith communities. It is our hope that the legislature of the state
of Massachusetts will respond to this petition from its constituents and vote
to allow this amendment to come before the people.


Among the signers are the leaders of Vision New England (2,053 Churches in
Massachusetts), the four Roman Catholic Dioceses of Massachusetts (about 1000
Catholic Churches), the Orthodox Churches (about 100 Churches in MA), the
Islamic Council of New England (representing 25 Islamic Centers and Mosques),
the Black Ministerial Alliance (about 80 Churches), Jewish congregations, and
various Lutheran, Presbyterian, Methodist, Episcopalian communities as listed.
We anticipate other signers will be notifying us of their desire to endorse
this statement as well.

More:
http://www.boston.com/news/specials/gay_marriage/articles/2004/02/08/leaders_and_members_of_over_3000_churches_mosques_and_synagogues_issue_joint_statement_in_support_of_constitutional_amendment_initiative/

[noahmijo]

1. It is so hard to maintain any faith nowadays...

I can't even bear to wear my cross around anymore signifying myself as a Catholic knowing that these nuts all represent the movement at least from a concrete point of view...I really really hate conservative followers of all religions, I've gotten to the point where I simply pray in private and never attend church or even go near "followers" of my own religion.

FUCK EM that's all I have to say FUCK THEM They don't speak for God and they never will.

[davidinalameda]

4. that's one of the main reasons that I'm a Unitarian

the Unitarian Church has constantly supported GLBT rights

and it's more spiritual in its outlook--especially since it doesn't have any hard and fast dogma

[noahmijo]

8. One of the biggest reasons why I don't leave is family

Otherwise I'd probably be right there with you, but you can imagine if you know any old school Irish, Italians or Latinos like myself who were raised Catholic (luckily my parents are not conservatives I got the loving good end of the religious upbringing) and the thing is it's more culture based for me to stay Catholic, but that doesn't mean I'll lash out at the institution anytime I see it being corrupt or preaching hatred.

[bowens43]

2. There is virtually no difference between

fundamentalist Islam and fundamentalist Christianity. They are just two ends of the same worm. Bigotry, xenophobia, hatred and a desire to force others to live, believe and act as they do. The enemy is not Christianity, it is not Islam. The enemy is fundamentalism.

[Zenlitened]

18. "The enemy is fundamentalism." Exactly. - n/t

[ooglymoogly]

3. gays can't be brought under the yoke

therefore they are dangerous to all fanatical gov'ts, with the exception of the five or six members of the log cabin club who would sell their people down the river for a pat on the back by their nazi overseers

[teenagebambam]

5. This would be funny...

...if it wasn't so sad.

"...who approves of wife-beating and believes in traditional family values"

[iverglas]

6. we may be being a tad narrowly focused

An affidavit by a Canadian MP in the recent Supreme Court of Canada reference on same-sex marriage:

http://64.233.161.104/search?q=cache:XJLpFltB0xsJ:www.samesexmarriage.ca/docs/scc/marlene_jennings_affidavit.pdf+%22same-sex+marriage%22+%22supreme+court%22+muslim&hl=en&ie=UTF-8
http://www.samesexmarriage.ca/docs/scc/marlene_jennings_affidavit.pdf

3. In total, the Committee heard from 467 witnesses. The majority of witnesses (274 or 59%) favoured extending equal marriage rights to same-sex couples. 166 witnesses or 35.5% opposed.

4. These witnesses represented a board range of groups and interests of Canadian society concerned with the issue of same-sex marriage.

5. Those speaking in favour of same-sex marriage included same-sex couples, a number of whom were raising children, as well as parents and family-members of gays and lesbians, children being raised by same-sex parents, educators, union groups, women's and ethnocultural organizations, academics, legal organizations and Bar Associations, family organizations, youth groups, Human Rights
Commissions and a variety of religious denominations including representatives of Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, and Catholic communities, the Unitarian Church, the United Church of Canada, Metropolitan Community Churches, and the Religious Society of Friends (Quakers).

6. Those speaking against same-sex marriage included academics, lawyers, family organizations, ethnocultural organizations and a variety of religious denominations including representatives of Catholic, Pentecostal, Islamic, Evangelical, Jewish and Mennonite faiths. The opposition to same-sex marriage on the basis of religious views was most common.

I don't know what her distinction between "Muslim" and "Islamic" is, except that in the latter case "Islamic" was probably part of the organization's title -- yes, the two witnesses were from the Islamic Council of Imams-Canada and the Islamic Society of North America:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/infocomdoc/37/2/JUST/Meetings/Evidence/JUSTEV37-E.HTM#Int-509824
http://www.parl.gc.ca/infocomdoc/37/2/JUST/Meetings/Evidence/JUSTEV36-E.HTM#Int-508923

But we also had:
http://www.parl.gc.ca/InfoComDoc/37/2/JUST/Meetings/Evidence/JUSTEV24-E.HTM#Int-446732

Rabbi Justin Lewis (Interfaith Coalition for Same-Sex Marriage): Thank you.

We are here representing the Interfaith Coalition for Same-Sex Marriage. As noted in our brief, our coalition includes representatives from the Unitarian Council of Canada, the Universal Fellowship of Metropolitan Community Churches, the Society of Friends or Quakers, the United Church of Canada, and members of the Jewish, Muslim, Sikh, and Catholic communities.

What I'm getting at ... is that singling out Muslims / Muslim religious institutions/leaders for this kind of criticism -- "radical", "terrorist" -- is a little selective; from an article quoted:

JewishWorldReview.com has discovered that prominent religious conservatives — Jews, Catholics and Evangelical Christians — are allied with a radical Islamic group to stop gay marriage. Pushing a constitutional amendment that would restrict marriage to heterosexuals, they work with the Islamic Society of North America. What is ISNA? According to terrorism expert Steve Emerson, ISNA: ...

I'd say it could just as easily be written the other way around: it has been discovered that Muslims are allied with radical Jews, Catholics and Evangelical Christians to stop gay marriage. We know from history (and the news) what radical Jews, Catholics and Evangelical Christians have got up to. And I find the term "conservatives" a little mild for it. In fact, I find "terrorism" more appropriate in many cases. Oh yeah, the leadership probably didn't have a direct hand in it in most cases, but the distinction is a little subtle for me.

"ISNA," says Emerson, "is a radical group hiding under a false veneer of moderation."

And "radicals" of any religion who undertake activities to deny others human rights, and to directly harm others, are vicious extremists hiding under a false veneer of religion.

It isn't Muslims who have murdered doctors and bombed abortion clinics in the US and Canada, just for instance. It wasn't Muslims whose supreme religious leader abetted the Nazis. It isn't even Muslims who engage in individual acts of violence against GLBT people in North America.

It strikes me that maybe it's Muslims who should be more careful about the company they keep. And we should all keep our perspective.


That said, obviously the "unholy alliance" that has long been observed, between right-wing Christian organizations and the states in which they exercise decisive influence (some Latin American states in the case of the RC Church, the US in the case of fundamentalist Protestant churches ...) and right-wing Muslim organizations and the states in which they exercise decisive influence, is distasteful.

It's just that the Christians who participate in it are every bit as distasteful as the Muslims.

http://www.thenation.com/doc.mhtml?i=20020923&c=3&s=bunch

Ironically, even as public discourse demonizes Islamic fundamentalists, the unholy alliance of the Vatican, Islamic fundamentalists and right-wing US forces is still working together when it comes to trying to defeat women's human rights. Feminists encountered this alliance in full force at the International Conference on Population and Development in Cairo (1994) and at the World Conference on Women at Beijing (1995), as well as during the five-year reviews of those events in 1999 and 2000. One need only look at the allies of the Bush Administration at the UN children's summit in May 2002--such as the Holy See, Sudan, Libya, Iraq and other gulf states--to understand that this alliance is still functioning globally. We need to closely track the connections among various antifeminist "fundamentalist" forces, not only at the UN but in other arenas as well, such as in the making of world health policies, or even in the passage of anti-women's rights national legislation in countries where outside forces have played a key role.

When the US government lines up with those forces, who's surprised to see the right-wing US Christian churches doing it?

[OneBlueSky]

7. religious leaders need to confine their prohibitions . . .

to members of their own denominations . . . if Catholic cardinals want to tell Catholics not to use condoms, more power to 'em . . . but when they start saying that non-Catholics also must not use condoms, they're crossing the line and should keep their mouths shut . . . same for Muslim leaders, Mormon leaders, and every other kind of religious leader . . . keep your dogma in your own families, thank you very much . . .

[Ian David]

9. I'm sorry if I made it appear that Islam was primarily to blame

I thought it was pretty clear that fundamentalist conservatives of ALL religions were being equally represented.

No religion has a monopoly on either love or hate.

However, I have tried very hard to find even ONE Muslim Imam or Cleric who is in favor of gay marriage or even gay rights.

I have contacted the leaders of various gay-Muslim groups.

NONE of them have yet been able to find EVEN ONE Muslim religious leader who believes in gay rights.

And believe me, they've looked MUCH harder than I have.

Now, obviously not all Muslims (or people of any faith) are all bigots or zealots.

This shortcoming does not reflect poorly upon Muslims or upon Islam, any more than the failings of the Pope can reflect poorly upon Christians or Christ.

But I find it troubling that the largest religion in the world does not have even one single solitary religious leader firmly on the side of tolerance.

This is not a condemnation of Muslims or of Islam-- Just of the people who are "minding the shop." Criticisms of The Pope are not criticisms of Catholics, and criticisms of Bush are not criticisms of Americans.

They didn't elect THEIR leaders any more than WE did.

[iverglas]

10. you talkin to me? ;)

I'll bet you misclicked, and you were.

I should have made it clearer maybe that I wasn't saying that *you* were saying that -- it was the last article you quoted, in particular, that I found bothersome.

Singling out any member of this unholy alliance (which is, as I noted, merely a natural outgrowth of the alliance that has existed at the international level for many years, when it comes to resistance to efforts to combat the oppression of women in particular) just looks agenda-driven to me. (And yes, it was the author of that article, rather than you, who did that.)

However, I have tried very hard to find even ONE Muslim Imam or Cleric who is in favor of gay marriage or even gay rights.

I spent some time this afternoon looking for just that info, and following leads from one google search to another, until I found it.

http://huriyahmag.com/winter/features.daayiee.htm
http://huriyahmag.com/summer/interview.daayiee.htm

Daayiee Abdullah. Now ... he's an African-American convert, in the US, reared a Baptist. I saw him described as "one of three" openly gay Muslim clerics (presumably all in the US), but wasn't able to identify the others.

And there may be more on the way:
http://www.baywindows.com/news/2002/05/02/Columns/Gay-Imam.Will.Reach.Out.To.Gay.And.Lesbian.Muslims-249541.shtml

There are GLBT people who are Muslims, and activists:
http://www.ilga.info/Information/international/second_international_retreat_for.htm
"LGBTQ Muslims and Friends Hold International Gathering in London, England"

In welcoming the delegates on the first day, Faisal Alam, Founder & Director of Al-Fatiha, said that, "the struggle to gain acceptance as lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered Muslims in our community is just beginning. Our battle against oppression is a struggle to enlighten others about the truth and the core of Islam – a religion that promotes social justice and tolerance towards all people." He continued by saying that, "unfortunately these important tenets have been forgotten in dealing with the LGBTQ Muslim community."

Al-Fatiha was born in October of 1998 when a group of forty people met in Boston, Massachusetts, USA at the First International Retreat for Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered Muslims. At the end of the retreat the group decided that an international organization needed to be formed in order to address specific concerns and issues facing the LGBTQ Muslim community around the world. The Al-Fatiha Foundation was officially incorporated in the United States in February of 1999. It now has a board of directors to oversee the growth or the organization and plans to launch a membership drive at the end of the summer. In May of 1999, Al-Fatiha successfully held its first conference in New York City, NY, USA. The conference was believed to be the first-of-its-kind. Since its inception, Al-Fatiha has grown to include six chapters in the United States and Canada (in Atlanta, New York City, San Francisco, Toronto, Vancouver, and Washington DC). In November of 1999, Al-Fatiha began its first chapter outside of North America in London, England. All seven chapters hold regular social gatherings, dinners, and holiday celebrations for the LGBTQ Muslim community in their local area. Al-Fatiha plans to open future chapters in other major cities across the United States, Canada, the United Kingdom, and eventually around the world.

The success of Al-Fatiha has been an inspiration to many LGBTQ Muslim activists. Daayiee Abdullah, coordinator of Al-Fatiha’s Washington DC chapter said ...

aha, its own website:
http://www.al-fatiha.org/
"Al Fatiha" means "the beginning", and I see on another (unrelated) site is "another name for the Surah Hamd which is the first Surah in the Qur'an".

This site
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/al-fatiha-news/message/460
mentions "Salaam" as its sister organization, and I found that one here:
http://www.asaap.ca/dosti/WhatsOn.asp

SALAAM TORONTO !!
Last Updated on 27/01/2003
Queer Muslim Community
SALAAM TORONTO :Queer Muslim Community . Salaam Toronto is a social based organization dedicatedto Muslims who are : Lesbian, gay, bisexual, transsexual and transgender,as well as those questioning their sexual orientation or gende identity and their friends. Salaam Toronto is dedicated to the human rights of all peoples espescially Queer Muslims. Salaam toronto's goal is to provide a safe space and a forum for LGBTQ Muslims to address issues of common concern, share individual experiences, and institutional resources. Salaam Toronto was originally formed in 1991 in Toronto, Canada to support Muslims who self-idetify as lesbian, gay ,bisexual, transgender,and those who are questioning their sexual orientation or gender identity.(In 1993 Salaam Toronto closed its doors). In November 1997,the Queer Muslim movement was reborn with the formation of AL-FATIHA internet-based email discussion group. The listserve now hosts more than 300 subscrcibers from over 20 countries around the world. Al-FATIHA Foundation now has chapters throughout North America, as well as in England and South Africa. Salaam Toronto was reborn in February 1999 as Al-Fatiha Toronto. AS of June 2002 Al-Fatiha Toronto has been re named Salaam Toronto: Queer Muslim Community. It remains part of the Al-fatiha international organization. Salaam Toronto aims to create a supportive and safe environent for lesbian, gay , transexual, transgender and bisexual Muslims. It hopes to assist queer Muslims in reconciling their sexual orietaion or gender idetity with Islam. Like Al-Fatiha international, Salaam Toronto promotes the islamic notion of social justice, peace, and tolerance through its work to bring all, closer to a world that is free from injustice, prejudice, discrimination, racism, misogyny, sexism and homophobia.

The site where that appears, btw, is for this organization, in Toronto:
http://www.asaap.ca/low/home/index.html

The Alliance for South Asian AIDS Prevention is a community-based, non-profit, charitable organization committed to providing health promotion, support, education and advocacy in a non-discriminatory manner for those identified as South Asian living with and affected by HIV/AIDS.

Ah, here we are:
http://www.salaamcanada.org

At the "1st Salaam Canada & the 4th Al-Fatiha International Conference", in 2003
http://www.salaamcanada.org/press.html
the speakers included Siraj Kugle (apparently misspelled at the Salaam site), a name I ran across in the searches that led me to Daayiee Abdullah:
http://www.xtra.ca/site/toronto2/arch/body1419.shtm

Scott Siraj Kugle, a professor of religion at Swarthmore College in Pennsylvania, who will be discussing spirituality and sexuality at the conference, says that the struggle for queer Muslims will get harder before it gets easier.

... For Kugle, the path to liberation lies in liberating Islamic theology itself — something that is very new for Muslims. “So many of us are afraid of the Koran because for so long it’s been used against us. For a long time, Muslim feminists and gay activists took a secular route and avoided the Koran altogether because they didn’t feel it could be anything but oppressive. But there’s a new generation of Muslim feminists, particularly in Morocco, South Africa and Iran, who are engaging with the Koran and seeing that there are new ways to interpret it. And when you read the Koran, you realize that far from condemning us, it actually offers a lot of resources on how to live sincerely within our faith as gay and lesbian. For instance, the Koran is full of really interesting stories about rebellion.”

Though there is not a large focus on homosexuality in the Koran, Kugle says “the traditional interpretations of the Koran make some conclusions about homosexual acts that are condemning, but I’m not sure that those are accurate and correct interpretations. There’s not even a word for homosexuality or homosexual in the Koran.”

That may sound familiar to some Christians in the crowd. ;)

Cdn Prime Minister Paul Martin's parish priest in Montreal may support legislation permitting same-sex marriage:
http://www.365gay.com/newscon05/02/020105canMarr.htm

But, as the Catholic Church and evangelical Protestants flood Members of Parliament with postcards calling on them to support traditional marriage Prime Minister Paul Martin's parish priest says he supports gay marriage.

Rev. John Walsh, of St. John Brébeuf parish in Martin's Montreal riding of LaSalle-Émard says the Catholic Church has to open its arms to gays and lesbians, and that all he is being asked to do is to respect civil gay marriage.

-- and there are probably a fair number of other closeted marriage-rights supporters in the RC, if not the fundie protestant, clergy up here -- but generally speaking, one would be no more likely to find RC (or Southern Baptist, or Orthodox Jewish) clerics supporting such rights than to find Muslim clerics doing it.

Islam hasn't had the kind of political crises that led, centuries ago, to schisms in the Christian church and to the divergent theology and politics of those churches today. But who knows, we may see just such schisms develop if different factions within the Muslim population world-wide take different approaches to the various political issues that they bring their theology to bear on.

Meanwhile, if I weren't so straight and unbelieving both, I think I'd check out something like Salaam, where some interesting thinking and acting seems to be going on, and see about working up a decent holier-than-the fundies alliance. ;)

[Ian David]

11. Thanks. I'm going to have to read through all that later tonight.

I was familiar with Huriyahmag.com, but the last time I looked they didn't have an actual cleric on-board.

I'll go have a look.

Thanks!

[Ian David]

12. Follow-up

"Daayiee Abdullah is a queer Muslim scholar"

I believe that is different from an Imam or Cleric.

I've contacted him before, and he didn't know of any gay-inclusive Imams.

This article says he plans to try and open an "inclusive" mosque in Toronto.

I don't know whether this makes him an "official" Imam or not, but he's still my hero either way.

But my personal feeling is that unless he is somehow officially ordained, it's a less compelling story. It's like holding up a defrocked priest as an example of the tolerance of the Catholic Church.

But I'll take my heroes where I can find them.

[iverglas]

14. hmm

Speaking of Muslim scholars, I think we need one. ;)

I saw him referred to in various places as "imam" --
http://huriyahmag.com/winter/features.daayiee.htm
"By imam Daayiee Abdullah"
(search for "imam Daayiee Abdullah" and you get a couple of dozen returns)

I was sort of pussyfooting around the question of, um, the place of African-American Muslims in the global Islamic, whatever, community, and whether his ordination-equivalent would be recognized outside his smaller community.

Here's one copy of the 2004 article that refers to him as "one of three":
http://www.islam-online.net/Discussion/English/bbs.asp?aGroupID=43526&aParID=227441&action=move

Imam Daayiee Abdullah, who is based in Washington, D.C., and one of three Islamic clergymen worldwide known to be openly gay, ...

Fascinating as I find some aspects of religions, I'm not actually familiar with the process for the equivalent of "ordaining" a Muslim cleric. But ... kinda as I suspected:
http://www.islam.com/salat/theprayer.htm

There is no ordained priesthood in Islam. Every Muslim can be Imam (who leads congregational prayer) and can deliver a sermon. The members of the congregation may select, and for this purpose, they should choose one from among themselves who knows the Holy Quran better than the others. No vestment is prescribed for the Imam nor any special dress for the congregation. All that needed is the body and the head should be decently and cleanly covered.

Uh ... and, I'll bet, that the head be on a male body.

[iverglas]

17. here's something good

The Muslim Canadian Congress has stated its support for the same-sex marriage bill tabled in Parliament this week by the Liberal government.

http://www.muslimwakeup.com/main/archives/2005/02/canadian_muslim_1.php
(I read about its endorsement in the copy of one of the abysmal Sun newspapers that delivered free to my door yesterday when I wasn't looking, but that report is not on line.)

February 02, 2005
Canadian Muslim Group Endorses Same-Sex Marriage Legislation
By Nargis Tapal

OTTAWA - The Muslim Canadian Congress, a Toronto-based grassroots organization, has welcomed the legislation presented by Justice Minister Irvin Cotler that re-defines marriage to include same-sex partners, and has urged Muslims and other minority groups to stand in solidarity with gays and lesbians.

Addressing a press conference in Ottawa this morning, Rizwana Jafri, president of the MCC said Muslim Canadians have experienced life as a marginalized minority and have relied on the Canadian Charter to fight for their right to be treated as equal citizens. "It is incumbent upon us, as a minority, to stand up in solidarity with Canada’s gays and lesbians despite the fact that many in our community believe our religion does not condone homosexuality," she added.

"This legislation is not about religion; it is about fundamental and universal human rights that are a guarantee that all Canadians, irrespective of their religious or ethnic background, feel part of the same family. While, within this family, we may agree to disagree we must respect each other and treat others with dignity that is a hallmark of civil society, Ms. Jafri added.

Ms. Jafri appealed to social conservative Muslim organizations to stop being used by the Conservative Party who are using this controversy to score political points by spreading fear among racial minorities.

I'd note, concerning that last paragraph, that the same point was made by a Chinese Canadian organization spokesperson who spoke in favour of same-sex marriage rights at the press conference before the Supreme Court delivered its decision last year: that the Chinese-Canadian Christian community is too often portrayed as monolithically opposed to equal rights initiatives, and this is because (and he said this very explicitly) of exploitation and manipulation of Chinese Canadians by right-wing forces.

http://www.muslimcanadiancongress.org/

The Muslim Canadian Congress is a grassroots organization that provides a voice to Muslims who are not represented by existing organizations; organizations that are either sectarian or ethnocentric, largely authoritarian, and influenced by a fear of modernity and an aversion to joy.

Members of the Muslim Canadian Congress come from all parts of the world with diverse ethnic and racial backgrounds. We are proud of our Muslim heritage and the great contribution of Islam to human civilization. As Muslim Canadians we believe in the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, and the Canadian constitution as our guiding principles.

The Muslim Canadian Congress looks to the future, and not to the past for the best days of the Muslim community; a community that will fully integrate and participate with other Canadians to build a country that is a beacon of hope, peace, prosperity and joy for the rest of the world.

... The MCC is a secular organization that will work to create a safe space and environment for all Muslims who are opposed to any form of theocracy.

As Muslims we believe in a progressive, liberal, pluralistic, democratic, and secular society where everyone has the freedom of religion. We want our communities to be equal and active contributors and participants in the development of a just, democratic, and equitable society in Canada.

We believe in the separation of religion and state in all matters of public policy. We feel such a separation is a necessary pre-requisite to building democratic societies, where religious, ethnic, and racial minorities are accepted as equal citizens enjoying full dignity and human rights enunciated in the 1948 United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights.

Explicitly not a "religious" organization, but an organization of religious people.

This article (linked from that page) is interesting on our topic as well. Irshad Manji is an obnoxious self-promoting self-impressed intellectually-lightweight Canadian lesbian Muslim you may have heard of.
http://www.muslimcanadiancongress.org/tpstory.htm
It addresses the differences between clergy and community in the particular context of Muslims and WWII.

http://www.muslimcanadiancongress.org/globeandmailstory.htm

... Welcome to the weekly gathering of the Muslim Canadian Congress (MCC), a new Toronto-based group with about 100 members across the country (although to date no president) -- and one not everyone in the Muslim-Canadian community is comfortable with.

They are not here tonight to discuss the teachings of the Prophet Mohammed or the opening of an Islamic school. Instead, this association of journalists, engineers, students and others stands for causes not commonly associated with Muslim activists -- aboriginal rights, secular schools, civil liberties and the separation of religion and the state.

... Yet the MCC doesn't campaign only for the civil liberties of Muslims -- it also showed solidarity with William Sampson, who says he was tortured in a prison in Saudi Arabia, and has called for reform in the desert kingdom. "We hold the Canadian Charter of Rights as defining Canadian citizenship," says Raheel Raza, a media consultant. "We wish countries in the Muslim world would adopt the Charter of Rights. This is what Canada has to offer the world."

Other-directed thinking and acting is a sign of maturity, in both the individual and the group. And I always remember the poster my Vietnam draft resister friend had hanging in his Toronto kitchen: a picture of two women hanging their wash in their adjacent back yards, with the words "Class consciousness is knowing which side of the fence you're on; class analysis is knowing who's there with you."

[Ian David]

13. Actually, Islam HAS fractured many times of the centuries

Suni, Shiite, etc.

For example, the Suni and Shiite sects split over something to do with which ancestor was a more direct descendent of Muhamed.

And then there's "The Nation of Islam," which started here in America.

From what I remember from reading the biography of Malcolm X, The Nation of Islam was not recognized as "real" Muslims by most of the community.

I don't know if that's changed.

Religions of all kinds have been splitting and fracturing since the first time one person turned to another and said, "Sun!" and the other said, "Moon!"

I don't know if this is new, but lately some Christian denominations are actually MERGING.

And on a POSITIVE note...

Religious Coalition For Freedom To Marry
http://www.rcfm.org/


Signers of the Massachusetts Declaration of Religious Support
For Same-Sex Marriage
Listed by Denomination
http://www.rcfm.org/signers.htm

[iverglas]

15. well I was being a complete idiot

That was a moronic thing to say, wasn't it?

For someone who has been rather intimately involved in the politics of Muslim countries over the years, especially.

One day, in about 1982, the interpreter at one of my Shi'a Iraqi clients' refugee hearings stopped in his tracks and said he didn't know what my client was talking about -- she'd referred to her uncle "Abd'Ali", and this was impossible. She's Shi'ite, I said. Ah! he said, and went back to interpreting. And the immigration officer looked on without a clue, but I didn't think the fine points of baby-naming in the Muslim world neeeded to be explained to him; enough that he be impressed at my own erudition.

http://www.themuslimyouth.com/articl/tauh06.html

Allamah Ibn Hazm, may Allahs' Mercy be upon him, said that Muslims were collectively agreed upon the impermissibility of every name which means service to anyone other than Allah, the Almighty, such ass Abd-'Umar (slave of 'Umar), Abd-Al-Ka'bah (Slave of the Ka'bah), and like that except Abdul- Muttalib.

Any name which implies the worship of anything or anyone other than Allah is forbidden, (like Abd-Ali, Abd-Alhusain, Abd-Alnabi, or abd- AlRassol). This is because of its association with Allah. All the creatures are Allah's slaves and possessions. Allah created them to worship Him alone and to practice monotheism. But some of Allahs’ slaves associated Him with others (i.e. shirk, other gods) while some became true believers

Opinions differ. Shi'ites exalt Ali, beyond Hussein ("Abdihussein") and Mohammed ("Abdi Mohammed"); Sunnis do not:
http://www.islamfortoday.com/shia.htm
"The Origins of the Sunni/Shia split in Islam"

So hmm. I wonder whether it might be vaguely accurate to say that the schisms haven't been as directly related to political events/issues as they have been in Christianity?

Protestantism and Roman Catholicism having divided over pretty purely temporal matters in the beginning, e.g. (power struggles among European royalty). For all I know, though, so did Shi'ites and Sunnis!

[Ian David]

16. I only vaguely recall the history of Muslim Schisms

But did you know that almost every church in America split during The Civil War?

Guess where "The Southern Baptists" came from?

[Behind the Aegis]

19. From a Islamic website

Here is the position, more of less, of Islam on homosexuality: Islam's Stance on Homosexual Organizations. Doesn't seem much different than other fundamentalist groups. I am not saying all of Islam is fundamentalist, but it seems it has at least one branch that is.