Homosexuality: A Way of Life and Sexual Orientation or a Depraved and Unethical Matter?

Sexual, aesthetic, and romantic attraction to the same sex or degeneration, deviation, unnatural inclination, and at best, a disease? The American Psychological Association and many human rights activists, religious or secular, consider homosexuality merely a manifestation of diversity in human sexual orientations and demand equal rights and dignity for homosexual citizens. However, Islam refers to homosexuality with terms such as 'Lavat' and 'Musahaqah', considers it a crime, and prescribes the death penalty for homosexuals. On the other hand, society largely aligns with the religious institution in its unequal view and stigmatization of homosexuals. Gender equality activists, however, consider such an approach homophobia and demand an end to it. In this week's taboo, we host Mojtaba Amini, a religious researcher, and Shadi Amin, a gender equality activist, to discuss the taboo of homosexuality. I want to ask about the religious views on homosexuality. Why do religions, particularly Islam, consider homosexuality a depraved matter? Mr. Amini, what explanation can you provide for our listeners to start the discussion from this point? Mojtaba Amini: Homosexuality can be viewed from several perspectives. The first perspective is that of heavenly religions, and the other is human rights. When Islam addresses homosexuality, it does not differentiate between homosexual acts and homosexuality, or for example, heterosexuality. All of these are categorized together, and more attention is paid to the moral outcome of it, in terms of its impact on human society. Homosexuality, which is based on the oppression of others, is recognized as a crime because its moral impact on society is what religions consider. Divine and heavenly religions focus more on moral issues. From the perspective of religions, the moral impact of homosexuality is that it ultimately leads to corruption, prostitution, and the commission of crimes. This reasoning that homosexuality leads to corruption and prostitution or has an immoral effect on the structure of society—of course, there is also discussion about that structure, which is ultimately built by humans—how is it explained? I mean, I want to say how this introduction can lead to that conclusion? How can love between two same-sex individuals and sexual relations between them undermine the moral foundations of society? How can religion prove this connection? Essentially, where do we start and where do we end in this discussion? Amini: You see, these are a series of divine rulings that have been revealed from above to humanity, not that humanity determines for itself. It has been stated in a general way. Now, with the passage of science, science has come and created a series of disagreements about some of these and is expressing them. We also believe from a religious perspective that if science correctly proves a historical issue or phenomenon, religion must inevitably align with it. For example, in Judaism, Orthodox Jews say no, it cannot be. But there are three other groups in Judaism that say a homosexual can rise to all social bases, even to the level of a rabbi. Many others still believe that this cannot exist in Judaism. Christianity is the same. Christian schools reject homosexuals, except for a few specific ones or churches in democratic countries that have political parties and parliaments and have managed to change the churches' attitudes toward this matter. But from the perspective of Islam, since it is referred to as 'Lavat', it is considered oppression, corruption, and prostitution. Not that these issues are separated from each other. Well, there are sayings from the Prophet of Islam and the Imams that all have mentioned the moral corruption or the corruption that society may be afflicted with in the future or its impact on reproduction. It creates deviations in society that inevitably opportunists can take advantage of. Well, I prefer to categorize the points you raised for Ms. Amin, the other guest of the program. In fact, from the fact that homosexuality can lead to the immorality of society and moral corruption, you spoke to 'Lavat', which you described homosexuality with. Let’s see what Ms. Amin has to say in response to the points you raised so that I can ask the next points. Shadi Amin: Religions have specifically pointed to homosexuality. For example, if we raise the issue of reproduction, well, asexuality—someone who has no inclination towards either gender—can also cause the disconnection of the human race; as it is said. But we see that they point to homosexuality and present it as an unethical issue to society. Do we [today] need religious teachings that pertain to a specific time? Even in sociology, there are few studies that, for example, are from a hundred years ago regarding actions within German society and are still said to be valid today. But religious teachings are emphasized even after two thousand years and said to be valid. Well, humanity has passed this point. This is a reality. What religion has stated or what you attribute to Islam [is debatable]. Well, there are a series of philosophers and religious researchers who reject this, including Mr. Naraghi or other philosophers in the Arab world. They say that Islam does not have an issue with homosexuality. Homosexuality is not mentioned anywhere in Islam, and the act of Lavat mentioned in relation to the people of Lot is a violent act and a forced relationship with adolescent boys and the guests of the people of Lot. The reality is that homosexuality is a subject related to the modern world and where you have the right to choose and your individuality is recognized. The freedom of sexual orientation is accepted, and if religion is in conflict with it, we all agree that religion must reform its perspective on this issue. Ms. Amin, Mr. Amini also spoke about ethics. That is, as soon as the discussion about homosexuality or the rights of homosexuals and the acceptance and respect of this group of citizens arises, the discussion of ethics comes up, and I want to know what direct relationship exists between lifestyle choice and sexual orientation with general and social ethics? Can you provide a brief answer to this part? Amin: Yes, please. You see, what is ethics? In fact, what we know as social ethics is a set of propositions that are supposed to better define the relationship between humans and give it some order. Well, when this comes and deprives human rights from them, it is itself unethical. Because ethics that is not based on the inherent freedom of humans and the free relationship of humans is repressive. This is where when you describe something as unethical, you must say who it harms? It is not love that has brought our world to harm; it is hatred and violence. When we talk about the love between two humans and so much hatred is expressed towards homosexual love, so much violence is exercised against it; to the point of killing these people. Well, this shows that we are going down the wrong path. In fact, we are committing a lifetime of immorality in relation to a love and affection that I think none of the religions at least openly practice against love between humans. The subject goes back to the sexual relationship of two people, and then various explanations are given as to why this is wrong. Well, previously it was not only considered immoral. It was also labeled as a disease and deviation. Science has actually come to the aid of this part of society and said no, it is not only not a disease but a natural inclination that exists in many humans, and perhaps if society opens itself to these people, we will see more and more of them every day. I think the number of children who die of hunger every day, the number of women who lose their lives in unwanted pregnancies, and the number of abortions that occur due to social conditions of people, if we add these together, still has nothing to do with the level of homosexuality and those who do not want to have children, and now there are many heterosexual couples who do not want to have children. Very well, we return to you, Mr. Amini. Perhaps you have a response to Ms. Amin's remarks. She raised a question that could be an important and central question. She said that the ethical or unethical issue we raise must consider who it actually harms? It might not be a bad idea for you to answer that when homosexuality is considered unethical, from what perspective and what harm is it supposed to cause? And well, now the discussion of family and disconnection of generations has also been raised; we see that the institution of family has undergone many changes. We see many same-sex families that at least in free and more democratic countries are families and live their lives. Is opposing homosexuality and considering it unethical, in fact, limiting the possibility of peaceful coexistence of all people with each other—in whatever form of family they want—not your opinion? Amini: First of all, I would like to say to both you and her that I have not entered from the door of prejudice but have entered from the door of research. The door of science is not closed in Shia thought. That is, if we can scientifically explain the issue, even the issuance of fatwas will change, provided that we convince those who issue fatwas scientifically. Secondly, regarding the moral harms that homosexuality creates; the damages it causes to the family unit. Suppose that in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim families, such a person arises; when this person arises, it somewhat disrupts the family. Secondly, suppose two homosexuals accept the guardianship of a child; this child may not face problems within the family, but as soon as they step outside the house, they face psychological conflicts with others in society, the questions that arise, who is your father? Who is your mother? That is, there is a modeling. For example, in some families, a child raised by two fathers or two mothers who are homosexual will certainly change their psychological inclinations. The law asks us, well, how does this begin, and where does it end? Very well. Ms. Amin! Mr. Amini has gone in his discussion to the point that a child raised in a same-sex family faces problems and society asks questions that may be challenging for them and confronts them with challenges. Shouldn't the discussion go in the direction that why does society have such questions about such a child? Amin: You have answered the question somewhat very briefly and effectively. The international disease guide published by the World Health Organization has even removed transsexuality from the list of diseases. I want to say that there is no discussion about categorizing sexual orientations or gender identities of individuals and then wanting medicine to change it; it has been proven that it is neither possible nor humane. All these treatment methods recommended for people's sexual orientation are methods that are referred to globally as medical torture. What Mr. Amini mentions regarding family, you see, family does not have a single form. Since the beginning of humanity, it has not had a single form. Family has evolved into this nuclear family consisting of a man, a woman, and children, and what we want to pledge allegiance to is a safe space for the growth and development of a child. The reality is that this safe space is not present in many families—I repeat, in the majority of families. You look at all this violence against children in families, all this sexual abuse of girls and boys in families, all this pressure on women in marital relationships, all this oppression of women in patriarchal relations. In fact, I want to tell you that it is we who should come and tell heterosexuals that you have not only failed to create a warm family unit but have also been bad examples for us. Well, my daughter has grown up in such an environment. I want to know who can allow themselves to say that my daughter, who is a very social person with a very cheerful spirit, is engaged in collective work, is an artist, and has excellent grades... who wants to say that my child is psychologically harmed? What kind of statement is it that we come and determine what will happen to this child based on the sexual orientation of the mother or father? My child has enjoyed having two mothers throughout her life and has also had her father. You are actually saying to us now that children from the moment they are born are looking for a father and mother. No! Children recognize and love those who show them affection, help them, and are there for their growth, and why can't two women or two men play this role? Rest assured that if there is any harm, we can quickly categorize it as coming from the outside environment. A child may be bullied at school and told, 'You have two moms/dads,' and it is society that has not created understanding and interaction. Well, Mr. Amini, you saw that Ms. Amin had...