Arjuna Web

<div align="center"> <table border="0" cellpadding="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="mso-cellspacing: 1.5pt; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184; width: 636px;"> <tbody><tr style="height: 38.25pt; mso-yfti-firstrow: yes; mso-yfti-irow: 0; mso-yfti-lastrow: yes;">  <td style="height: 38.25pt; padding: .75pt .75pt .75pt .75pt; width: 474.15pt;" valign="top" width="632">  <h1 align="center" style="margin-top: 0cm; tab-stops: center 236.3pt left 379.35pt right 472.65pt; text-align: center;"><span style="color: windowtext; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 20.0pt;">Gay   marriage may not be contrary to Islam<o:p></o:p></span></h1><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm; text-align: center;"><span style="font-family: "FranklinGothic-ExtraCond","sans-serif"; font-size: 14.0pt; mso-bidi-font-family: FranklinGothic-ExtraCond;">Faisal Kutty  ;</span>   <i><span style="background: white; font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 13.0pt;">Assistant professor   of law, Valparaiso University and Adjunct Professor of Law, Osgoode Hall;   This article first appeared in The Huffington Post<o:p></o:p></span></i></div></td> </tr></tbody></table></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm; text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">JAKARTA POST, 04 April 2014<o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div><div align="center" class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm; text-align: center;"><b><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;"> </span></i></b><b><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">                                     </span></i></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm; tab-stops: 206.35pt 268.65pt;"><b><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">                                                                                          <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm; tab-stops: 164.95pt 187.0pt;"><b><i><span style="font-family: "Times New Roman","serif"; font-size: 12.0pt;">                                                              <o:p></o:p></span></i></b></div><table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0" class="MsoNormalTable" style="border-collapse: collapse; mso-padding-alt: 0cm 0cm 0cm 0cm; mso-yfti-tbllook: 1184;"> <tbody><tr>  <td style="padding: 0cm 2.8pt 0cm 0cm; width: 468.0pt;" valign="top" width="624">  <div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Can   Muslims accept same-sex marriages? This has been a thorny question since the   first jurisdictions began legalizing same-sex marriage. It took on a new   urgency in the wake of the Defense of Marriage Act ruling from the US Supreme   Court last June. Now, the heat is on as state courts continue to strike down   same-sex marriage bans. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Islamic   law, as interpreted today, unanimously classifies same-sex sexual activity as   haram (prohibited). Islamic law encompasses fiqh (from pre-modern times to   contemporary times) as well the state sanctioned derivatives and laws. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The   prohibition is derived from the normative Islamic position that the   institution of the family (preservation of which is one of the maqasid al   Sharí’ah, higher objectives of the Shariah) created through marriage is the   only sanctioned avenue for sex. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">This   policy objective is reinforced through comprehensive regulations found in   classical fiqh, which is the human articulation of God’s will as expressed in   the Shariah. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Under   this public policy guise, homosexuality — as well as extra and pre-marital   sex — are all outlawed ostensibly because they threaten the narrowly defined   institution of family. Indeed, even the sexual space within marriage is   further restricted through prohibitions against bestiality, anal intercourse   (liwaat), masturbation, necrophilia and other such conduct considered   unnatural.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The   prohibition of the homosexual act is traced back to the biblical teachings   against sodomy. Despite the unanimity on the prohibition, there are major   disagreements on the criminalization of homosexuality, its categorization and   even the punishment it should attract, if any. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Three of   the four classical Sunni schools (Shafi, Hanbali and Maliki) classified   liwaat as a hadd (serious crime against God with severe penalties including   death) while the fourth (Hanafi) classified it as ta’zir (crime for which the   state can exercise discretion in punishment). <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">A   growing number of contemporary traditionalist Sunni and Shia scholars including   Shaikh Mohamed El-Mochtar El-Shinqiti and Zaytuna College’s Shaikh Abdullah   Bin Hamid Ali — while affirming the immorality of the act — assert that there   is no temporal punishment stated in the two primary sources of Islamic law,   the Koran and the Sunnah (teachings and sayings of the Prophet), for merely   being homosexual. Prominent Iranian scholar Abdolkarim Saroush even notes   that any persecution or discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation   would be wrong.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Like the   punishment for adultery and fornication, there is strong basis to argue, as   many scholars have done, that the punishments are really for public indecency   within the context of Muslim society. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">In fact,   this is reinforced by the fact that even in the classical Muslim era, evidence   of homosexuals in Muslim lands abounded but with minimal instances of   prosecution. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">This may   have been partly due to the combined effect of Islamic law’s strict   evidentiary requirements and the prioritization and pre-eminence of privacy   rights. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Though   classical jurists deemed homosexual conduct immoral, they appear to have had   a more sophisticated take on the issue. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Shaikh   Hamid Ali in his The Homosexual Challenge to Muslim Ethics, documents how   some jurists attempted to understand those who behaved effeminately   (mukhannath) based on whether it was innate or by choice. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">He   quotes Shaikh Yahya b. Sharaf al-Nawawi (1277 CE) as writing that “there is   no blame, censure, sin or punishment on this type [one acting out of natural   inclination] because he is excused by virtue of having no hand in that   condition”. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Shaikh   Ali also refers to classical jurist, Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaini (1448 CE)   who cited Imam Ibn Jariri al-Tabari (922 CE) to conclude, that when men   exhibited feminine characteristics due to their innate nature then rather   than being condemned they should be taught to gradually unlearn thisn,   because they may have been created this way.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Islamic   law did not seek to regulate feelings, emotions and urges, but only its   translation into action that authorities had declared unlawful. Indeed, many   scholars — including prominent 11th century jurist Abu Muhammad Ali Ibn Hazm   — even argued that homosexual tendencies themselves were not haram but had to   be suppressed for the public good. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Though   not what the LGBTQ community wants to hear, it reveals that even classical   Islamic jurists struggled with this issue and had a more sophisticated   attitude than many contemporary Muslims. Moreover, such fiqh works offer   Muslims some lessons on how to live with differences. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">A case   in point is a ruling by Shaikh Ibn al Qayim al Jawziya, a prominent Hanbali   jurist of the 14th century, who was asked whether the Muslim state should ban   the Zoroastrian institution of self-marriage whereby men were encouraged to   marry their mothers and sisters. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">While   affirming that this was unlawful and morally repugnant under Islamic law, Ibn   al Qayim (a student of the puritanical Ibn Taymiyaa) ruled that the state   could not ban this practice and that in fact the institution ought to be   recognized under two conditions: 1) the matter is not brought to a Muslim   court; and 2) the Zoroastrian community recognized self-marriage as a valid   tradition.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Given   the dynamism and sophistication inherent even in classical Islamic   jurisprudence, it can be argued that there is plenty of room to accommodate   differences within, particularly in a secular liberal democratic context. To   make it workable though, both sides of this debate need to understand the   other.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The   question is not about legalizing sex outside of traditional marriage. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">That   ship sailed long ago. It left the port with the sexual revolution, and sailed   off with the Supreme Court’s decision in Lawrence v. Texas; which effectively   legalized consensual sex among adults. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Moreover,   considering that most Muslims have no problem extending full human rights to   those — even Muslims — who live together “in sin” (both homosexuality and sex   outside of marriage is referred to as indecent — fahisha in Islamic law), it   seems hypocritical to deny fundamental rights to same-sex couples. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Moreover,   as Mohamed Fadel points out, this is not about changing Islamic marriage   (nikah), but about making “sure that all citizens have access to the same   kinds of public benefits”.<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">Similarly,   same-sex advocates must accept that others cannot be forced to approve of   what they sincerely believe is wrong. They can demand full constitutional   entitlements, but not the right to dictate or interfere in the religious   dogma of others. <o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">The essence   of religious freedom is that individuals and communities must have freedom to   determine their core doctrinal beliefs and they must be tolerated in the   public sphere. As Ronald Dworkin says:<o:p></o:p></span></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><br /></div><div class="MsoNormal" style="line-height: 150%; margin-bottom: .0001pt; margin: 0cm;"><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%; mso-bidi-font-weight: bold; mso-fareast-font-family: "Times New Roman";">“We   can’t ask people to set aside their most profound convictions about the truth   of deep moral and ethical issues when we are also asking them to make...the   most basic and fundamental moral and ethical decisions.” </span><span style="font-family: "Arial","sans-serif"; font-size: 13.0pt; line-height: 150%;">●</span></div></td></tr></tbody></table>

Gay marriage may not be contrary to Islam Faisal Kutty ; Assistant professor of law, Valparaiso University and Adjunct Profes...

Baca selengkapnya »