Ask Lemmygrad

Our party is popular among Muslims and it is popular within the LGBTQ+ community. The uniting force between them is combatting the primary contradictions within our society. We both face the problems of housing, healthcare, education, poverty, racism, etc. We recognize that ik eachother. And that makes it easy to put aside some of the different viewpoint in order to organise.

We also have a lot of LGBTQ+ people from the Muslim community themselves. And ultimately I think that is the 'easiest' way to change: from within. The Muslim community also has to face their own contradiction s and they need to find their own way forward. External pressure like we see so often is only, in my opinion, going to strengthen reactionary views.

Plenty of religious people contradict the blatant teachings of their religions, Abrahamic religions most of all. Love, compassionate, selfless service to those in need, destruction of oppressors to liberate the oppressed, these are all themes in Abrahamic religious texts that are often ignored today.

The story of Lod is the reference that Abrahamic religions use to bash queer people but queer scholars would point out that the story of Lod is not at all about queer people and is about people doing sex crimes and assault. Religious people misinterpreting and misusing religious texts to justify their personal positions is pretty common, and it is no different here. We live in an age of war and hyper capitalism, and have suffered centuries of colonialism which has enforced very specific ways of thinking on the whole world. People being ignorant and wrong about things is to be expected

I believe it's because there's a fundamental difference between a personal, lived spirituality and a politicized, ideological weaponization of religion (co-optation by ruling classes throughout history) - which itself contradicts the core teachings of Abrahamic religions, such as Islam, which do not teach hatred. The point is not to force a literalist, often revisionist, interpretation of ancient texts onto everyone else, but to find personal meaning and community within a faith tradition while upholding universal human rights.

The goal is to criticize said interpretations, specifically the politicized, fundamentalist interpretations that exist in all faiths which are used to justify bigotry and violence (and the inverse - these being presented by bourgeois media as the "defaults" to justify dehumanization and imperialist wars against adherents). The goal is not to vilify the religion itself or its billions of peaceful adherents who are on their own spiritual journeys. Whether religious or not, bigotry like LGBT-phobia often exists due to lack of experience and engagement with these people (or other marginalized groups) and common internalized taboos that really are not limited to religion. By far most people are able to open their minds once they become acquainted with and actually learn about LGBTQ+ in the first place, and realize that there is no difference in our humanity whatsoever and that we are one - no matter what our genders, sexualities or identities are. I live in a Muslim majority country, and there are LGBTQ+ venues here and an emerging community expressing itself, for example.

And as Marxists, religious or not, we know that the very origin of widespread bigotry of all kinds is not something that is internalized out of the blue or to blindly be "accepted", but something that arose from now ~7000+ years of class society.

Am Muslim, I don't even know LMAO I think it's just how you're brought up?

I have plenty of gay / trans friends, I know a lot of Hijabi women who also have gay / trans friends.

There is still a lot of work that can be done in my community, particularly with Muslim men, as there is a lot of discrimination. But even then there are strides being made. An old childhood friend of mine used to be extremely homophobic and I distanced myself from him, caught up with him about a year ago and he's a completely changed person. Still has some "I don't understand why..." questions but is getting better at asking questions on things instead of just denouncing them vehemently.

My own father was standing, arms linked, with a tall goth trans mommy waving the trans flag at a Palestine protest.

I think a lot of it comes down to just receiving exposure of someone who is LGBTQ+ and realizing they're normal people lol.

The way I see it. Religions are tools to be used. There is no such thing as a pure religion, the ruling class always co-opt religion to serve their purposes, and imperialist forces always co-opt religions to create conflicts. And when the working class become the ruling class, it will be no different, except that now it would be a tool to serve the common good.

Religious beliefs are to be inferior to laws, religious institutions are to be managed by socialist institutions. Beliefs, customs, and practices that no longer fit the new context are to be discouraged or even condemned. However, we must not rely on force to do so. The primary means are education and propaganda, consistent and persistent. The Chinese has a saying: 水滴石穿 (Water drips, stone wears away).

Disclamers:

1. I have only based my perspective on East Asian culture, which traditionally take it easy with religious stuffs. I do not know how different are the Islam societies.
2. The socialist government must be trusted by the people (having full legitimacy) in order to implement something like this.

As a former evangelical Christian, I can only talk to the Christian side of things, and will leave other religious texts alone.

The Bible has a few things relevant to this discussion:

1. Jesus' fulfillment of the law and the subsequent new covenant after his alleged sacrifice
2. The condemnation of Sodom and Gomorrah
3. The creation of man and woman
4. The forbidding of a man lying with another man
5. A man leaving his parents to be united in one flesh with a woman
6. Identity of all being sinners and of all sins being equal to god

(1) Many Christians view the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross as a fulfillment of the old law--essentially invalidating strict adherence obligations to what's laid out in Leviticus. This brought in a new covenant which (though there are other rules mentioned throughout the new testament) essentially boils down to "love god and love others." Paul even describes the situation as "all things are lawful, but not all things are edifying (good)." With this view it's easy to say that God has freed us from moralistic obligations (such as refraining from same sex relationships) as long as we love everyone and direct people to God.

(2) The Bible tells a story of 2 cities being destroyed by god for their wickedness. One of his friends actually bartered with God to save one if something like 5 righteous people could be found in the city, but that quota wasn't met. Prior to their destruction, however, God sends some masc presenting angels to warn one of his followers to gtfo so he doesn't die. Upon seeing these sexy new hunks in their city the townsfolk demand the follower of god let them fuck the angels. Instead the follower of god let's the townsfolk fuck his daughters (women were property, so this substitution protected his new friends at the cost of basically breaking an expensive dish). Some view this as a story of god wiping out the cities for their homosexual tendencies, but it's more accurately a story of god wiping them out for their practices of sexual domination as an act of humiliation.

(3) The Bible says god created man and woman. Some view this as an affirmation of a strict gender binary. The Bible does not, however, list everything God created with specific detail and it doesn't draw a distinction between trans and cis folk.

(4) Modern English translations say that a man shouldn't lie with another man as one lies with a woman. This is viewed by some as an overt condemnation of same sex relationships; however, this can also be interpreted as a condemnation of sexual domination (a la number #2) or a criticism of the ongoing practice of pederasty, when an older man fucks a younger man in an act of manipulation or exploitation. This is embedded in a longer passage about lust and idolatry.

(5) The recognition of marriage as a holy covenant endorsed and before God is reflected in the idea that a man will leave his father and mother and become one flesh with his new bride (a de facto woman). This is used as an example of god's love for his followers. There's no condemnation of same sex relationships in this passage, merely a passing statement reflecting the social norms at the time regarding marriage.

(6) There's the idea in the Bible that all sin is abhorrent to God equally, and that all mankind has sinned and betrayed God equally. That is why the sacrifice arc of Jesus is in the story--a way to redeem the fallen and unify people with God. If same sex relationships are wrong and so is getting drunk, lying, or overeating, than who are we to condemn that practice so long as it doesn't hurt other people?

There's a few other comments about the circumstances and practices of the Bible without direct passages.

(1) The Bible is a disparate collection of letters and books written of an age and people for that age and people. It does contain some passages that provide useful advice that's not necessarily supposed to be taken as divinely inspired doctrine. This is a blatantly heretical take from an evangelical perspective, but is clearly borne out in writings attributed to Paul. His letters were to specific churches to help them deal with specific issues they were dealing with at the time and are obviously not intended to be a governing cannon for all god's people. He even admits at times that he's interjecting his own thoughts and not those inspired by god. He is providing good life advice from a position of respect, not of divine authority.

(2) There are countless instances of polygamy and concubines in the Bible that are not strictly condemned aside from optics (like "what'll people think if the king is a removed?"). Many of god's favorite people kept harems. There's also no condemnation of lesbians. King Solomon had 1000 women--you telling me he never once got sucked off while watching some girls go down on each other?

All in all, if the Bible is viewed not as a strict literal list of commands (which reflects the diversity of the text and the circumstances of its creation) there's sparse condemnation if any.

Former indoctrinated Christian here.

Yeah, how exactly do you coexist with people who think their beliefs are above people's right to existence and autonomy?

They don't. They hold a double standard for people inside their religion and those outside it.

Do you see many trans or gay Muslim women or men?

People outside their religion they barely care about what they do. People inside their religion they pressure and oppress and shame into not being outwardly lgbtq+

This gives off the illusion of being progressive to those on the outside.

Its the same with modern cults. Its all cults. Religion is just a cult who's leader has died.