Previous posts in this discussion:
PostOrlando Nightclub Shooter Omar Mateen; "Bacha Bazi" (Massoud Malek, USA, 06/14/16 3:29 am)
In a video, Seddique Mateen, the father of Omar Mateen, who committed the worst mass shooting in the US history, said: "He was a good and educated son; the sight of two men in Miami kissing angered his son."
Seddique Mateen, who was born in Afghanistan, knows very well about the long tradition of "bacha bazi"--boy play--in his native country.
Prostitution in Afghanistan is illegal, but bacha bazi, child prostitution and sexual slavery in which adolescent boys are sold to wealthy or powerful men for entertainment and sexual activities, is a common practice. It is legal to buy bacha bazi videos on the streets of Kabul.
Source: The Dancing Boys of Afghanistan (a fascinating and horrifying video).
Is the father of the Muslim terrorist who killed 49 innocent people trying to tell us that his good and educated son never heard of the common practice of pedophilia in Afghanistan? Doesn't Seddique remember that one of the sons of Zahir Shah was ganged raped in the 1960s?
Didn't Seddique Mateen teach his son that homosexuality is tolerated in Islam?
(Quran, verse 4:16): "If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both. If they repent and amend, Leave them alone."
(Quran, verse 52:24): "And there will go round boy-servants of theirs, to serve them as if they were preserved pearls."
(Quran, verse 76:19): "In paradise, where martyrs for the cause of Allah enjoy an orgy of virgins and young boys. And boys will circulate among them, when you see them you will count them as scattered pearls."
We are told that Islam is a peaceful religion, but lately we don't see the peaceful side of this faith?
JE comments: Omar Mateen had professed an allegiance to ISIS, but reports indicate his rampage was a lone-wolf act. Other reports say that Mateen himself was gay, and had been seen in the Pulse nightclub several times.
Another sad, sad event, which will lead to two reactions: from the Left, appeals to ban assault rifles, and from The Donald, "I told you so" remarks about Muslim invaders. Like Trump, however, Mateen was born in New York.
Thoughts on Orlando Massacre
(Richard Hancock, USA
06/14/16 3:29 PM)
All of the world's papers have been filled with reactions to the Orlando shootings. The 14 June Wall Street Journal has several articles about the tragedy. I found three of these articles to be interesting: "The National Cost and Political Consequences of Orlando," by Gerald Seib, "Islam's Punitive Behaviour on Homosexuality," by Karen Leigh and Asa Fitch, and "Homophobia Is Institutionally Derived From Scripture," by Ms. Hirsi Ali, a fellow at the Harvard Kennedy School.
Gerald Seib recommends that we not become too fearful because of Orlando. He points out, that since 9/11, 95 people have been killed by terrorists while in 2015, 35,000 were killed in automobile accidents. Cars are much more dangerous to our population than are assault rifles, but we seem to to accept this without much concern.
Karen Leigh and Asa Fitch point out that 10 predominately Muslim countries prescribe the death penalty for homosexuals. This attitude is the same for all sects of the Muslim community, whether Sunni or Shiite. The death penalty can be by stoning, sword, or throwing the guilty culprit off a building.
Ms. Hersi Ali says that The Pew Research Center found that in 33 of 36 countries, 75% of the people believe that homosexuality is morally wrong. The Sharia laws universally proscribe the death penalty for this offense.
Before we offer too much criticism of Muslim countries for their attitude on homosexuality, we need to ponder the thought that many individuals in the West, whether Jewish or Christians, share in this belief. The Old Testament is outspoken in its criticism of homosexuality--in Genesis, 9:20-27; 19:4-11; Judges, 19:22-25; Leviticus 18:22; 20;13; Ezekiel 16:50. St. Paul mentioned this also in Romans, 1;26-27; Corinthians, 1;6-9; Timothy, 1:10. However, Jesus never mentioned homosexuality.
Different churches in the US have recently engaged in hostile debate over this subject. My own church, The Episcopal Church, lost 20% of its membership because it appointed a homosexual bishop without having a church-wide poll on this matter. The Anglican Church in England along with its US Episcopal counterpart lost contact with their African brethren who maintained that homosexual behavior is sinful. I am quite disgusted with the national Episcopal Church for appointing a homosexual bishop without the approval of the membership.
I feel that we should not discriminate against homosexuals, but that we are not required to believe that their style of life is correct. The Bible is clear about marriage as constituting a liaison of a man with a woman. Homosexuals are entitled to have their opinions but the same is true of heterosexuals.
Robert A. J. Gagnon in his book, The Bible and Homosexual Practice, lists the following problems with homosexuality:
A significantly decreased likelihood of establishing or preserving a successful marriage.
A five- to ten-year decrease in life expectancy.
Chronic, potentially fatal, liver disease--hepatitis.
Inevitability fatal esophageal cancer, pneumonia, internal bleeding.
Serious mental disabilities, many of which are irreversible.
A much higher than usual incidence of suicide.
A very low likelihood that its adverse effects can be eliminated.
An only 30% likelihood of being eliminated through lengthy, costly, and ever time-consuming treatment in an otherwise unselected population of sufferers (although a very high success rate among highly motivated, carefully selected sufferers).
I had not intended to go into such a long discussion of homosexuality, but I think that we should recognize that it is not in our best interests to promote acceptance of homosexuality in Muslim countries if we wish to garner their assistance in controlling Muslim extremists.
My attitude toward homosexuals is similar to my feelings about smokers and alcoholics. They constitute a problem in our society and I wish that they would give up tobacco and/or liquor.
In regard to terrorism in the US, I would recommend the complete ban of assault rifles. In my younger days I was a hunter of rabbits, deer and antelope. I used a .22 or a 30-30 Winchester. I see no need for an assault rifle in hunting unless one is hunting elephants, African lions or grizzly bears.
We need to give more support to mental health patients. When Nancy and I came to Norman in 1964, The Central State Hospital had 3,000 mental-health patients who operated a self-sufficient farm of 800 acres. Throughout our nation, there were complaints of the abuses committed by insane asylums. As a result of this, most of these institutions were closed or diminished. Central State now treats fewer than 100 patients and all the others are homeless street-dwellers or they are in prisons. Instead of improving these institutions in response to criticism, we close them.
I believe there was a movie, "One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest," depicting these abuses at Norman's Central State.
In our country, we seem unable to follow a middle course of moderation in improving institutions rather than closing them. The result is that we have shootings such as those at Orlando. The relatives and co-workers of the Orlando shooter knew that he was unstable. If he had been institutionalized, Orlando would not have happened.
JE comments: What does Robert Gagnon's The Bible and Homosexual Practice mean by "sufferers"? Gay people? The American Psychiatric Association hasn't listed homosexuality as a mental disorder since 1973.
(To be fair, I just read several Amazon reviews of Gagnon's book, and it is praised for its depth of Biblical scholarship. But Gagnon apparently accepts the Old Testament message at its harshest face value.)
Returning to the Orlando tragedy, one wonders if Omar Mateen was motivated by a hatred of the "West" or by his own struggle with sexual identity. Mateen took any possible answers to the grave.
Homophobia in Muslim Countries: How Should the West React?
(Carmen Negrin, -France
06/15/16 3:49 PM)
Richard Hancock mentioned in his post about Orlando that "it is not in our best interests to promote acceptance of homosexuality in Muslim countries if we wish to garner their assistance in controlling Muslim extremists" (15 June).
I ask: is it in our interests to accept that men/women be slaughtered because of their personal sexual lives? Is it in our interests to overlook our own moral and ethical values of non-exclusion of certain social or sexual minorities? And all this for some temporary assistance from countries who would gladly live without us if they could? Closing our eyes to these executions comes to stimulating their greed and corruption in exchange for giving up our own values. We have been doing this for many years for petroleum and, in my opinion, have not been very successful in creating a trustworthy relationship.
JE comments: My heart is in total agreement with Carmen Negrín. I'm not sure about the Realpolitik side of my brain.
Yet are "we" actually promoting the acceptance of gays in any Muslim country? I know of no specific example.
Does the "West" Promote Acceptance of Gays in Muslim Countries?
(David Duggan, USA
06/16/16 2:39 PM)
In response to John E's question (see Carmen Negrín, 15 June), at least as I recall, Obama was somewhat confrontational when he addressed the Kenyan[?] parliament and suggested that their laws against gay marriage and the like were not in keeping with progressive, democratic and enlightened values.
Of course, this was scarcely Daniel in the lion's den, pun intended: Kenya has no oil to sell us and Obama was simply lecturing his (alternative) homeland as to what it should do, something that we in his adopted homeland have become quite accustomed to. Please note: I have no dog in this fight: I'm neither gay nor a Muslim.
JE comments: Ah, but nothing pleases a nation more than being told what to do. Kenya is a Muslim-minority nation in any case: 11% of the population, mostly centered on the coast.
- New Calls to Ban Assault Rifles in US; from Gary Moore (John Eipper, USA 06/15/16 4:06 PM)
Gary Moore writes:
On the Orlando shooting, and the FBI's protestations that it did everything it could beforehand,
within the law: Isn't Congress, not the enforcement arm, where we need to look first after this
incident? Doesn't the size of this terrorist-template event (circumventing whether to call Mateen
a "terrorist") reconfigure the NRA logjam on gun control?
How could the NRA and allies now
phrase an argument against a law by saying: "If the FBI repeatedly checked you out
for terrorist ties or disposition, then your name goes on a list saying you can't buy an assault
rifle--and if you try to, the FBI has to look at you harder?" Does Orlando mean the NRA people
and the civil liberties people can now find some kind of common ground on the definition of danger?
JE comments: I believe Gary Moore is arguing that the NRA speaks with forked tongue: that it argues against purchase restrictions, but blames the FBI for not enforcing the existing restrictions. Perhaps I misunderstood.
People in most nations would find it strange that the US is having this discussion in the first place. Calls for assault-weapons bans come up every time there's a mass shooting. And they are renewed the next time there is a mass shooting.
The latest: an appeal from Pres. Obama for a "no fly, no buy" law--that if you're on a list that bans you from airplane, you shouldn't be able to purchase a weapon. This seems pretty reasonable.
Meanwhile, there are 300 million guns in this country. Almost one per person.
- New Calls to Ban Assault Rifles in US; from Gary Moore (John Eipper, USA 06/15/16 4:06 PM)
- Does the "West" Promote Acceptance of Gays in Muslim Countries? (David Duggan, USA 06/16/16 2:39 PM)
- Homophobia in Muslim Countries: How Should the West React? (Carmen Negrin, -France 06/15/16 3:49 PM)