Tuesday, July 28, 2020
how to sexually escalate and talk dirty to women
Just shut up get your fcking knickers off and stand there with your legs wide open in front of that fan and dribble for me until i'm ready to take you wench if you move one inch I'm gonna wack your fucking arse so fucking hard they will hear you screamin fcking China!!
Lesbian Muslim : “God Hasn't Stopped Me"
Scripture and Islamic jurisprudence
In the Quran
Messengers to Lot
The Quran contains several allusions to homosexual activity, which has prompted considerable exegetical and legal commentary over the centuries.[1] The subject is most clearly addressed in the story of Sodom and Gomorrah (seven verses) after the city inhabitants demand sexual access to the messengers sent by God to the prophet Lot (or Lut).[1][2][3][4] The Quranic narrative largely conforms to that found in Genesis.[1] In one passage the Quran says that the men "solicited his guests of him" (Quran 54:37),[50] using an expression that parallels phrasing used to describe the attempted seduction of Joseph, and in multiple passages they are accused of "coming with lust" to men instead of women (or their wives).[1] The Quran terms this an abomination or fahisha (Arabic: فاحشة, romanized: fāḥiša) unprecedented in the history of the world:
Later exegetical literature built on these verses as writers attempted to give their own views as to what went on; and there was general agreement among exegetes that the "abomination" alluded to by the Quranic passages was attempted sodomy (specifically anal intercourse) between men.[1] Some Muslim academics disagree with this interpretation, arguing that the people of Lot were destroyed not because of participation in same-sex acts, but because of misdeeds which included refusing to worship one God, disregarding the authority of the Prophets, and attempting to rape the travelers, a crime made even worse by the fact that the travelers were under Lot's protection and hospitality.[51][52]:194–195
The sins of the people of Lut (Arabic: لوط) subsequently became proverbial and the Arabic words for the act of anal sex between men such as liwat (Arabic: لواط, romanized: liwāṭ) and for a person who performs such acts (Arabic: لوطي, romanized: lūṭi) both derive from his name, although Lut was not the one demanding sex.[53]
Zina verse
Only one passage in the Quran prescribes a strictly legal position. It is not restricted to homosexual behaviour, however, and deals more generally with zina (illicit sexual intercourse):[54]
Most exegetes hold that these verses refer to illicit heterosexual relationships, although a minority view attributed to the Mu'tazilite scholar Abu Muslim al-Isfahani interpreted them as referring to homosexual relations. This view was widely rejected by medieval scholars, but has found some acceptance in modern times.[1]
Cupbearers in paradise
Some Quranic verses describing the paradise refer to "immortal boys" (56:17, 76:19) or "young men" (52:24) who serve wine to the blessed. Although the tafsir literature does not interpret this as a homoerotic allusion, the connection was made in other literary genres, mostly humorously.[1] For example, the Abbasid-era poet Abu Nuwas wrote:[55]
Jurists of the Hanafi school took up the question seriously, considering, but ultimately rejecting the suggestion that homosexual pleasures were, like wine, forbidden in this world but enjoyed in the afterlife.[1][8]
In the hadiths
The hadith (sayings and actions attributed to Muhammad) show that homosexual behaviour was not unknown in seventh-century Arabia.[5] However, given that the Quran did not specify the punishment of homosexual sodomy, Islamic jurists increasingly turned to several "more explicit"[1][6] hadiths in an attempt to find guidance on appropriate punishment.[5][6]
While there are no reports relating to homosexuality in the best known hadith collections of Bukhari and Muslim, other canonical collections record a number of condemnations of the "act of the people of Lot" (male-to-male anal intercourse).[8] For example, Abu `Isa Muhammad ibn `Isa at-Tirmidhi (compiling the Sunan al-Tirmidhi around C.E.884) wrote that Muhammad had indeed prescribed the death penalty for both the active and also the passive partner:
Ibn al-Jawzi (1114–1200) writing in the 12th century claimed that Muhammad had cursed "sodomites" in several hadith, and had recommended the death penalty for both the active and passive partners in homosexual acts.[56]
Al-Nuwayri (1272–1332) in his Nihaya reports that Muhammad is "alleged to have said what he feared most for his community were the practices of the people of Lot (he seems to have expressed the same idea in regard to wine and female seduction)."[5]
Other hadiths seem to permit homoerotic feelings as long as they are not translated into action.[57] One hadith acknowledges homoerotic temptation and warns against it: "Do not gaze at the beardless youths, for verily they have eyes more tempting than the houris"[58] or "... for verily they resemble the houris".[59] These beardless youths are also described as wearing sumptuous robes and having perfumed hair.[60]
In addition, there is a number of "purported (but mutually inconsistent) reports" (athar) of punishments of sodomy ordered by early caliphs.[8] Abu Bakr apparently recommended toppling a wall on the culprit, or else burning him alive,[61] while Ali bin Abi Talib is said to have ordered death by stoning for one sodomite and had another thrown head-first from the top of a minaret—according to Ibn Abbas, the latter punishment must be followed by stoning.[5]
There are, however, fewer hadith mentioning homosexual behavior in women;[62][63] but punishment (if any) for lesbianism was not clarified.
Transgender
In Islam, the term mukhannathun is used to describe gender-variant people, usually male-to-female transgender. Neither this term nor the equivalent for "eunuch" occurs in the Quran, but the term does appear in the Hadith, the sayings of Muhammad, which have a secondary status to the central text. Moreover, within Islam, there is a tradition of the elaboration and refinement of extended religious doctrines through scholarship. This doctrine contains a passage by the scholar and hadith collector An-Nawawi:
The hadith collection of Bukhari (compiled in the 9th century from earlier oral traditions) includes a report regarding mukhannathun, effeminate men who were granted access to secluded women's quarters and engaged in other non-normative gender behavior:[7] This hadiths attributed to Muhammad's wives, a mukhannath in question expressed his appreciation of a woman's body and described it for the benefit of another man. According to one hadith, this incident was prompted by a mukhannath servant of Muhammad's wife Umm Salama commenting upon the body of a woman[65] and following that, Muhammad cursed the mukhannathun and their female equivalents, mutarajjilat and ordered his followers to remove them from their homes.[66]
According to Everett Rowson, none of the sources state that Muhammad banished more than two mukhannathun, and it is not clear to what extent the action was taken because of their breaking of gender rules in itself or because of the "perceived damage to social institutions from their activities as matchmakers and their corresponding access to women".[7]
Traditional Islamic law
According to Samar Habib, the classical Islamic laws did not deal with homosexuality as a sexual orientation as the concept is modern and has no match in classical law; but the juridical textbooks dealt with liwat and zina.[67] But Everett K. Rowson stared, the paucity of concrete prescriptions to be derived from hadith and the contradictory nature of information about the actions of early authorities resulted in lack of agreement among classical jurists as to how homosexual activity should be treated.[8][10]
Sunni
Broadly, traditional Islamic law took the view that homosexual activity could not be legally sanctioned because it takes place outside religiously-recognised marriages.[68] All major schools of law consider liwat (anal sex) as a punishable offence.[69] Most legal schools treat homosexual intercourse with penetration similarly to unlawful heterosexual intercourse under the rubric of zina, but there are differences of opinion with respect to methods of punishment.[70] Some legal schools "prescribed capital punishment for sodomy, but others opted only for a relatively mild discretionary punishment."[10] The Hanbalites are the most severe among Sunni schools, insisting on capital punishment for anal sex in all cases, while the other schools generally restrict punishment to flagellation with or without banishment, unless the culprit is muhsan (Muslim free married adult), and Hanafis often suggest no physical punishment at all, leaving the choice to the judge's discretion.[9][70] The founder of the Hanafi school Abu Hanifa refused to recognize the analogy between sodomy and zina, although his two principal students disagreed with him on this point.[8] The Hanafi scholar Abu Bakr Al-Jassas (d. 981 AD/370 AH) argued that the two hadiths on killing homosexuals "are not reliable by any means and no legal punishment can be prescribed based on them".[71] Where capital punishment is prescribed and a particular method is recommended, the methods range from stoning (Hanbali, Maliki), to the sword (some Hanbalites and Shafi'ites), or leaving it to the court to choose between several methods, including throwing the culprit off a high building (Shi'ite).[70]
Shia
For unclear reasons, the treatment of homosexuality in Twelver Shia jurisprudence is generally harsher than in Sunni fiqh, while Zaydi and Isma'ili Shia jurists took positions similar to the Sunnis.[8] Where flogging is prescribed, there is a tendency for indulgence and some recommend that the prescribed penalty should not be applied in full, with Ibn Hazm reducing the number of strokes to 10.[9] There was debate as to whether the active and passive partners in anal sex should be punished equally.[57] Beyond penetrative anal sex, there was "general agreement" that "other homosexual acts (including any between females) were lesser offenses, subject only to discretionary punishment."[10] Some jurists viewed sexual intercourse as possible only for an individual who possesses a phallus;[72] hence those definitions of sexual intercourse that rely on the entry of as little of the corona of the phallus into a partner's orifice.[72] Since women do not possess a phallus and cannot have intercourse with one another, they are, in this interpretation, physically incapable of committing zinā.[72]
Practicality
Since a hadd punishment for zina requires testimony from four witnesses to the actual act of penetration or a confession from the accused repeated four times, the legal criteria for the prescribed harsh punishments of homosexual acts were very difficult to fulfill.[9][57] The debates of classical jurists are "to a large extent theoretical, since homosexual relations have always been tolerated" in pre-modern Islamic societies.[9] While it is difficult to ascertain to what extent the legal sanctions were enforced in different times and places, historical record suggests that the laws were invoked mainly in cases of rape or other "exceptionally blatant infringement on public morals". Documented instances of prosecution for homosexual acts are rare, and those which followed legal procedure prescribed by Islamic law are even rarer.[8]
Modern interpretation
In Kecia Ali's book, she cites that "contemporary scholars disagree sharply about the Qur'anic perspective on same-sex intimacy." One scholar represents the conventional perspective by arguing that the Qur'an "is very explicit in its condemnation of homosexuality leaving scarcely any loophole for a theological accommodation of homosexuality in Islam." Another scholar argues that "the Qur'an does not address homosexuality or homosexuals explicitly." Overall, Ali says that "there is no one Muslim perspective on anything."[73]
Many Muslim scholars have followed a "don't ask, don't tell" policy in regards to homosexuality in Islam, by treating the subject with passivity.[74]
Mohamed El-Moctar El-Shinqiti, director of the Islamic Center of South Plains in Texas, has argued that "[even though] homosexuality is a grievous sin...[a] no legal punishment is stated in the Qur'an for homosexuality...[b] it is not reported that Prophet Muhammad has punished somebody for committing homosexuality...[c] there is no authentic hadith reported from the Prophet prescribing a punishment for the homosexuals..." Classical hadith scholars such as Al-Bukhari, Yahya ibn Ma'in, Al-Nasa'i, Ibn Hazm, Al-Tirmidhi, and others have impugned the authenticity of hadith reporting these statements.[75]
Egyptian Islamist journalist Muhammad Jalal Kishk also found no punishment for homosexual acts prescribed in the Quran, regarding the hadith that mentioned it as poorly attested. He did not approve of such acts, but believed that Muslims who abstained from sodomy would be rewarded by sex with youthful boys in paradise.[76]
Faisal Kutty, a professor of Islamic law at Indiana-based Valparaiso University Law School and Toronto-based Osgoode Hall Law School, commented on the contemporary same-sex marriage debate in a March 27, 2014, essay in the Huffington Post.[77] He acknowledged that while Islamic law iterations prohibits pre- and extra-marital as well as same-sex sexual activity, it does not attempt to "regulate feelings, emotions and urges, but only its translation into action that authorities had declared unlawful". Kutty, who teaches comparative law and legal reasoning, also wrote that many Islamic scholars[78] have "even argued that homosexual tendencies themselves were not haram [prohibited] but had to be suppressed for the public good". He claimed that this may not be "what the LGBTQ community wants to hear", but that, "it reveals that even classical Islamic jurists struggled with this issue and had a more sophisticated attitude than many contemporary Muslims". Kutty, who in the past wrote in support of allowing Islamic principles in dispute resolution, also noted that "most Muslims have no problem extending full human rights to those—even Muslims—who live together 'in sin'". He argued that it therefore seems hypocritical to deny fundamental rights to same-sex couples. Moreover, he concurred with Islamic legal scholar Mohamed Fadel[79] in arguing that this is not about changing Islamic marriage (nikah), but about making "sure that all citizens have access to the same kinds of public benefits".
Some modern day Muslim scholars, such as Scott Siraj al-Haqq Kugle, argue for a different interpretation of the Lot narrative focusing not on the sexual act but on the infidelity of the tribe and their rejection of Lot's Prophethood. According to Kugle, "where the Qur'an treats same-sex acts, it condemns them only so far as they are exploitive or violent." More generally, Kugle notes that the Quran refers to four different levels of personality. One level is "genetic inheritance." The Qur'an refers to this level as one's "physical stamp" that "determines one's temperamental nature" including one's sexuality. One the basis of this reading of the Qur'an, Kugle asserts that homosexuality is "caused by divine will," so "homosexuals have no rational choice in their internal disposition to be attracted to same-sex mates."[80]:42–46 Kugle argues that if the classical commentators had seen "sexual orientation as an integral aspect of human personality," they would have read the narrative of Lot and his tribe "as addressing male rape of men in particular" and not as "addressing homosexuality in general."[80]:54 Kugle furthermore reads the Qur'an as holding "a positive assessment of diversity." Under this reading, Islam can be described as "a religion that positively assesses diversity in creation and in human societies," allowing gay and lesbian Muslims to view homosexuality as representing the "natural diversity in sexuality in human societies."[52] A critique of Kugle's approach, interpretations and conclusions was published in 2016 by Mobeen Vaid.[81]
In a 2012 book, Aisha Geissinger[82] writes that there are "apparently irreconcilable Muslim standpoints on same-sex desires and acts," all of which claim "interpretative authenticity." One of these standpoints results from "queer-friendly" interpretations of the Lot story and the Quran. The Lot story is interpreted as condemning "rape and inhospitality rather than today's consensual same-sex relationships."[83]
In their book Islamic Law and Muslim Same-Sex Unions, Junaid Jahangir and Hussein Abdullatif argue that interpretations which view the Quranic narrative of the people of Lot and the derived classical notion of liwat as applying to same-sex relationships reflect the sociocultural norms and medical knowledge of societies that produced those interpretations. They further argue that the notion of liwat is compatible with the Quranic narrative, but not with the contemporary understanding of same-sex relationships based on love and shared responsibilities.[84]
Abdessamad Dialmy in his 2010 article, "Sexuality and Islam," addressed "sexual norms defined by the sacred texts (Koran and Sunna)." He wrote that "sexual standards in Islam are paradoxical." The sacred texts "allow and actually are an enticement to the exercise of sexuality." However, they also "discriminate . . . between heterosexuality and homosexuality." Islam's paradoxical standards result in "the current back and forth swing of sexual practices between repression and openness." Dialmy sees a solution to this back and forth swing by a "reinterpretation of repressive holy texts."[15][85]
Some Islamic & Western scholars argue that in the course of the Quranic Lot story, homosexuality in the modern sense is not addressed, but that the destruction of the "people of Lot" was a result of breaking the ancient hospitality law and sexual violence, in this case the attempted rape of men.[86][
HOW TO TOUCH YOURSELF - Lesbian Sex 101 [Ep 8] Vulva Anatomy and Masturb...
Just to prove that Lesbians and married couples and Muslims Masturbate too in fact in some case even more than single people tehe Well it would appear that in the Qur'an /Islam the only sexual act outside of marriage "NOT" considered to be perverted is Masturbation and yet because I am single I have been getting it in the neck by a load of religious type people who are saying that single people are perverts because we must be watching pornography and must be masturbating tehehe but now we all know that even if were single people were one it's got fckalltodo with you and two it is the only logical legal and according to Islam non sinful thing to do. SO fck u bitch!
Monday, July 27, 2020
Starship SN5 Fuel Tanking Test From Boca Chica, Texas
Guy's Aliens and people who see Aliens are no longer considered to be crack pots the U.S. Navy has finally admitted to having seen /encountered Aliens the Pentagon has finally admitted to having known about Aliens for decades. Governments of the world have spent billions of dollars in trying to find and communicate with Aliens they have built a whole SETI Deepspace listening array and so yep they believe in Aliens Ok so now perhaps we can start to take people more seriously who are saying that they believe themselves to have been abducted by Aliens or that they are involuntary upon some kind of Mind control government program now why would a government wish to put their citizens upon some kind of illegal mind control program who would wish to do this? ah Aliens would wish to do this to humans and perhaps they have been doing this to humans as it would be a cool way in which to control and take over our planet or any planet without killing or being killed by controlling the minds of the creatures of that planet perhaps our governments are trying to study this concept and the effects that it might have upon humans in order to know what they are up against or perhaps our militaries are selfishly trying to exploit Alien technology before anyone else can get their grubby little hands upon it who knows all we know is that they are trying to mimic magick /the occult with science these days and there is a lot of it going on what we also know is that Hitler and his Nazi's were all also involved in the occult and what was so amazing about the Nazi's and NASA is that they the Nazi's ended up working for the American and Russian Governments and it was Nazi's who invented N.A.S.A. and it is their rocket science and their Nazi rockets where all of this rocket science today comes from not only that but what was amazing about the Nazi's was the wonder of their prolific scientific ability over just "6 years" they produced some of this worlds most important scientific achievements of today and so one wonders whether or not they had some sort of early Alien contact or could it have been that they found a hidden bunker under the earth of advanced technology? What we do know is that during the 1900's there were a lot of world famous archaeological digs going on and a lot of German scientist were involved in these digs and back in those days such places and peoples as the Egyptian government had not established any sort of import and export control concerning artefacts from ancient digs neither was their any control over the prevention of loss / theft or damage of these finds but what we now know is that there are important parts of hierographic messages upon the walls of these tombs that are either completely missing nor have been deliberately destroyed so that nobody else can read them or properly understand what these ancient statements were saying or the important messages that they gave us from 4,000 years or more ago and that is crucial information that the general publics of the world has been denied information which may have steadied us for whatever may come next in so far as Alien contact's.please follow this lead :-https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PkPn-YMp9vI&t=77s
Sunday, July 26, 2020
Parallel Worlds Probably Exist. Here’s Why
This may also be why I do not have a partner or anyone of the opposite sex like me on this world but I am not unattractive in comparison to some who have and I am not unintelligent in comparison to some who have neither am I less able in any way than some who have neither do I smell more badly than some who have neither is my mind more bad in any way than some who have sexually criminally or objectionable in anyway from some who have for even drug addicts Alcoholics the mentally ill murders rapist sadist tyrant fascist dictators tortures and even pedophiles and terrorist who have and this on it's own is all very Alien and weird on a planet where the whole system of a physical law and existence has proven to be within a two dimensional Universe where everything has it's natural opposite partner two by two therefore where are mine? As this truly is the case of the universal laws of physics then in order forme not to have a natural opposite there has to have been some intentional prevention of intervention that is deliberately blocking the natural process of life upon my planet solar system galaxy universe as far as known to man? I truly believe that since 1998 I have been abducted into another multiple world / Earth I believe that I may have been taken by Aliens or other world Humans who have taken me to live in a worst state of entanglement of my life and my world /existence as a type of punishment I believe that these Aliens / other world Humans live among us. I Believe that they picked me and set me up into a position of lawlessness and then as any normal Earth police would do I was arrested by what looked police persons but who transferred me to what looked like a police van and took me to what looked like a police station and then place what looked like a police cell and then took me to what looked like a courthouse and then sentenced me to serve a time of punishment within another but worse dimension of Earth. Who else feels this way?
Saturday, July 25, 2020
Unexplained: Helen Duncan The Blitz Witch (Paranormal Investigation Docu...
Military Intelligence could not afford to take the chance that she could donas she claimed to do during war time in case she could really speak to the dead and through lose talk gave away British war secrets away to the enemy neither did they want her to demoralise the British people who may have lost someone due to military action and so in respect for the family of the deceased.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)