What's new

Congratulation to all Liberals

backed by Fatwas and endorsed by the religious leadership
Sir read it full fatwa which states naturally born means not turned into khusra in other words no major gender signs on body but most of the khawaja saras are men (physically).
 
I want to know which fatwas and ulemas @Oscar is following
hqdefault.jpg


I found this :lol:
 
hqdefault.jpg


I found this :lol:

Forget this and that, the rules in Islam are very straightforward and logical. If someone has male genitalia, he is male, if someone has female genitalia, she is female. If there is ambiguity, it will be seen which characteristic is more prominent. If there is total ambiguity, then the person has to choose. They are required to get an operation if needed in order to adopt the characteristics of appropriate gender. After that, they live the rest of their lives accordingly. If they are unable to have sexual intercourse through genitals, then they can't provide the marital rights to spouse and hence cannot marry.

As opposed to this, today Western teachings encourage full gender fluidity. You can be male one moment, female another, and completely mixed in the next. They allow homosexual acts such as fellatio and buggery. And the real concern is that our liberal, westernized rulers are furthering this Western agenda of their masters. Why, all of a sudden, we see an emphasis on this at the same time when the West is shouting about transgender rights? This has the hallmarks of an attempt at spreading homosexuality and is absolutely disgusting.
 
Honestly I find it quite strange. The chances of someone having undefined genital organs is very low and generally i think in the UK only 0.5% of people define as transgender. However "trans culture" is a lot higher, where you have homosexual people cross dressing etc, identifying as people of different genders. That is more hormonal/preference rather than physical. Yet there is so much time dedicated to this issue in the western media recently.

From my point of view, the fatwas i posted seem reasonable, Allah created people a certain way, but if they can function as a man or a woman they should be able to get married. It is afterall just a genetic variation.
 
Forget this and that, the rules in Islam are very straightforward and logical. If someone has male genitalia, he is male, if someone has female genitalia, she is female. If there is ambiguity, it will be seen which characteristic is more prominent. If there is total ambiguity, then the person has to choose. They are required to get an operation if needed in order to adopt the characteristics of appropriate gender. After that, they live the rest of their lives accordingly. If they are unable to have sexual intercourse through genitals, then they can't provide the marital rights to spouse and hence cannot marry.

As opposed to this, today Western teachings encourage full gender fluidity. You can be male one moment, female another, and completely mixed in the next. They allow homosexual acts such as fellatio and buggery. And the real concern is that our liberal, westernized rulers are furthering this Western agenda of their masters. Why, all of a sudden, we see an emphasis on this at the same time when the West is shouting about transgender rights? This has the hallmarks of an attempt at spreading homosexuality and is absolutely disgusting.
And that fatwa which @Oscar mentioned states the same.
 
I want to know which fatwas and ulemas @Oscar is following
Why bhai? You aren’t coming into my grave and I sure am not worried about yours.
My religion is the MOST private aspect of my life and I have vowed to defend ir with force..

And please read the link I posted.
 
how can someone be Shadeed Kawara
Its actually a, bilkul Shareef, yet extreme desirous, looking down, noticing well, extra sensitive, kamao poot, without money drain type of a guy. :taz:
 
Sir read it full fatwa which states naturally born means not turned into khusra in other words no major gender signs on body but most of the khawaja saras are men (physically).
What if its inside the body and covered? What if its mental?
Too many questions based on ideals decided by men without today’s knowledge of physiology or psychology. An issue that CANNOT be defined by edicts or fatwas issued 1300 years ago or today based on interpretations of those fatwas issued 1300 years ago.

The same thought process that once declared the concept of slave equality as against the teachings of their forefathers, declared the loudspeaker haram in the 1920s still plague Islam today and even supposed educated folk. Its that need for sticking to the old ideas and traditions.. Lat and Uzzahs of knowledge.

The issue has too much ambiguity, but when there are already hateful ideas present on killing people for contrived blasphemy.. then this issue is lower on the rung of problems in Pakistan.

The traditions and issue of honor of laat and uzza which actually were related to power plagued the Quraysh and helped brainwash people then.. are mirrored by TLP and their ilk today.

This is frankly an issue which is solved by defining what is Sodomy and the characters and actions of sodom and the earliest histories and treatment of such issues.. when open admission of adultery was ignored by the prophet and not acted upon until the perpetrators insisted; its sad how so called muslims prefer to act out their own social lackings and their own frustrations by worrying more about other people’s and especially poor folks lives than looking into their own deeds and worrying about their graves.
 
Desi Liberals strive to clone everything that happens in the glorious West, with same-sex marriages being a norm there, this is a momentous news for the Pakistani Liberals :lol: . One an other note, they also casually mock the concept of Ummah by adding the Chumma word.

The title is drenched in sarcasm, but it isn't offensive.
Well, it was not same sx marriage, to be correct. Yes, but, its kinda confused. :undecided:
 
Its actually a, bilkul Shareef, yet extreme desirous, looking down, noticing well, extra sensitive, kamao poot, without money drain type of a guy. :taz:

or someone who is willing to do a sheep
 
How is this related to liberalism or the ummah? Foolish thread title by a reactionary thought process it seems.

It may be a legal issue but one that was backed by Fatwas and endorsed by the religious leadership. The so called liberals had nothing to do with nor was any Ummah involved, cant say the same about Chummahs though.

The title of this thread is offensive.
Title Edited!
 
Back
Top Bottom