Of course religion is a choice. People convert to and abandon religions all the time. So yes, you can choose to be a muslim.
And if you or anyone else thinks homosexuality is comparable to paedophila, you/they are a bigot.
LGBT issues in Football
- Thread starter esmufc07
- Start date
And if you or anyone else thinks homosexuality is comparable to paedophila, you/they are a bigot.
People can be convinced to change their previously held beliefs, sure. But without being convinced you cannot change what you believe. Tell me, can you choose to “convert” to a religion you’re not convinced is true? That is my challenge to you. Get back to me when you’re able to do that.
I was born into a catholic family, went to church all the time, went to catholic school. I walked away from the religion 100% on my own, not a single outside influence whatsoever.
Did you seriously just equate these two?
Yes.
Plenty of people convert to and from religions without being convinced by others, I know quite a few.
They study, consider and make up their own mind. It happens all the time and is only healthy way anyone should join a religion. Everything else is brainwashing and indoctrination.
It's also actually against some religions rules to try and "recruit" people.
Can you now choose to return to your previously held beliefs? I mean this directly, right now can you convince yourself consciously that your previously held believe are now true? I’m eagerly awaiting your reply.
BD, so you can choose to believe in something you do not believe in? That’s a real talent that. I don’t think you’ve thought this through.
Duffer, but they have convinced THEMSELVES to change their beliefs. I’m not talking about external influence here, although it does play a part. My challenge extends to you. Choose a religion you are convinced is untrue and consciously choose to belief in it. I’d love to hear how you did it.
No matter what anybody does, if the individual isn’t convinced themselves, their belief isn’t a choice. They’ve been compelled to change their beliefs through critical reasoning not choice.
This is the last post I can make on the main forum for today so I’ll be unable to post further replies. And I don’t think pedophilia is equivalent to homosexuality to those asking. I’m just picking out what todays society considers a taboo. Pedophilia is an illegal act and homosexuality is not. I’m not here to debate law. I was making a moral argument. There is nothing wrong with having different views on morality as long as laws are not broken.
* to chesterlestreet (last reply I promise), Muslims would argue that there are objective and scientific harms. We can argue back and forth on what they are but I honestly feel the subject will only be opening up a can of worms with emotions running high. Let’s just leave it at that. I’m not here to convince you either way.
Last edited:
That's a blatant false equivalency, though.
Society (secular society, let's say) has various reasons for being against pedophilia and incest (both of which are phenomena that are objectively/scientifically harmful or detrimental in multiple ways).
The only reason Muslims have to be against homosexuality is scripture (which is by definition neither scientific nor objective).
To make it even clearer:
Society (your term of choice) is against pedophilia and incest for a multitude of reasons. The "morally against it" part is multifaceted (the moral consideration isn't a simple one, it is complex and involves multiple judgments).
A Muslim declaring they're against homosexuality because...the Qur'an says it's to be condemned is obviously not comparable. The "morally against it" part is simply and solely about adhering to scripture, i.e. it's not complex at all and it doesn't involve multiple judgments.
Now, you could - of course - argue that in the case of individuals, the actual "morality" amounts to pretty much the same thing: we don't like it, 'cause somebody said it's wrong (whether that be secular law or scripture). But that doesn't make the equivalency you used - as part of your argument - any less false.
Last edited:
I'm one, my wife is another. No f*ck off, you cnut.
Did you just create an account to post this non-sense? I predict a pretty short carreer on this forum.
I tried to walk away from the world being round the other day, it didn't really work.
Also, there's many way to practice any religion. Weirdly enough, bigots tend to focus far more on the "gay are freaks" or "foreigners are thieves" side than the " love thy neighbor as thyself" part.
"And why should ye not fight in the cause of Allah and of those who, being weak, are ill-treated and oppressed?". That's also in the quran, but I guess the "gay bad" bit is a far easier way to allow people to be the worst version of themselves (I could write the exact same paragraph for any religion).
It's a choice whether or not to follow an ideology. There is no rational argument you can make otherwise. You can literally choose to start or stop believing in it at any given time.
Train wreck of a post.
Of course all religion is a choice, laughable to think otherwise.
Love the casual, offhand comparison of homosexuality to pedophilia.
Jesus. I'm not going anywhere near this thread.
I should probably say attack the post and not the poster - but I understand where you're coming from.
There are millions upon millions of Muslims who are not fundamentalist, reactionary cnuts.
Just as there are millions upon millions of Christians who are fundamentalist, reactionary cnuts.
Best to keep that in mind, yeah?
I know a gay Muslim and he's pretty accepted (nowhere near as he'd be in a liberal culture) but accepted nonetheless by a lot of the people around him. A really ignorant post.
Overall, there are still far more homophobic muslims (and Christians) than there are tolerant ones, so I have no idea why people are getting annoyed by that post. Yeah maybe a bit of generalisation, but the religion and it's followers are hardly tolerant of gay people.
Good for you if you're a muslim who's accepting of gay people, but you're an outlier and you know it.
Good for you if you're a muslim who's accepting of gay people, but you're an outlier and you know it.
You don't have to come back, you know?
I've been wondering about that. I think for a lot of 'truly' religious people, being religious as such isn't much of a choice. As in, they can't imagine their world otherwise, it's like that with their god(s) and holy book(s) and rites and whatever. I had a friend like that in high school, who claimed he would have been the same devout protestant if he would have been born and raised in Saudi-Arabia. This might not apply to more casual adherents though.
In any case, I think the point isn't so much that following a religion is a choice (again, I think many adherents to a religion don't perceive it as such), but rather that what you follow within that religion is a choice. Every religion has numerous separate streams, and many adherents are aware of that variety. And even within those streams, adherents have very different ways of living/following their religion, and they are again aware of that.
So when this guy says that his religion prevents him from wearing that the One Love arm band (that's what it was; it didn't even feature the famous rainbow), then I do think that's a cop-out. He will be aware that many muslims have no concerns with homosexuality, and as other people here pointed out, his own interpretation of Islam does allow him to play for a club that's sponsored by gambling companies and more. So why stop at homosexuality specifically?
Maybe in his defense though, I'll also add that there might be more behind his refusal. An article in my Dutch newspaper pointed out that some players have talked about various social pressures they have to deal with (like the convictions of their families or communities), that actually feature more strongly in these decisions than their own specific religious beliefs. He could have said that though.
The fact that people here mentioned Islam exclusively as one of the main reasons for this argument is quite amazing and continues to show the absolute respect people have for Muslim community here(the irony about showing support for the LGBT community and being racist at the same time, caf special), when:
1. Croatian captain(Modric, anyone heard about him?) won't wear it either, but I guess Croatians(christians mostly) being homophobic is a non story
2. Serbian captain already refused to wear the armband long time ago
But I guess the biggest story is when one of muslim captains(even though no one ever heard of him)says he won't be wearing it.
1. Croatian captain(Modric, anyone heard about him?) won't wear it either, but I guess Croatians(christians mostly) being homophobic is a non story
2. Serbian captain already refused to wear the armband long time ago
But I guess the biggest story is when one of muslim captains(even though no one ever heard of him)says he won't be wearing it.
Didn’t know about Modric. Interesting. How long has he been refusing? Why didn’t you mention it in this thread before now?
Did you miss the 8 page thread in here the other day when Casillas and Puyol had their Twitter jape? Not about armbands but a concern for the LGBTQ community not involving Muslims.
This thread is not about Islam.
It revolved around muslims because one poster went in that direction but it totally is applicable to pretty much any religion.
I think it would be more apt for discussion to continue in the general forum, not much football related at this point.
All of this is coming recently, some countries are not agreeing to FIFA request to wear rainbow armbands at Qatar.
Portugal, Poland, Spain and Serbia are other countries that won't wear it. Serbia have said that they don't want to ignite provocation from fans and the public, so make of that what you will.
I honestly hate these forced messages that are beginning to come up in football because of how it tries to label people in one camp or another, and therefore create judgements for those players just based on that. Even if a player agrees with the overall motivation but doesnt agree on the method then they still have to do it or have public scrutiny. Also don't like how they are focused on certain campaigns but not allowing others that don't necessarily fit the popular narrative.
You're looking at clubs to wear armbands out of support for Ukraine but then it would be interesting to see their reaction of someone wears a pro Palestine armband.
Last edited:
I agree that making political statements is a can of worms we maybe shouldn’t open but don’t see why anyone can reasonably object to supporting universal human rights, regarding sexuality or the colour of someone’s skin. That’s the whole point of these campaigns. They transcend geopolitics, so everyone should get behind them. And if they don’t, well then that’s on them.
this is quite an arbitrary distinction when discussing islamaphobia really, given that rhetoric is often (but not always) grounded in racism
I'm being ambivalent on the subject but it's decidedly a political issue when most of the countries outside the western hemisphere disagree with it, it'll end up being political for that alone.
You're coming out with that pedantry and telling others to stop deflecting?
As Tarrou said, muslims are all too often portayed as brown and foreign in the UK media, playing into general racism and Islamophobia. The two are so intertwined in the eyes of most simple-minded bigots a lot won't draw the distinction.
I'd agree on the choice front. Making are making out like being religious like choosing between having cup of tea or coffee.
In reality, if you've been brought up as religious and it's ingrained in you, underpinning your lifestyle and all of your beliefs and values, it isn't really a choice. I'd imagine the particular branch of a faith you get set on is more often a birthright than active choice too.
Yes some do walk away from it, but the vast majority don't.
I just clicked on this thread. He is not refusing it individually, his entire team is not up for it.
Teams or players obviously should have the right to refuse wearing things like rainbow armbands. The same as others absolutely have the right to call them out for it. Religious beliefs do not shield people from being criticised for having shitty views.
Of course it’s a problem with Islam, as much as it’s also a problem with Christianity - the split is almost equal in terms of Christian countries and Muslim countries where homosexuality is against the law, and there’s probably even more Christian countries where it’s frowned up, but just not in law.
Of course it’s a problem with Islam, as much as it’s also a problem with Christianity - the split is almost equal in terms of Christian countries and Muslim countries where homosexuality is against the law, and there’s probably even more Christian countries where it’s frowned up, but just not in law.
Did they give a reason why?
Lads, it’s Croatia.
"The Croatian Football Federation (HNS) announced that if FIFA allows for wearing rainbow armbands, they will ask the organization to allow Modrić to wear an armband with the Croatian flag.
“For us, the Croatian flag is a symbol of patriotism, pride, passion, and love for the homeland and family; these identify Croatia’s national team. We believe, that our flag symbolizes many more values than any single campaign could, and inclusiveness is definitely one of the values of our nation,” said HNS representatives."
Isn't their shirt basically a Croatian flag as it is? Either way, this isnt Modric, its the Croatian fa.
Is this the Gary Glitter song that was being sung? Forgive my ignorance, but why is it homophobic? Perhaps I am hearing lyrics incorrectly
It's the usual Rentboy one.
Unacceptable on our part.
Ten Hag's response to hearing that United fans were chanting homophobic songs (clipped at the 6min mark for the question):
I think in the future he should just condemn it and leave it at that instead of comparing it to booing an injured player coming off. Poor from him.
I think in the future he should just condemn it and leave it at that instead of comparing it to booing an injured player coming off. Poor from him.