Identity vs Preference
In recent times, there has been a noticeable increase in discussions related to the LGBTQ+ movement, which has led to heated debates on various platforms. Promoting understanding and inclusion requires the practice of open-mindedness, active listening, and respectful dialogue, which unfortunately tend to be lacking in these discussions. To cultivate a society that truly embraces inclusiveness and understanding, it is imperative to engage in a dialogue that is characterized by openness and respect.
LGBTQ movement
It is often noted that any form of criticism directed at the LGBTQ movement elicits intense emotional responses and is quickly categorized as rooted in hate, violence, or phobia. However, it is worth exploring whether there are legitimate concerns among those who have differing views regarding the actions of this movement. Consequently, it becomes vital to create a space where such concerns can be expressed without being immediately dismissed as expressions of animosity or aggression. The main purpose of this article is to provide an analysis of a specific topic that is closely related to the LGBTQ+ movement. This particular topic revolves around the fundamental question of whether sexual orientation should be considered as an inherent aspect of one’s identity or simply categorized as sexual desire.
sexuality as identity
The LGBTQ community has emerged as a cohesive collective, raising the need for a critical examination of sexuality as an identity. By assuming the label of a community, they have effectively compared themselves to racial or ethnic groups. However, it is crucial to recognize that sexuality primarily encompasses personal preferences rather than constituting a fundamental aspect of one’s identity. To illustrate, individuals attracted to a specific type of woman, such as those who are tall, do not form a community dedicated solely to the admiration of “tall women.” Instead, your inclination toward particular physical attributes represents a personal preference or desire.
The problem with portraying LGBTQ people as a community or race lies in the tendency to combine any criticism directed at their sexual behaviors with an attack on their essence. This line of thinking presents inherent challenges since, unlike racial or religious identities, sexual actions can incorporate elements that are subject to moral, ethical, or social considerations. Additionally, the LGBTQ movement often refers to itself as marginalized and lumps itself together with other truly marginalized racial groups.
Balancing terminology and identity
The use of terms such as “marginalized”, commonly used by groups that have genuinely faced marginalization because of the color of their skin, presents another concern. The indiscriminate use of such terminology can dilute its meaning and undermine the experiences of those who have historically suffered from systemic oppression and discrimination. Therefore, care must be taken to use terminology accurately and carefully, to avoid minimizing the struggles of marginalized groups based on factors beyond sexual orientation.
It is essential to make a clear distinction between criticizing sexual actions and launching personal attacks that target the essence of an individual. Consider the scenario where people who are sexually attracted to minors or siblings perceive their orientations as inherent aspects of their identities. Should criticism of their sexual orientations be equated with hatred and intolerance? If sexual orientation forms the core of a person’s identity, then what basis does the LGBTQ movement have for denying these people the same “equality”, “love” and “human rights” that they defend for themselves? One possible answer to this question is that underage or sibling attraction is universally considered unethical and illegal due to the significant harm inflicted on vulnerable individuals. Consequently, criticism of such actions does not come from hatred or intolerance, but rather reflects a response based on moral and ethical principles. However, it is worth noting that this was precisely the case with homosexuality only a few decades ago. Considering the presence of drag queens and men dressed as women who insist on parading in front of children, it becomes uncertain whether the inclusion of pedophilia as part of an identity could potentially emerge in the future.
The problem of sexual orientation as identity
Understanding sexual orientation as an identity presents another, more problematic dilemma. If sexual orientations are considered identities, should all sexual orientations be treated equally? Does harboring disapproval of homosexuality carry the same weight as disapproving of consensual adult sibling relationships or pedophilia? If we start to classify certain orientations as morally wrong or unacceptable, does that constitute an attack on the identity of individuals? Should we stop imposing legal or societal restrictions on sexual orientations such as attraction to minors or incest? By perceiving sexual orientation as an inherent facet of an individual’s identity, similar to their race or ethnicity, the argument against specific orientations loses credibility.
When sexual orientation is considered immune to discrimination, the task of discerning which sexual orientations are superior or more socially acceptable becomes challenging. If sexual orientation is considered equivalent to one’s identity, people with harmful attractions, such as pedophiles or those in incestuous relationships, might claim that the LGBTQ movement discriminates against them and regards their “identity” as superior. This serves as evidence that, unlike race, sexual orientation is not purely an aspect of identity but is connected to actions. The LGBTQ movement presents itself as an identity and minority group, strategically redirecting the focus of the discourse from the sexual act to the identity of the individual.
The debate on sexual preferences
Ultimately, equating sexual preferences with inherent aspects of personal identity carries substantial implications. When people define themselves solely based on their sexual preferences, any criticism directed at their sexual behaviors can be misinterpreted as an attack on their entire being. However, this perspective overlooks the fact that sexual actions involve elements that are subject to moral, ethical, social, and legal considerations. As a result, there are important questions about the extent to which we should accept all sexual orientations and the possible consequences of labeling certain orientations as unacceptable. The consequences of equating sexual preferences with immutable aspects of personal identity are central to the ongoing debate. When we consider sexual orientation, which includes both desires and actions, an important question arises: Does criticizing a particular action mean attacking a person’s entire identity? In short, can we equate being against certain sexual acts with being racist? If the answer is yes, does this mean that we must accept all sexual actions, including the most abominable ones (incest, desires towards minors, etc.)? These sexual desires are also orientations, aren’t they?
In this context, a significant problem arises when presenting sexual orientation as an identity. Treating it as an identity would imply that all sexual orientations, regardless of their taboo nature, should never face criticism. However, if sexual orientation is seen as an action rather than an identity, then criticizing it should not be equated with phobia or intolerance. Accusations of bigotry can get in the way of meaningful discussions that have the potential to foster greater understanding. Such accusations often prevent the exploration of different perspectives and limit the opportunity for constructive dialogue.
the islamic perspective
From an Islamic perspective, sexual desires and orientations are recognized as part of the human experience. All humans experience sexual desires, acting on some within certain limits is acceptable, while acting on others is not. However, it is crucial to understand that these desires alone do not serve as defining characteristics of an individual. Islam delineates clear boundaries and guidelines regarding appropriate expressions of sexuality. Therefore, it is not the sexual desires themselves that shape one’s identity or worth as a person, but the choices and actions made in accordance with Islamic principles.
In this perspective, Islam emphasizes the notion that human beings are multifaceted and should not be reduced solely to their sexual desires or orientations. One’s identity and worth are shaped by a wide range of factors, including moral conduct, character, and adherence to God’s teachings and good works. Islam encourages people to recognize their inherent worth beyond their sexual desires and to strive for righteousness in all aspects of life.
By understanding the Islamic perspective on sexual desires and orientations, one can take a holistic approach that acknowledges the complexities of human nature while emphasizing the importance of aligning one’s actions with the moral teachings of Islam. We invite the reader to reflect on the balanced nature of Islam and its nuanced approach to gender and identity within the framework of morality.
I have a question? Call 877-WhyIslam, you deserve to know!
