Rilek1Corner

Tag: bisexual

  • Cape Town’s Gay Mosque Provides Rare Haven

    Cape Town’s Gay Mosque Provides Rare Haven

    CAPE TOWN — Friday prayers at the People’s Mosque in Cape Town looks like any other around the Islamic world, except in this South African city the imam is openly gay and the teaching promotes homosexual rights.

    It is a stance that provokes outrage from many Muslims, but Mr Muhsin Hendricks has built up a small, loyal congregation by helping worshippers try to reconcile their sexuality and their religion.

    “There is this love-hate relationship from the Muslim community,” Mr Hendricks told AFP.

    “Sometimes they feel that I should be thrown from the highest mountain, and sometimes they appreciate that there is one imam who is willing to work with people who they are unwilling to work with.”

    Cape Town has an active gay scene, and is often described as the “gay capital” of Africa, with a district of gay-friendly restaurants, bars, guesthouses and clubs near the city centre.

    In 1996 Mr Hendricks founded “The Inner Circle”, a support group for Muslims living in Cape Town who felt rejected due to their sexual orientation, which led to him setting up the mosque five years ago.

    In contrast to the emotions that surround the explosive topic of Islam and homosexuality, the mosque offers a calm and open place for gay Muslims to worship together.

    “I got divorced at the age of 29 after being married (to a woman) for six years,” Mr Hendricks, 48, said.

    “That was the point where I just felt — no more double life. I needed to be authentic with myself, and part of that process was to come out.

    “This is who I am and if that means I am going to be killed because of my authenticity, then that is how I choose to meet God.”

    ‘HOMOPHOBIC MESSAGING’

    Today the mosque, located at the Inner Circle offices, has about 25 regular worshippers, and even offers a marriage blessing to gay couples.

    South Africa’s 1996 constitution was the first in the world to protect homosexuals’ rights, and the country is the only one in Africa that allows same-sex marriages.

    But many South Africans of all religious groups are less tolerant, and LGBT (lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender) people are often subject to discrimination and violence.

    There are about 300,000 Muslims in Cape Town and most mosque leaders in the city take a clear stand against homosexuality, even encouraging home imprisonment and “corrective treatment”.

    “Homosexuality is unacceptable and the punishment will be the fire,” Imam Pandy, leader of a mosque in Mowbray, a busy central district of Cape Town, told AFP.

    “How can you be homosexual? It is forbidden. And it is your duty as an imam or as a Muslim to go and speak to them and say ‘no, it cannot be’.”

    The Inner Circle group has worked for 20 years to support gay Muslims, often struggling to survive against overwhelming opposition from orthodox Islamic leaders.

    “The messaging that the Muslim community gets about queer issues comes from a clergy that is completely homophobic,” said Mr Abdul Karriem Matthews, programme manager at the Inner Circle.

    ‘PIONEERS OF CHANGE’

    For worshippers like Mr Zaid Philander, a local art teacher, the mosque provides a welcome refuge, as well as access to counselling after he endured a harrowing “corrective” ritual conducted by a quack “doctor” in Cape Town.

    “There are a lot of lives being destroyed based on sexuality and religion, and that needs to change,” he said. “Here they are the pioneers of this change, and this is a good place to start.

    “I choose to be in a place where I can have a healthy relationship with God, and the Inner Circle gives me the freedom to be the person I am.”

    At one recent Friday prayers attended by AFP a female visitor from the Middle East gave a sermon to about 30 people citing passages from the Koran to promote an accepting version of Islam.

    She asked not to be identified or quoted for fear of hostile reprisals in her native country, where open worship by gay Muslims would be unimaginable.

    Mr Hendricks, whose father was also an imam, travels worldwide to spread his message to other gay Muslims that the answer is to stay positive.

    “I want to… arrive at a point where we can include queer people,” he said. “I don’t see the Muslim community as the enemy.”

     

    Source: www.todayonine.com

  • LGBT Community Given A Lot Of Public Space In Singapore, Why Pushing For More?

    LGBT Community Given A Lot Of Public Space In Singapore, Why Pushing For More?

    Dear All Singapore Stuff,

    This is what I saw this Sunday on my MRT ride back home. Two men openly kissing on the train. Everyone was looking at them. I was kind enough to take the pic without a direct shot of the boy’s face.

    I respect everyone’s rights, but this is Simply Disgusting in a public space.

    What if my children saw this and asked “Mummy, why are the two men kissing?”

    Would I have to answer “It’s the same as normal love and marriage. The only difference is that one man opens his buttocks for the other man to put his private part inside but in the end, no babies come out. They only get AIDS”?!

    Is this another publicity stunt by the gay community?

    Most people in SG already know they exist but would prefer that they just go back inside the closet and stop seeking attention.

    Recently, Minister Chan Chun Sing bravely spoke out against public displays of homosexuality in Singapore. These were his words “I’m not going to discriminate … (You’re free to do) whatever you do behind your bedroom doors … It’s not my problem. I’m not a sex policeman … But if you tell everyone to champion pro-LGBT or anti-LGBT (causes), it (might) cause social divisions, so (I have to step in) to be the policeman in the middle.” (source: http://m.todayonline.com/singapore/chan-chun-sing-urges-youth-go-beyond-…)

    It seems that we really need sex policemen like Mr Chan and stricter laws to keep the urges of the gay community in check. The gay minority can do whatever they want in their bedroom but they should not be going around promoting the gay lifestyle and demanding for gay marriage. They can be gay but we have our right not to accept their behaviour in public. A vast majority of Singaporeans do not approve of gay marriage and are unlikely to change our minds anytime soon. Singapore should not degenerate into a free-for-all where gay men can brazenly go around wrecking young boys’ buttocks in the name of love, without fearing the consequences of their actions.

    Homosexuals should be thankful that they have their annual Pink Dot. We as the moral majority have already given them enough public space. What more do they want? Gay sex parties? Gay parades? To be able to teach kids about gay sex? Some of them are not contented with Pink Dot and intimacy in private. Instead, they want to flaunt their gayness in public and ‘confront’ normal heterosexual couples until they accept them as normal and see them as equally ‘married’. No, homosexual relationships are not normal and therefore will be never be equal to a real marriage between a man and a woman. We have to draw the line at some point. For many of us, life is not just about fulfilling sexual fetishes that are falsely attributed to genetics.

    Melinda
    A.S.S Contributor

    Source: www.allsingaporestuff.com

     

  • Pink Dot Disappointed By New Ruling, Google Pledges Continued Support

    Pink Dot Disappointed By New Ruling, Google Pledges Continued Support

    In light of new rules that could curb foreign funding and involvement in events held at the Speakers’ Corner in Hong Lim Park, organisers of Pink Dot said they hope more Singaporeans and local companies will step forward to support them in 2017.

    Pink Dot, an annual non-profit event, organised in support of the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender (LGBT) community, also said in a statement on Friday (Oct 21) that while it respects and understands the Ministry of Home Affairs’ position, it is “disappointed” by the latest clarifications from the ministry.

    “Pink Dot has always been a local movement dedicated to bringing LGBT Singaporeans closer to their friends and families and closer to Singapore society as a whole – a universal aspiration that we do not consider to be controversial or political,” said spokesman Paerin Choa.

    “We remain committed to organising and holding Pink Dot as we have done for the past eight years and we want to work closely with the Ministry of Home Affairs and other Government agencies to ensure that we remain within legal boundaries and keep the event safe for all participants, as we begin planning for next year’s Pink Dot event,” said Mr Choa.

    “As our society continues to evolve, we hope that this will be the start of an ongoing dialogue and we look forward to continue engaging with the various Government agencies to better foster understanding between the Government and the LGBT community in the long term.”

    The 2016 edition of Pink Dot had 18 corporate sponsors, including Facebook, Google, Barclays, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, BP, Bloomberg, and Twitter.

    The Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) stated that foreign entities will have to apply for a permit to organise or assist in the organising of events held at the Speakers’ Corner in Hong Lim Park. This covers sponsoring, publicly promoting, or organising members or employees to participate in the event.

    Meanwhile, Singapore entities, such as local companies and non-governmental organisations, can organise or assist in the organising of an event, without the need for a permit. This is meant to “reinforce the key principle” that the Speakers’ Corner was set up primarily for Singaporeans, MHA stated.

    MHA also clarified that Singapore entities refer to those which are incorporated or registered in Singapore and controlled by a majority of Singapore citizens. This means many of Pink Dot’s foreign sponsors, which are registered and incorporated in Singapore, would not qualify as a Singapore entity, and would need to apply for a permit.

    GOOGLE BACKS PINK DOT

    At least one sponsor has committed to taking the extra step of applying for a permit in order to continue supporting Pink Dot.

    When contacted by Channel NewsAsia, a Google spokesman said: “We’ve been proud supporters of Pink Dot since 2011 and we will continue to show our commitment to diversity and inclusion. So we will apply for a permit to support Pink Dot in 2017 if required by this new regulation. We hope that these new rules will not limit public discussion on important issues.”

    Another past sponsor, JP Morgan said via a spokesman that the company is “committed to promoting equality in our workplace and encourage a supportive and inclusive culture”. Channel NewsAsia has reached out to six other past sponsors of Pink, including BP, which said it had no comment.

    Other entities which have organised events at Hong Lim Park include the YMCA, but its head of corporate affairs Samuel Ng told Channel NewsAsia that he believes the YMCA “won’t be affected” by the new rules, as its past Proms @ the Park events were held at the main lawn ‎of Hong Lim Park, not at the Speaker’s Corner.

    “The administration and all is quite different,” said Mr Ng, referring to whether an entity applies to hold an event at the Speaker’s Corner or at the park. “(Our events) would be under the community shelter that manages the park.”

     

    Source: www.channelnewsasia.com

  • MHA: Foreign Companies Need Permit To Sponsor, Promote Or Participate In Speakers’ Corner Events

    MHA: Foreign Companies Need Permit To Sponsor, Promote Or Participate In Speakers’ Corner Events

    Foreign companies will need a permit to sponsor, publicly promote or get its employees to participate in events at the Speakers’ Corner, stated the Ministry of Home Affairs (MHA) on Friday afternoon (Oct 21).

    For the first time, the ministry made clear what a Singapore entity was: those incorporated or registered in Singapore and controlled by a majority of Singapore citizens.

    The entity’s directors must be mostly Singaporean, and the majority of its ownership must be held by Singaporeans or one or more Singapore companies.

    Meanwhile, the ministry is loosening rules for local entities organising events at the Speakers’ Corner. From next month, Singapore companies or non-government organisations no longer need permits to hold events at the Speakers’ Corner. Now, only Singapore citizens are exempted.

    In its news release on the amendments to the rules, the ministry reiterated that the Speakers’ Corner was set up in 2000 for Singaporeans to express their views on issues that concern them.

    “The Government’s position has always been that foreign entities should not interfere in our domestic issues, especially those of a political or controversial nature,” said the MHA. “The amendments reinforce the key principle that the Speakers’ Corner was set up primarily for Singaporeans.”

    MHA is also extending the rules to those who participate at Speakers’ Corner events through remote means. So foreign entities will also need a permit if they speak through teleconferecing or pre-recorded messages at the Speakers’ Corner.

    These changes come on the back of reviews to Speakers’ Corner rules which the MHA started in June. The ministry had wanted to “make it clear that foreign entities should not fund, support or influence” events held at Speakers’ Corner, such as June 4’s Pink Dot – the annual lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender rally.

    This year’s Pink Dot – the eighth such – attracted 18 sponsors including multinational companies such as Google, JP Morgan, Goldman Sachs, Apple, Facebook, Microsoft, Visa and General Electric.

     

    Source: www.straitstimes.com

  • Championing LGBT Equality Does Not Necessarily Mean Being Pro-LGBT

    Championing LGBT Equality Does Not Necessarily Mean Being Pro-LGBT

    I refer to the report “Chan Chun Sing urges youth to go beyond relying on good grades for jobs” (Sept 24).

    Offering his personal views on lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender (LGBT) issues, Minister in the Prime Minister’s Office Chan Chun Sing said: ““I’m not going to discriminate … I’m not a sex policeman.”

    When we have a law like Section 377A, however, which criminalises male gay sex but not female gay sex, then it is effectively a “sex policeman” and discriminates against gay males. Mr Chan’s comments seem incongruous with the current situation.

    Also, people supportive of LGBT equality are not “pro-LGBT” per se, not in the way that it would be seen as elevating LGBT people above others nor be seen as morally equivalent to those who are “anti-LGBT”.

    For example, if some people are racist against blacks, and there are laws or social programmes that promote general racial equality, then it would be inaccurate to claim that equality legislation is pro-black.

    Likewise, it is incorrect to portray equality for all, including LGBT people, as being pro-LGBT.

    LGBT activists tend to speak out against bullying of LGBT people and also bullying in general because they tend to see or experience the harm of bullying first-hand and are inclined to try to stop it.

    Let us not confuse this with being pro-LGBT per se. People who speak out against bullying of blacks or racist bullying in general are not generally seen as being pro-such-and-such a race.

    I also see support for things like proper relationship and marriage equality not so much as pro-LGBT but as pro-marriage.

    Decades ago in the United States, some areas outlawed mixed-race marriage, but when that was overturned, it helped to improve the relationships of those couples. And this has a positive knock-on effect on society.

    As a married heterosexual Singaporean, my marriage would not be affected if same-sex marriage were ever allowed. It is not as if mine would suddenly crumble because some other same-sex couple could marry.

    There is no rational basis for claiming harm to marriage where same-sex marriage is allowed.

     

    Source: www.todayonline.com