NationStates Jolt Archive

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/3114/museurope.jpg (http://img51.imageshack.us/my.php?image=museurope.jpg)
Source: The Gallup Coexist Index 2009
http://www.muslimwestfacts.com/mwf/118249/Gallup-Coexist-Index-2009.aspx


This is no news really but still interesting. If your a LGBT in Europe or a LGBT visiting, be careful in heavily muslim areas or avoid those areas completely.

Want to see a similar poll with catholics, mormons, jews, etc.

Zero percent?

Well, thats a first.

They can have Fred Phelps if they want.

You are trying to tell me that there is not a single gay muslim in all of the UK? I call shenanigans.

Want to see a similar poll with catholics, mormons, jews, etc.

US mormons prolly close to muslims in Europe. Jews prolly close to mainstream Western Europe.

You are trying to tell me that there is not a single gay muslim in all of the UK? I call shenanigans.

They could be closeted or suffering from internalized-homophobia, growing up in muslim families...

You are trying to tell me that there is not a single gay muslim in all of the UK? I call shenanigans.

Generally percentages involve rounding.

You are trying to tell me that there is not a single gay muslim in all of the UK? I call shenanigans.

I went to college with a a gay Iranian muslim. His family were fine with it, they just wouldn't let him go on holidays to see the family back in Iran for some reason.

Generally percentages involve rounding.

I don't think I've ever seen Zero percent on any poll. You could run an approval poll of Hitler with the Jews and still not get Zero percent.

I went to college with a a gay Iranian muslim. His family were fine with it, they just wouldn't let him go on holidays to see the family back in Iran for some reason.

Probably because in Iran he would've either be stoned or beheaded. Not exactly a safe place for him.

This is no news really but still interesting. If your a LGBT in Europe or a LGBT visiting, be careful in heavily muslim areas or avoid those areas completely.

Weeeeeeeeeeeeee! Baseless fearmongering!

*Points at poster using statistics to convey a message those statistics don't support in the slightest*

http://glenclous.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/nelson-simpsons.jpg

It's ironic... you see. Muslims were ok with homosexuality up to the XIX century.

It's ironic... you see. Muslims were ok with homosexuality up to the XIX century.

Sorta-kinda. Islam has always prohibited same-sex intercourse and this prohibition has continually been recognized. But, unlike in Christian Europe, a culture of homoerotic literature flourished in its cultural centers during the medieval era, one that romanticized the concept of a love that cannot be legitimately fulfilled.

Sorta-kinda. Islam has always prohibited same-sex intercourse and this prohibition has continually been recognized. But, unlike in Christian Europe, a culture of homoerotic literature flourished in its cultural centers during the medieval era, one that romanticized the concept of a love that cannot be legitimately fulfilled.

Indeed, which makes me wonder what happened in the last 150 or more that made them radically oppose it.

Regardless of whether the Muslim percentages surprise me, I find 59% for the UK rather surprisingly low.

I went to college with a a gay Iranian muslim. His family were fine with it, they just wouldn't let him go on holidays to see the family back in Iran for some reason.

Because homosexuality is punishable by death in Iran. >_>

Because homosexual acts are punishable by death in Iran. >_>

Fixed for accuracy.

Weeeeeeeeeeeeee! Baseless fearmongering!

*Points at poster using statistics to convey a message those statistics don't support in the slightest*

http://glenclous.files.wordpress.com/2008/12/nelson-simpsons.jpg

While I think we shouldnt stereotype (muslim=/=anti-gay) and that there are many muslims who are ok with gays, these statistics are a matter of concern. And stats like this too:


In Amsterdam, there were at least 250 and possibly more than 1000 cases of assault on homosexuals last year. Two out of three perpetrators came from immigrant backgrounds, researchers from the University of Amsterdam (UvA) concluded in a study of anti-gay violence in Amsterdam

http://www.nisnews.nl/public/221108_3.htm

This isnt fear mongering, it's identifying a problem.

Hooray for broad generalisations. I know a lot of Muslims who are fine with homosexuality. Also, shock horror, deeply religious people from all creeds generally do not like homosexuality not just people who follow Islam.

While I think we shouldnt stereotype (muslim=/=anti-gay) and that there are many muslims who are ok with gays, these statistics are a matter of concern. And stats like this too:


http://www.nisnews.nl/public/221108_3.htm

This isnt fear mongering, it's identifying a problem.

And how many of these immigrants were Muslim?

Indeed, which makes me wonder what happened in the last 150 or more that made them radically oppose it.

It is a bit weird to hear Ahmadinejad proclaim that there are no gays in Iran... it's like he is totally clueless (or pretends to be totally clueless) of Persian history in this respect.

It is the general pattern that anti-imperialist nationalist movements tend to construct homosexuality as foreign effeminacy... even against indigenous cultural traditions that were in many cases displaced by Western imperialism. It's also true that religions perceiving themselves as under threat often react with extremism--Islamic fundamentalism as we deal with it is a basically modern phenomenon.

[/url]

This isnt fear mongering, it's identifying a problem.

Going from "most people who self-identify as Muslims say that they PERSONALLY find homosexuality immoral" to "gay people are in danger around European Muslims" is pretty definitely fear-mongering. I suspect most of those same Muslims would also say they personally found drinking alcohol immoral; if you saw such a poll, would you start a thread warning anyone who likes beer to fear for their lives around Muslims?

I think those stats are a problem, and I'd very much like to change them, but it's still silly to equate a stupid-but-sane belief with "THEY'RE COMING TO KILL YOU! RUN AWAAAAAAAY!"

This isnt fear mongering, it's identifying a problem.

"The researchers explained the over-representation of Moroccans by the fact that they frequently hang about the streets. Religious motives played practically no role in anti-gay violence, they claimed."

I went to college with a a gay Iranian muslim. His family were fine with it, they just wouldn't let him go on holidays to see the family back in Iran for some reason.

Can't imagine why not. :p

Hooray for broad generalisations. I know a lot of Muslims who are fine with homosexuality. Also, shock horror, deeply religious people from all creeds generally do not like homosexuality not just people who follow Islam.

Avg muslim in Europe is also prolly much more religious than the mainstream. They may (on avg) also have lower education and wealth.

So if you control for social variables (religiosity, education, wealth level), maybe muslims arent different than the mainstream.

However, this is still a problem.

Going from "most people who self-identify as Muslims say that they PERSONALLY find homosexuality immoral" to "gay people are in danger around European Muslims" is pretty definitely fear-mongering. I suspect most of those same Muslims would also say they personally found drinking alcohol immoral; if you saw such a poll, would you start a thread warning anyone who likes beer to fear for their lives around Muslims?

I think those stats are a problem, and I'd very much like to change them, but it's still silly to equate a stupid-but-sane belief with "THEY'RE COMING TO KILL YOU! RUN AWAAAAAAAY!"

Fine, dismiss it as fear mongering. I still think this is concerning.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,562638,00.html

"The researchers explained the over-representation of Moroccans by the fact that they frequently hang about the streets. Religious motives played practically no role in anti-gay violence, they claimed."

And? How does this respond to what I've said.

And? How does this respond to what I've said.

If your a LGBT in Europe or a LGBT visiting, be careful in heavily muslim areas or avoid those areas completely.

Religious motives played practically no role in anti-gay violence, they claimed.

I'm fairly sure basic reading comprehension is not beyond you.

Avg muslim in Europe is also prolly much more religious than the mainstream. They may (on avg) also have lower education and wealth.

So if you control for social variables (religiosity, education, wealth level), maybe muslims arent different than the mainstream.

However, this is still a problem.



Fine, dismiss it as fear mongering. I still think this is concerning.

http://www.spiegel.de/international/germany/0,1518,562638,00.html



And? How does this respond to what I've said.

Source please. The majority of muslims I've interacted with are hard working and are breaking into the middle class. You can't build up a strawman like that. Where are the studies that muslims are among the poorest and least educated class?

While I think we shouldnt stereotype (muslim=/=anti-gay) and that there are many muslims who are ok with gays, these statistics are a matter of concern. And stats like this too:


http://www.nisnews.nl/public/221108_3.htm

This isnt fear mongering, it's identifying a problem.

Except you aren't identifying a problem, you're working hard to obfuscate it and, indeed, create a climate of fear. As is evident by the fact that you directly connected the statistics saying "most people who self-identify as Muslims say that they PERSONALLY find homosexuality immoral" with strongly implying that the same people will be violent and attack homosexuals on sight, and that it's dangerous for homosexuals to walk through muslim neighbourhoods.

Only later did you offer up suggestions that there might be an actual problem lying beneath it all.

So yes: YOUR POST and your OP is blatant fear mongering, and you contribute to making it worse by your desperate cries of "wolf!"

Next time, try to actually make the point you're thinking of.

I'm fairly sure basic reading comprehension is not beyond you.

I used muslim also in the cultural sense (in most cases Mid East and N Africa). Xtianity has anti-gay religious texts too. But theres still a difference in attitudes. (in Europe). And this is the worldwide survey, not muslims in Europe vs mainstream.

http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/2397/pew.jpg (http://img36.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pew.jpg)

Except you aren't identifying a problem, you're working hard to obfuscate it and, indeed, create a climate of fear. As is evident by the fact that you directly connected the statistics saying "most people who self-identify as Muslims say that they PERSONALLY find homosexuality immoral" with strongly implying that the same people will be violent and attack homosexuals on sight, and that it's dangerous for homosexuals to walk through muslim neighbourhoods.

Only later did you offer up suggestions that there might be an actual problem lying beneath it all.

So yes: YOUR POST and your OP is blatant fear mongering, and you contribute to making it worse by your desperate cries of "wolf!"

Next time, try to actually make the point you're thinking of.

Well, yea, I do consider 0% vs 58% a bit scary. If you think those are 'desperate cries of "wolf!"', we are done discussing.

But theres still a difference in attitudes.

So? Mere disapproval of homosexuality does not a hate crime make.

Well, yea, I do consider 0% vs 58% a bit scary. If you think those are 'desperate cries of "wolf!"', we are done discussing.
There you go, missing the mark you yourself set up again.

The problem here isn't that even 100% personally believe that homosexual acts are morally wrong. The problem is that some people chose to be violent towards homosexuals.

And what motivates the people who are violent?
"The researchers explained the over-representation of Moroccans by the fact that they frequently hang about the streets. Religious motives played practically no role in anti-gay violence, they claimed."
Not religion, it seems. So there lacks a connection between your alarmist 0% and the violence you warn against.


If you want to talk about the problem of intolerance, you need to try again, because that's another matter.

So? Mere disapproval of homosexuality does not a hate crime make.

It's not a motivation ("The findings suggest that harassment of gay people is common and, in many cases, not motivated by particularly negative attitudes toward homosexuals") but its a correlate:

"Physical attacks against homosexuals, although less common, represent a more serious problem for the victims. This study discovered that there were some leading predictors for these assaults, namely, being male, having been maltreated, being a heavy social drinker, and having defensive, antigay attitudes. The implications of these findings and imperatives for social workers are discussed"
http://proquest.umi.com/pqdlink?Ver=1&Exp=05-16-2014&FMT=7&DID=1464119741&RQT=309&attempt=1&cfc=1

Also:

"Most people merely disapprove of those who are or perceived to be LGBT.
The people who disapprove do not perpetrate violence. But, they also do not act
as guardians, protectors or helpers of LGBT people (Harry, 1990). Rather than
help or protect, many disapprovers use religion or politics to sanction what has
come to be known as Reparative Therapy. Members of our own profession practice
Reparative therapy (Drescher, 1998). (It is difficult to assess how much Reparative
Therapy is practiced throughout the world. Common beliefs about LGB people
suggest that Reparative Therapy is not just a U. S. phenomenon.)"
http://www.springerlink.com/content/p78780282621q01r/

So, its a matter of concern.

It's not a motivation ("The findings suggest that harassment of gay people is common and, in many cases, not motivated by particularly negative attitudes toward homosexuals") but its a correlate:

Obviously. It would be very surprising if it were not. But so what?

Does it justify your original claims that LGBTs should be careful in heavily Muslim areas? No.

Does it lead us to the policy conclusion that European countries should discourage or marginalize Islam, or restrict immigration? No.

It is a bit weird to hear Ahmadinejad proclaim that there are no gays in Iran... it's like he is totally clueless (or pretends to be totally clueless) of Persian history in this respect.

It is a bit weird. But it's not really that much. Sometimes countries and leaders try to feign ignorance in order to justify a certain way of acting.

It is the general pattern that anti-imperialist nationalist movements tend to construct homosexuality as foreign effeminacy... even against indigenous cultural traditions that were in many cases displaced by Western imperialism. It's also true that religions perceiving themselves as under threat often react with extremism--Islamic fundamentalism as we deal with it is a basically modern phenomenon.

I guess this is exactly what happened to Islam. Fundamentalism may have been a reaction or protection mechanism to a threat they perceived from coming into contact with the Western world.

Obviously. It would be very surprising if it were not. But so what?

Does it justify your original claims that LGBTs should be careful in heavily Muslim areas? No.


Yes.


Does it lead us to the policy conclusion that European countries should discourage or marginalize Islam, or restrict immigration? No.

I had something like this in my mind:


Gays and lesbians of Canada's ethnic minorities launch fight against homophobia

MONTREAL — Patrick Yousse was jailed for a year in his native Cameroon, where he says he was abused, nearly raped and discriminated against daily because he was gay.

The stocky 27-year-old, sporting stylish glasses and a silver stud in his right ear, grew teary-eyed as he told his story at a rally against homophobia held in Montreal Sunday.

He was arrested for homosexuality in 2006 in the African country when he was denounced by a former boyfriend. Yousse says he was beaten by police and held in jail for three days before going to trial.

"They thought of me as an extra terrestrial," he said. "I had a trial and was convicted of homosexuality and sent to prison for a year. That year was horrible. I lived with discrimination, I was almost raped more than once, I was physically abused, my family abandoned me."

After his release, he still encountered constant harassment and his family denied his existence. Yousse spent a brief time in Tunisia before coming to Canada on a student visa five months ago.

He recently applied for refugee status.

"I'm less scared in Canada, I feel safer," Yousse said. "But I have dreams where I'm still abused. I hope with time they'll fade but it won't happen overnight. It's a deep wound."

Yousse's case is extreme, but members of sexual minorities face discrimination in many countries and within immigrant communities in Canada.

Members of Quebec's gay and lesbian communities, along with representatives of the ethnic minority communities, are trying to change the face of homosexuality in the province.

On Sunday, they launched an awareness campaign with the support of the Quebec government aimed at making Canadians of all backgrounds more aware of the issues surrounding sexual diversity.

"Our role is to be the bridge," said Robert Rousseau, an organizer. "Often, these men come to Quebec with a lot of baggage that leads them to developing a poor perception of themselves.

He says gays and lesbians who've developed an internalized homophobia are more vulnerable to having risky sex. His organization is reaching out specifically to religious leaders of ethnic communities to get their help in demystifying homosexuality.

Alexis Musanganya, 35, president of gay rights organization African Rainbow, is an activist who himself endured silent discrimination in his native Rwanda. He says he lived in the closet, believing himself to be the only gay man in his country.

"In many countries it's condemned, it's criminal to be gay to be lesbian," he said, noting that many Africans want to believe that homosexuality doesn't exist within their nations.

"In some countries you face a death sentence. In places like Cameroon, Senegal, you might get six months to five years in jail and fines."

And even where anti-homosexuality laws are mostly unenforced, the fact that they're on the books is problem enough.

"It can be used to tarnish reputations and it affects work against HIV and AIDS," Musanganya said.

"That's what these types of laws do. It doesn't just affect homosexuals, it can affect the whole society in certain ways."

Musanganya added that homosexual immigrants who arrive in Canada expecting a more open society often run into discrimination within the expat communities here.

"When we get here, we still find ourselves living in hiding," he said. "We still have to pretend, talk about women while we think of men. I see that a lot. We help people get out of isolation, to know they aren't alone. They're not alone wanting to live their dreams and it's - happily - beginning to change. It's being talked about more."

A recent survey published by Fondation Emergence, a Quebec gay rights lobby group, gives some support to his theory.

It suggests second-generation immigrants have are much more accepting of homosexuality than their parents.

Almost half of the first generation respondents said they felt that homosexuality was an illness or a deviant behaviour, a feeling shared by only 24 per cent of their children.

But the survey of 500 Quebec residents also suggests that the perception of homosexuality was more negative in African and Asian communities than in Western European ones.

Copyright © 2009 The Canadian Press. All rights reserved.

http://www.google.com/hostednews/canadianpress/article/ALeqM5hI2TzQrc92P2sTf0VefssTfk7DVA

Yes.

Only if you also believe that LGBTs should be careful among any group of social drinkers, or any group of men, or any group of people who have been treated poorly... yet somehow I doubt you have started threads on any of these topics.

I had something like this in my mind:

Fine with me. But you know what will not encourage ethnic minorities to hear any message of sexual diversity? Fear-mongering and overgeneralization.

The 0% figure for British Muslims responding to that question is certainly perplexing.

It pretty much murdered my Monday morning. It's noon now, and that's enough.

Here's what I've got:


The data described in this report come from six different
surveys. In the United Kingdom, phone interviews were
conducted among the general population in June 2008 and
included 1,001 interviews of individuals aged 15 years and
older, whose households were contacted via Random Digital
Dial (RDD). Within each household, the individual with
the most recent birthday was selected to take the interview.
Data were weighted based on gender, age, household size,
and education to reflect the general population. Face-to-face
interviews were conducted with British Muslims, aged 18
and older, during July 2008 in England, Wales, and Scotland
in areas where the Muslim population was 5% or more
based on the 2001 British census. Data collection resulted in
504 completed interviews. Face-to-face interviews followed
random route protocols within assigned primary sampling
units (PSUs) to ensure that a representative population
of Muslims living in neighborhoods with at least 5%
Muslim penetration was obtained. The Muslim data were
weighted to gender, age, and selection probability within the
household.

After talking about the French and German studies, "Methodology" goes on to say this:

The items included in each survey were similar across all
three general populations. With respect to the Muslim
populations, the British and French populations received a
longer version of the questionnaire because of the structure
of the face-to-face interviewing process. Phone interviews
require shorter questionnaires and as a result, some items
were not fielded to German Muslims.

Unfortunately, it doesn't appear to say anywhere in the report, which questions were left out of the phone interviews. If the question at the basis of the OP's graph was one, then the sample size in Britain, of Muslims answering that question, was the minimum of any of the surveys. Putting it's sample error (see below) at the top of the stated range.

Now, "Methodology" also says this:

The maximum margin of sampling error for all six
populations is ±5 percentage points.

If the question at the basis of the OP's graph was only asked in the face-to-face interviews, with a third the sample size of questions asked also in the phone interviews, then the sampling error would be this maximum, ±5 %. That is, 0% could mean 5%.

If the question WAS asked in the phone interviews, I would guess at around ±2 %. If anyone knows how to calculate sampling error, do please correct me.

In any case, it's a far higher figure than "rounding error" which would be ±0.5 %. Rounding error could produce a figure of 0% on the graph, when one, two but not three of 504 respondents answered that they found homosexual acts morally acceptable.

0% rounded to the nearest percent does not mean 0 respondents, it means zero, one or two respondents in the case of this question which was only put to 504 British Muslims. It means up to seven answers of "homosexual acts are morally acceptable" if the question was also in the phone interviews for a total of 1505 respondents.

The report includes some apparently contradictory results, which the commentary repeatedly warns about drawing conclusions from. It is informative and seems to cover well the various ways in which an individual can be considered "integrated" or "isolated."

However, sexual mores are only one of these. All of the questions in this section ("2h: eros as the price of admission" ... wtf?) include the term "morally acceptable" and I believe there is room to doubt whether Muslims and Non-Muslims interpret "morally acceptable" in the same sense. What a person means by "moral" has a great deal to do with their religion! Whether they consider moral acceptability/wrongness as something that should be imposed on others is also very dependent on their devoutness and to which religion they adhere. Correlations with practical measures like banning headscarves bear this out: not only are the correlations much weaker, they actually go the other way. Muslims are less inclined to try to enforce their morals on others!

Of course, the same might be true of any minority. The correlations there are weak, well within the five percent. Clearly, though, in terms of public policy -- what a person thinks should be imposed on others -- there is nothing like the strong correlation of the "moral" questions. This is a systemic error, it comes from the question and it is a mistake in methodology.

Two further points: the graph NMG singled out is the outlying case, and even if there is no mistake and it is completely accurate, it in no way represents the complete result of this survey.

And finally, the report makes no findings on criminality. There may exist some factual basis for asserting that Muslims are more likely to beat you up or otherwise discriminate against you for being gay ... but it certainly does not exist in this report.

http://img51.imageshack.us/img51/3114/museurope.jpg (http://img51.imageshack.us/my.php?image=museurope.jpg)
Source: The Gallup Coexist Index 2009
http://www.muslimwestfacts.com/mwf/118249/Gallup-Coexist-Index-2009.aspx


This is no news really but still interesting. If your a LGBT in Europe or a LGBT visiting, be careful in heavily muslim areas or avoid those areas completely.

Is this personal morality, or morality that means they act like fundies in the US ??

Ethnically Muslim, eh? That's a new one. So it isn't their religion that makes them violent gay-bashers, it's... being born in a country with a high Muslim population.

Ethnically Muslim, eh? That's a new one. So it isn't their religion that makes them violent gay-bashers, it's... being born in a country with a high Muslim population.

While being born in an Orthodox Christian or Jewish population makes you more likely to be a bastion of race, religious, sex and gender equality. Damn those Ebil Mozlemz.

It's ironic... you see. Muslims were ok with homosexuality up to the XIX century.

Where they?

Islam is a religion built on top of Christianity, which was built on top of Judaism or Hebrew. Is anyone honestly surprised?

Where they?

Read a few posts below for what Soheran posted regarding that.

Read a few posts below for what Soheran posted regarding that.

I read em after I posted that,my bad.

I read em after I posted that,my bad.

No worries.

Islam is a religion built on top of Christianity, which was built on top of Judaism or Hebrew. Is anyone honestly surprised?

The site he quoted from also says looks for reconciliation between Abrahamic faiths, so homosexuality could be a convenient common enemy.

I used muslim also in the cultural sense (in most cases Mid East and N Africa). Xtianity has anti-gay religious texts too. But theres still a difference in attitudes. (in Europe). And this is the worldwide survey, not muslims in Europe vs mainstream.

http://img36.imageshack.us/img36/2397/pew.jpg (http://img36.imageshack.us/my.php?image=pew.jpg)

This image also disagrees with the original one you posted for general public acceptance by around 10% for each country.

This image also disagrees with the original one you posted for general public acceptance by around 10% for each country.

The questions are different. Acceptance is not the same as moral approval.

Ethnically Muslim, eh? That's a new one. So it isn't their religion that makes them violent gay-bashers, it's... being born in a country with a high Muslim population.

Actually that does raise a question - the poll has, for the most part, treated the muslim populations within each of the European countries as differing on host country only. Which is hardly the case.

I couldn't find country of origin statistics but based off the respective immigrant populations, I would imagine that most French Muslims were or Moroccan origin, most German Muslims were of Turkish origin and most British Muslims were of Pakistani (or Bangaldeshi) origin. Now other than sharing a faith, those three (well four) countries have very different historic and cultural backgrounds.

This is no news really but still interesting. If your a LGBT in Europe or a LGBT visiting, be careful in heavily muslim areas or avoid those areas completely.The Neo-Nazis are more likely to do something painful to you than the muslims. Worst thing I've heard happen concerning muslim intolerance towards homosexuality (in Germany) is gays being kicked out of an ice cream parlor.

This is no news really but still interesting. If your a LGBT in Europe or a LGBT visiting, be careful in heavily muslim areas or avoid those areas completely.

Also the American 'mid west', and various southern states, large parts of Africa, various rural areas in 'christian' Europe, and deprived areas generally.

Interesting how both of NMG's polls disagree with each other. However, if his first one is correct, it shocks and disgusts me that only 58% of the UK are OK with homosexuality.

The questions are different. Acceptance is not the same as moral approval.

Ah yes, I overlooked that, sorry.

Interesting how both of NMG's polls disagree with each other. However, if his first one is correct, it shocks and disgusts me that only 58% of the UK are OK with homosexuality.

The two polls ask different questions - but I too was quite surprised it came so low. I wonder if there was an age bias in their respondents (only older, possibly predominantly retires being willing to respond to a phone poll). If anyone found any actual demographics in that report could you point me too them, I couldn't find them.

Interesting how both of NMG's polls disagree with each other. However, if his first one is correct, it shocks and disgusts me that only 58% of the UK are OK with homosexuality.

I refuse to believe that figure is true.

While being born in an Orthodox Christian or Jewish population makes you more likely to be a bastion of race, religious, sex and gender equality. Damn those Ebil Mozlemz.

who said this? I can't find anyone making that claim in this thread.

I refuse to believe that figure is true.

I refuse to believe the Earth is round.

Well, yeah, the Islamic world is easily the most virulently homophobic region on the planet and I doubt most recent immigrants would immediately abandon that degree of hate simply because they've moved to that new country. What would be more interesting is the degree to which those prejudices are abandoned by their descendants as they're (hopefully) increasingly exposed to more accepting attitudes.

Demographic figures promise a majority of muslims in several bigger cities in Europe in 2030.

If it is true, I think we'll face another society.

the Islamic world is easily the most virulently homophobic region on the planet

No, some very Christian parts of Africa are just as bad.

Edit: And the Caribbean, e.g. Jamaica.

No, some very Christian parts of Africa are just as bad.

In which non-Muslim country is the government killing gays for being gay?

In which non-Muslim country is the government killing gays for being gay?

The statement was about the virulence of homophobia, not about the legal punishments inflicted for it. I see little difference between countries where gays are executed by the government for homosexuality (e.g. Iran) and countries where gays are executed by vigilantes for homosexuality (e.g. Jamaica): indeed, if anything, the latter is more indicative of the virulence of homophobia.

Furthermore, the actual implementation of capital punishment for homosexuality, both historically and in the present, is fairly rare. Even the teenagers executed in Iran a few years ago were officially executed for rape. The laws on the books tend to give a misleading picture, because homosexuality is just not something anyone has ever managed to deal with via law enforcement. You get legal harassment and police abuse, but not mass execution.

Interesting how both of NMG's polls disagree with each other. However, if his first one is correct, it shocks and disgusts me that only 58% of the UK are OK with homosexuality.

The two polls ask different questions - but I too was quite surprised it came so low. I wonder if there was an age bias in their respondents (only older, possibly predominantly retires being willing to respond to a phone poll). If anyone found any actual demographics in that report could you point me too them, I couldn't find them.

"Homosexual acts are moral" =/= "Homosexuality should be accepted"

And yea, theres an age factor in The 2007 Pew Global Attitudes Project:

http://img219.imageshack.us/img219/4426/clipboard01zod.jpg (http://img219.imageshack.us/my.php?image=clipboard01zod.jpg)
http://pewglobal.org/reports/pdf/258.pdf

Prolly a significant proportion of negative answers are people with immigrant background.

And yea, theres an age factor in The 2007 Pew Global Attitudes Project:

It's encouraging that all the shifts are positive.

Edit: It's also interesting how Brazil is both more religiously conservative (by the standard of the first poll) and more accepting of homosexuality than the US.

You are trying to tell me that there is not a single gay muslim in all of the UK? I call shenanigans.

I have a hypothesis. I believe that it depends on what type of Muslim is in the country. For example, in Germany a majority of Muslims are Turkish. Turks are more prone to western society, so being gay is a bit more okay. In France, there are North Africans. I don't know much about them, but I think they are still more open than the last bunch, which is found in the UK. In the UK there are majority of what? Desis (that, both Pakistani and Indian, I believe). From what I know, within these societies, there are very strict beliefs against homosexuality.

Then again, I have no fact to base any of this on, but I think it might hold a bit of some true.

No, some very Christian parts of Africa are just as bad.

Edit: And the Caribbean, e.g. Jamaica.

I don't know, it's tough to top the 99-1 anti-homosexual ratio in Mali...

However, the truth is also that there are more than a few states that have made homosexuality punishable by death, like Nigeria. Regardless, the fact still stands overwhelming majority of states with the most brutal laws against homosexuality are Muslim. I doubt that most people living there are opposed to these laws considering there are several states without these barbaric provisions, all of which are not located in Muslim areas.

I have a hypothesis. I believe that it depends on what type of Muslim is in the country. For example, in Germany a majority of Muslims are Turkish. Turks are more prone to western society, so being gay is a bit more okay. In France, there are North Africans. I don't know much about them, but I think they are still more open than the last bunch, which is found in the UK. In the UK there are majority of what? Desis (that, both Pakistani and Indian, I believe). From what I know, within these societies, there are very strict beliefs against homosexuality.

I'd have to agree. Generally, the issue has a lot more to do with how backward the country is than its religion; you're going to find the same idiocy in pretty much every Dark Age shithole regardless of its religious affiliation, whereas countries that have embraced more modern ideas don't have the same problems. The contrast between Turkey and North Africa is pretty apt.

Actually that does raise a question - the poll has, for the most part, treated the muslim populations within each of the European countries as differing on host country only. Which is hardly the case.

I couldn't find country of origin statistics but based off the respective immigrant populations, I would imagine that most French Muslims were or Moroccan origin, most German Muslims were of Turkish origin and most British Muslims were of Pakistani (or Bangaldeshi) origin. Now other than sharing a faith, those three (well four) countries have very different historic and cultural backgrounds.

That is very plausible to me.

The different measures of "integration" in the Gallup study paint rather different pictures of Germany (and/or their Muslims) and France (and/or their Muslims.) Germany appears to have good integration with tolerance on both sides, in economic and "democratic institution" terms ... while France does relatively well on all those moral tolerance questions like extramarital sex, homosexuality, abortion and such.

If there's a problem, it's most clearly exhibited in Britain.

Really looking forward to some "country of origin" stats. I'll dig them up if no-one else does ... in a few hours. Historical links like North Africa - France, or Pakistan/India - Britain, from the colonial era, would certainly be expected to make migrants favour one over the other of the European countries.

But there are other possible explanations for the differences between countries. Migrants might prefer one over the other for just the opposite reason -- a resentment of past colonial masters. "Morally conservative" Muslims might prefer Britain for it's historical image as sexually repressed (apologies to our British hornbag readers ....) Muslims who are career-ambitious might prefer Germany for its historically strong economy.

On another level altogether, it might have something to do with the societies they are minorities IN. Germans could be expected to deliberately resist singling-out an ethnic and religious minority, from experience of the Nazi era. French could make a bigger fuss about displays of religiosity, from their tradition of church/state separation.

The divisive effect of having had a huge act of terrorism in Britain (conducted by Muslims) could be a factor. It's a pity the survey wasn't conducted in Spain too ....

In short, I'm starting to realize just how damn difficult statistical sociology is.

I'd have to agree.

And I do too. Country of origin is obviously important. Ignoring it as a factor, and concentrating only on Muslim/General-population, would be foolish.

However ...

Generally, the issue has a lot more to do with how backward the country is than its religion; you're going to find the same idiocy in pretty much every Dark Age shithole regardless of its religious affiliation, whereas countries that have embraced more modern ideas don't have the same problems. The contrast between Turkey and North Africa is pretty apt.

Countries don't "embrace ideas."

Instead of querying you on how you define, in quality of life terms or in "progress" terms, or in "problem" terms, what is or is not a "shithole" ...
(and not just now playing the Palin card for you comparing a country to North Africa)
I politely ask you just what comparison you make between Egypt and Turkey? The aptness escapes me.

I refuse to believe the Earth is round.

As do I. :)

In which non-Muslim country is the government killing gays for being gay?

Death penalty no, but there's enough of them where it's a significant prison sentence:
see wiki (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Homosexuality_laws_of_the_world), in some cases what would amount to a death penalty (North Korea for example, although breathing the wrong way there can do so too).

I don't know, it's tough to top the 99-1 anti-homosexual ratio in Mali...

I'd bet that the numbers in the 95+ range are all within the margin of error of each other. Kenya and Uganda are overwhelmingly Christian, Tanzania is about equally Muslim and Christian (and a third neither), and Nigeria is on the verge of a Muslim majority but has a large percentage of Christians too.

Further, the numbers from Lebanon and Turkey are (admittedly not much) better, despite their being Muslim countries--comparable to India and South Korea, neither of which are majority Muslim (or Christian).

What we see is a pattern of socially conservative cultures also being homophobic, in rough proportion to how socially conservative they are. This should surprise no one.

Regardless, the fact still stands overwhelming majority of states with the most brutal laws against homosexuality are Muslim.

See my reply to Hairless Kitten.

It's true that there is a doctrinal difference when it comes to civil punishment between Muslim and Christian societies, largely because Christianity arose centuries before it became a state religion. Early Christian rulers prescribed the death penalty for homosexuality, but modern ones have a bit more flexibility than their Muslim counterparts.

This does not necessarily say very much about the actual number of people killed because of homophobia, however. The historical pattern in countries where homosexuality is illegal is that you have a culture that is just subtle enough to not openly violate the law while at the same time making its intent clear to people wishing to participate (and everyone else in the process). As a consequence there will be police raids, with their intensity and regularity depending on the country's repressive mood in this respect, but very few people will be provably charged with same-sex intercourse; rather, they will generally be charged with lesser crimes, sometimes ones invented specifically to prohibit association among gays, sometimes just vague ones concerned with "public morality."

The greater danger will often come from ordinary citizens who see no need to even pretend to abide by the rule of law, who assault and kill gay people on the basis of cues that need not be as an extreme as having actually witnessed them having sex. And that has absolutely nothing to do with Islam specifically.

Edit: And that's leaving aside what is the far deadlier issue for gays in Sub-Saharan Africa: the inability for a community under intense social and legal repression to deal with AIDS. The specificities of the punishments on the books are entirely irrelevant to that.

I doubt that most people living there are opposed to these laws considering there are several states without these barbaric provisions, all of which are not located in Muslim areas.

Homosexuality is not illegal in Turkey. It is not punishable by capital punishment in most of the African countries of which we are speaking, either--only Mauritania, Sudan, and parts of Nigeria, all of which are Muslim but not of which encompass the entirety of the Muslim presence in Africa.

Throwing out one segment of a study for discussion and ignoring the focus of the total survey can lead to erroneous conclusions. The fact remains that Muslims are integrating and adopting more western style attitudes, especially with each new generation.

From page 45 of the survey:

Since 9/11 and the terrorist attacks in Madrid and London, mistrust toward European Muslims has become palpable. Significant segments of European societies openly express doubt that Muslim fellow nationals are loyal citizens. The general construct of this premise rests on an oversimplified and erroneous understanding of Islam and terrorism. Muslims are often asked to demonstrate that they embrace the more liberal sexual values that exist in Europe to be considered full-fledged members of society, while overlooking that many other Europeans reject such values. Against this background, it is generally assumed that European Muslims cannot be trusted because of their perceived ambiguous allegiances and anachronistic values that reject the long-established tradition of the separation between the temporal and divine spheres. Findings from the Gallup Coexist Index indicate that what lies at the heart of coexistence is the issue of mutual respect. Successful community cohesion will require effort from all segments of society.

European Muslims are also here to stay. Large numbers were born in Europe and are second, if not third-generation British, French, or other nationalities. Gallup’s study shows their national identity and religion are compatible. Public expression of religiosity should not, therefore, be understood as a lack of loyalty to one’s country, nor should relinquishing ones’ religious or ethnic identity be a litmus test for patriotism.

Integration is a complex, multi-dimensional process that occurs at a different pace for each individual. In Europe, there is already much common ground on which to base serious conversations about the integration of ethnic and religious minorities. European Muslims accept democratic institutions, justice, and human rights as the building blocks of their societies. However, while concerns about finding a job, feeding one’s family, and having access to good schools and good healthcare services are challenges that all European residents and citizens face, these issues are even more daunting for minorities. As the poll findings suggest, the economic marginalization of some European Muslims may have an impact on their well-being. This, in turn, creates psychological barriers that prevent them from becoming active members of their communities. As a result, the integration debate has to widen its frame, moving beyond the confines of security and religion, and focus more on the socioeconomic struggles of citizens of all faiths and no faith.
Certainly food for thought.