Contemporary Issues & Challenges
LGBTQ Issues and the Islamic Perspective

Islam and LGBTQ Issues: A Modern Yet Scholarly Dawah Perspective
- Introduction
- Prophetic Predictions: A Sign of Our Times
- Controlling Desires: A Universal Test for All Believers
- Transitioning and Altering the Body: Respecting Allah’s Creation
- Clear Roles and Behaviors: Honoring Masculinity and Femininity
- Quranic Perspective
- Hadith Perspective
- Scholarly Interpretations (Classical and Modern)
- Comparison of Schools of Law
- Historical Context: Attitudes and Handling in Muslim Societies
- Common Arguments and Rebuttals
- Consequences in Society
- How Muslims Should Engage with LGBTQ Individuals
- Conclusion
- Recommended Books on the Topic
Introduction
Islam is more than just a religion—it is a complete way of life, beautifully balancing wisdom, compassion, and clear moral guidance. Today, we often encounter discussions around LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer) issues, which can lead to questions and confusion, especially among young Muslims and those seeking to understand Islam better. This article provides an honest and thoughtful exploration of LGBTQ issues through the lens of Islam, showcasing the profound beauty, clarity, and compassion inherent in Islamic teachings.
At the heart of Islam is the powerful belief that every person deserves dignity, respect, and kindness. Islam guides believers on how to live their lives, including how to handle their sexuality and identity in a way that brings peace and fulfillment. Muslims trust that these guidelines aren’t arbitrary—they come from our Creator, who deeply understands human nature and wants what is best for us.
When discussing LGBTQ issues, it's crucial to understand that Islam carefully distinguishes between feelings and actions. Simply having certain feelings or desires does not make someone sinful in Islam. What matters is how one chooses to act upon these feelings. This article will clearly outline Islam’s teachings, address common misunderstandings (such as claims that Islam might be "compatible" with modern LGBTQ ideology), and explain how Muslims can confidently uphold their beliefs without compromising compassion and respect toward others.
By exploring the wisdom of the Qur’an, the guidance of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), scholarly interpretations, and practical advice, readers will gain a deeper appreciation of Islam’s balanced approach—a path that is at once morally clear, deeply compassionate, and ultimately beneficial for individuals and society as a whole.
Prophetic Predictions: A Sign of Our Times
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) remarkably foretold certain moral changes that would become widespread as humanity moved closer to the Day of Judgment. Among these signs, he specifically predicted the prevalence of homosexuality and the blurring of distinctions between men and women.
He clearly warned about the increase in homosexual practices:
“Among the signs of the Hour is that men will be satisfied with men and women will be satisfied with women.” (Al-Tabarani, authenticated by scholars including al-Albani)
The Prophet also predicted that men and women would attempt to imitate each other, leading to confusion and social disorder:
“Allah has cursed men who imitate women and women who imitate men.” (Sahih al-Bukhari)
Additionally, he warned that immorality and indecency would become widespread and publicly accepted:
“Never does indecency (fahisha) become widespread among a people to the point of being done openly, except that plagues and diseases that were unknown to their ancestors will spread among them.” (Sunan Ibn Majah, authenticated by al-Albani)
These prophetic statements serve as powerful reminders and warnings for Muslims today, urging believers to uphold Islamic values with wisdom, patience, and compassion, especially as society increasingly normalizes behaviors contrary to Islam’s teachings.
Controlling Desires: A Universal Test for All Believers
In Islam, controlling one's desires and impulses isn't something required only from those experiencing same-sex attraction or gender confusion. All Muslims, regardless of their orientation or gender, are tested in this life with various desires, including sexual urges. Islam emphasizes that the guidelines and boundaries related to sexual conduct apply equally to everyone. Engaging in sexual acts outside of marriage—whether homosexual or heterosexual—is considered equally sinful and carries similar spiritual and worldly consequences.
The Qur’an and Sunnah make clear that illicit relationships, known as zina (adultery or fornication), are among the major sins. Islam does not single out LGBTQ-related acts alone but consistently calls all believers to exercise self-restraint. This universal principle of chastity ensures the preservation of family, dignity, and spiritual purity for everyone.
Transitioning and Altering the Body: Respecting Allah’s Creation
Islam teaches believers to respect and preserve the natural state in which Allah created them. Attempting to transition from one gender to another through surgical or hormonal treatments, or significantly altering one’s physical characteristics, is considered a violation of this natural order. Allah states clearly in the Qur'an:
“…and I (Satan) will command them so they will change the creation of Allah…” (Qur’an 4:119)
This verse highlights that deliberately changing or mutilating the body without medical necessity is inspired by harmful influences and opposed to divine wisdom. Scholars have universally interpreted such acts as impermissible, except in extremely rare cases involving genuine medical necessity, such as intersex conditions diagnosed clearly by qualified medical professionals.
Believers are encouraged to accept and honor their biological sex, understanding that true inner peace and fulfillment come from aligning with the divine design rather than altering it.
Clear Roles and Behaviors: Honoring Masculinity and Femininity
Islam assigns clear, dignified, and complementary roles for men and women, emphasizing that each gender possesses unique qualities and responsibilities. Blurring or deliberately crossing these lines through appearance, clothing, or mannerisms is discouraged, as it disrupts the natural order established by Allah.
The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) explicitly stated:
“Allah has cursed men who imitate women and women who imitate men.” (Sahih al-Bukhari)
This hadith illustrates the seriousness with which Islam views gender roles and expression. It’s not about limiting freedom, but about maintaining clarity, harmony, and purpose in society. Each gender is encouraged to embody the characteristics that Allah has naturally endowed upon them, which contribute to a balanced, healthy, and stable community.
Understanding and embracing these clearly defined roles helps believers find personal contentment and societal harmony, reinforcing Islam’s comprehensive vision of a just and balanced way of life.
Quranic Perspective
Islam’s primary source of guidance is the Qur’an, which Muslims consider the literal word of God (Allah). The Qur’an speaks about the people of Prophet Lūṭ (Lot) – an ancient community that was the first in human history to practice homosexual acts openly. Their story is mentioned in several places, making the Islamic position on their behavior very clear. Below, we list the relevant Quranic verses in quote blocks, along with brief explanations of their meanings and context.
Qur’an 7:80-84 – “And [We had sent] Lot when he said to his people, ‘Do you commit such immorality as no one has preceded you with from among the worlds? Indeed, you approach men with desire, instead of women. Rather, you are a transgressing people.’ But the answer of his people was only that they said, ‘Evict them from your city! Indeed, they are men who keep themselves pure.’ So We saved him and his family, except for his wife; she was of those who remained behind. And We rained upon them a rain [of stones]. Then see how was the end of the criminals.”
In this passage from Surah al-A‘rāf (Chapter 7), Prophet Lūṭ confronts his people with a piercing question: “Do you commit an immoral sin that no one before you ever committed?” . He describes how they lustfully approached other men instead of women, which Islam considers a major transgression. The people’s only response was to demand that Lūṭ and his followers be expelled from the town for “keeping pure” – in other words, for not joining in their deeds. According to Islamic teachings, this was not a case of sexual assault alone, but a community openly engaging in and endorsing homosexual acts as a lifestyle. The verses conclude by describing the fate of Lūṭ’s people: Allah rescued Lūṭ and his believing family (except his wife who supported the wrongdoing), and destroyed the town with a shower of stones from the sky . This severe punishment is seen as a direct consequence of the people’s persistence in indecency and their defiance of divine warning. The phrase “no one has preceded you in this” emphasizes that this act was unprecedented in its shamelessness. Islamic scholars note that the Qur’an uses the word “al-fāḥishah” (an obscene, shameless deed) for their behavior, underscoring its gravity .
Qur’an 11:78-83 – “And his people came hastening to him (Lūṭ), and before this they had been doing evil deeds. He (Lūṭ) said, ‘O my people, these are my daughters; they are purer for you. So fear Allah and do not disgrace me concerning my guests. Is there not among you a man of reason?’ They said, ‘You know we have no interest in your daughters, and indeed, you know what we want.’ He said, ‘If only I had against you some power or could resort to a strong support...’ (The angels) said, ‘O Lūṭ, indeed we are messengers of your Lord; they will never reach you. So set out with your family during a portion of the night...except your wife.’... So when Our command came, We made the highest part of the city its lowest and rained upon them stones of hard clay, marked from your Lord. And [Allah’s] punishment is not far from the wrongdoers.”*
This passage from Surah Hūd (Chapter 11) gives more detail. When handsome angelic guests (in the form of young men) came to Prophet Lūṭ, the townsmen hurried excitedly to Lūṭ’s house, driven by their lust . Lūṭ was so distressed by their shameless intent that he offered “his daughters” in marriage to those men, saying “they are purer for you.” Scholars explain that “my daughters” could refer to the women of the community (since a prophet is like a father to his people), or to Lūṭ’s actual daughters. In either case, Lūṭ was urging the men to fulfill their desires in a natural, lawful way (marrying women) rather than the unnatural lust they were pursuing. The men of the city bluntly refused, saying “you know well what we want” – meaning they had no desire for women at all . This exchange highlights that the issue was not lack of available women or inhospitable treatment of guests; it was clearly the men’s deliberate preference for homosexual acts over marriage to women. Lūṭ was overwhelmed and wished he had the strength to stop them. The story then describes that the visitors revealed themselves to be angels who came to rescue Lūṭ. By dawn, Allah’s decree came true: the town was overturned and rained upon with stones, completely destroying those who indulged in that immorality . Once again, we see that the Qur’an links the people’s homosexual behavior with their catastrophic punishment, signifying how serious the sin was in the sight of God.
Qur’an 26:165-166 – “Do you approach males among the worlds, and leave what your Lord has created for you as mates (your wives)? Nay, but you are a people who transgress.”
In Surah al-Shu‘arā’ (Chapter 26), verses 165-166, the Qur’an reiterates the same reprimand in even sharper words. Prophet Lūṭ asks his people how they could engage in sexual acts with other men instead of their wives whom God created for them. He emphasizes that they are abandoning the natural spouses Allah provided, thereby exceeding all bounds of decency. The use of “leave what your Lord has created for you” shows that heterosexually paired mates are part of the divine plan. These verses highlight the unnaturalness of the behavior: despite having lawful means to satisfy desires (i.e. marriage with women), Lūṭ’s people willfully chose a forbidden path. The word “transgress” (musrifūn) indicates they committed excess and aggression against their own souls and Allah’s limits. (Subsequent verses in this chapter go on to narrate that Lūṭ’s people threatened to evict him, and ultimately they were destroyed like the other accounts in the Qur’an).
Qur’an 27:54-55 – “And (remember) Lūṭ, when he said to his people, ‘Do you commit immorality while you see [its evil]? Do you indeed approach men with desire instead of women? Nay, you are a people behaving ignorantly!’”*
These verses from Surah al-Naml (Chapter 27) are very similar in content. Prophet Lūṭ addresses his people’s actions as “immorality” (fāḥishah) done in plain sight. The phrase “while you see” can mean “knowing full well (that it is wrong)” or “openly/publicly” . In either interpretation, it implies that they were not acting out of ignorance of the act’s nature – rather, they were defiantly indulging in it despite understanding its shamefulness. Lūṭ again questions how they could lust after men instead of women, accusing them of jahl (ignorance/foolishness) in their behavior. This ignorance is not lack of knowledge, but an arrogant disregard for moral guidance. Verses 56-58 of the same chapter (not fully quoted above) then describe how the people of Lūṭ responded by demanding his expulsion, and how Allah saved Lūṭ’s family except his wife, and rained down destruction upon the wrongdoers – consistent with the earlier accounts.
Qur’an 29:28-29 – “And (remember) Lūṭ, when he said to his people: ‘You certainly commit a shameful deed that no man has ever done before you. Indeed, you approach men and obstruct the road, and commit evil in your gatherings.’ But his people’s only answer was: ‘Bring Allah’s punishment upon us if you are truthful.’”
In Surah al-‘Ankabūt (Chapter 29), we find another reference to Lūṭ’s people. Verse 28 reiterates that they committed an unprecedented obscenity, similar to the phrasing in Surah 7. Verse 29 adds further insight: it mentions that they “approach men” (clearly referring to homosexual acts), “and cut off the highway, and commit evil in your gatherings.” This suggests that, in addition to their sexual transgressions, Lūṭ’s people were also guilty of highway robbery or ambushing travelers, and performing other indecent acts openly in their social assemblies. Islamic commentators explain that this indicates the people of Sodom (Lūṭ’s city) had become deeply corrupt in multiple ways – morally, socially, and criminally. Their response to Lūṭ was a stubborn challenge for divine punishment, which shows their arrogance and disbelief. The verses that follow (29:30-35, not fully quoted) describe a scenario similar to Surah 11: angels visit Prophet Abraham and then Lūṭ, and eventually Lūṭ’s people are destroyed by a terrible punishment. One point to note here is that while highway robbery and public misconduct are listed alongside the homosexual acts as the people’s sins, Lūṭ’s initial and primary warning to them was about their sexual immorality. This refutes the argument some make that the Qur’an only condemns the other crimes (like rape or robbery) of Lūṭ’s people and not their consensual homosexual behavior. In truth, all these sins were part of the depravity of Lūṭ’s society, and the Qur’an explicitly highlights the “lust toward men instead of women” as a major facet of their wrongdoing in each account.
Aside from the story of Prophet Lūṭ and his people, some scholars also point to another verse in the Qur’an that may relate to the issue:
Qur’an 4:16 – “And the two among you who commit it, punish them both. But if they repent and correct themselves, then leave them alone. Surely, Allah is ever Accepting of repentance, Most Merciful.”
In Surah al-Nisā’ (Chapter 4), verse 16 addresses a punishment for two people who commit an illicit sexual act. Early Islamic commentators had a couple of interpretations for this verse. One interpretation – held by scholars including Qatādah, Mujāhid, and Qādi Thānāullah (Panipati) – is that it refers to sexual misconduct between two men, i.e. a homosexual act. According to this view, the verse prescribed a disciplinary punishment (such as rebuking or beating) for two men caught in a homosexual act, in the early period of Islam. Later, clearer and stricter penalties for such acts were outlined in the Prophetic teachings (Hadith and Islamic law), effectively superseding this verse’s legal application. (Another interpretation of 4:16 is that it referred generally to fornication prior to the revelation of detailed laws, applying to an unmarried man and woman who commit adultery, with a similar temporary punishment of public shaming or beating. In either case, this verse shows that such sexual offenses were taken seriously and met with punishment, even in the early Quranic revelations, whether between a man and woman or two men.)
Summary of Quranic Teachings: The Quranic perspective is unambiguous that homosexual acts are considered a grave sin in Islam. The people of Prophet Lūṭ are cited as an example of a community that indulged in such acts, and they are described in the Qur’an with very harsh terms – transgressors, ignorant people, evildoers. They were the first to openly practice this behavior, and their story is told as a warning to others. The Qur’an’s consistent narrative is that Lūṭ’s people were destroyed by the command of Allah due to their persistence in that immorality and other associated sins. This establishes the act of homosexuality (in practice) as something firmly prohibited (haram) in Islam, falling under the category of al-Fawāḥish (lewd, indecent actions). The Qur’an does not describe the inclination or desire as such – it focuses on the actions. Thus, having a certain desire is not what is being punished; rather, the choice to engage in the forbidden behavior despite knowing Allah’s limits is what brought punishment upon Lūṭ’s people.
Hadith Perspective
The second primary source of Islamic guidance is the Hadith – the recorded sayings, actions, and approvals of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him). There are several authentic hadiths that directly or indirectly address homosexual acts (often referred to as “the deed of the people of Lūṭ” in Islamic literature). We will list the relevant hadiths in quote blocks and then explain their context and status.
Hadith 1: “The thing I fear most for my Ummah is the action of the people of Lūṭ.” – Prophet Muhammad ﷺ
This hadith is narrated by Jābir ibn ʿAbdullāh (may Allah be pleased with him) and recorded in Jāmiʿ al-Tirmidhī (Sunan al-Tirmidhi) and al-Hākim’s Mustadrak. The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, in this statement, is expressing a deep concern that his community (Ummah) might one day fall into the sin of Lūṭ’s people. He explicitly says this is the greatest fear he has for his followers. This highlights how serious and destructive the Prophet viewed this sin – he feared its occurrence among Muslims more than many other sins. It is a strong warning, indicating that such behavior is completely outside the bounds of acceptable conduct for a Muslim. Imams al-Tirmidhī, al-Hākim, and al-Dhahabī have all considered this narration authentic (ṣaḥīḥ) or at least reliable.
Hadith 2: “Allah’s curse is upon the one who does the action of the people of Lūṭ – (he repeated this curse three times).”
This hadith is reported by ʿAbdullāh ibn ʿAbbās (may Allah be pleased with him), a close companion and cousin of the Prophet. It is found in sources such as Sunan al-Tirmidhī and Sahih Ibn Hibbān. In it, the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ strongly condemns the act of homosexuality by invoking Allah’s curse (la‘nah) on anyone who performs the deed of Lūṭ’s people. He repeated this curse three times, which in the Arabic prophetic tradition signifies emphatic denouncement. Being cursed by the Prophet or in the sight of Allah means being deprived of His mercy – a very serious outcome. Scholars consider this narration as well to be authentic or at least of reliable grade. The triple repetition underlines that there should be no doubt about the prohibition and gravity of this act in Islam.
Hadith 3: “Whoever you find doing the action of the people of Lūṭ, execute the one who does it and the one to whom it is done.”
This injunction is recorded in several books of hadith, including Sunan Abī Dāwūd, Jāmiʿ al-Tirmidhī, Sunan Ibn Mājah, and the Musnad of Imam Ahmad, narrated on the authority of Ibn ʿAbbās (may Allah be pleased with him). In one version, it is part of Bulūgh al-Marām (a hadith compilation by Ibn Hajar) with the note that it has a trustworthy chain of narrators. Although this hadith is not in Sahih al-Bukhari or Sahih Muslim, many scholars of hadith have classified it as hasan (sound) or even ṣaḥīḥ (authentic) by corroborating chains. It conveys that the Prophet ﷺ instructed the Muslim authorities to apply capital punishment to those found committing sodomy (homosexual intercourse), whether they play the active or passive role. This is essentially a legal hadith indicating how an Islamic court or ruler should deal with such an offense if it is proven. It aligns with how serious the Quran and earlier hadith consider the act. We will discuss later how Islamic law (Sharī‘ah) deduced punishments for such acts and differences of opinion among jurists. But the hadith’s existence in reputable collections shows that the early Islamic community understood homosexual acts to be a major crime warranting severe punishment. This was not seen as a trivial matter or a “minor sin” – it was placed in a category akin to the most grievous sexual sins. (It should be noted that such a punishment would only be carried out by legitimate authorities under due legal process – it is not for individuals to take vigilante action. Also, proving such an act in an Islamic court historically required either a confession or four adult eyewitnesses to the act, which made convictions rare. The severe punishment mainly serves as a deterrent and a sign of how grave the sin is.)
Hadith 4: “The Prophet ﷺ cursed effeminate men (those men who imitate women in behavior or appearance) and women who assume the manners of men, and he said, ‘Turn them out of your houses.’”
This hadith is from Sahih al-Bukhari (Hadith 5886), narrated by Ibn ʿAbbās. While it is not directly about homosexual acts, it addresses gender behavior and expression. The Prophet ﷺ here curses biological men who deliberately behave like women in dress or mannerisms (mukhannathīn) and likewise curses women who deliberately imitate men (mutarajjilāt). He even instructed that such persons (at least those engaging in such behavior openly) be removed from the conservative environment of people’s homes. In fact, it is recorded that the Prophet ﷺ at one point expelled a man who was behaving in an effeminate, inappropriate way from the household, and the Caliph ʿUmar later did the same with a woman who was imitating men. This hadith shows that Islam encourages people to maintain the natural gender distinctions that Allah created, and it strongly discourages men from adopting feminine identities or women adopting masculine identities. This teaching would extend to aspects of transgender expressions or cross-dressing. It does not refer to someone who might naturally have a softer voice or gentler demeanor without affectation – rather it refers to those who intentionally deviate from their gender norms in a public manner. The curse in this hadith means such behavior is a serious sin, not a mere quirk. In the context of LGBTQ issues, this hadith is often cited regarding the transgender question: while Islam recognizes biological sex as a reality (and allows medical gender reassignment only in cases of clear biological intersex conditions or gender deformities as determined by qualified experts), it does not permit people to simply identify as the opposite gender for no legitimate reason. The Prophet’s curse on men who imitate women and vice versa illustrates that gender fluidity or deliberate transgender behavior is not acceptable in Islam. Muslims are taught that each gender has its honorable qualities and roles, and one should not abandon the nature Allah endowed them with. (However, Islam also teaches sensitivity: for example, there were some naturally effeminate men at the time of the Prophet – those who had no desire for women – and they were not condemned unless they displayed immoral behavior or intentionally flaunted transgressive mannerisms. Thus, the issue again returns to behavior and public conduct, not merely innate traits.)
(Hadith regarding lesbian behavior): There is no direct, fully authentic hadith text from the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ explicitly mentioning female-to-female sexual acts (often termed siḥāq in Arabic). However, classical scholars by consensus considered lesbian acts to be haram (forbidden) just like homosexual acts between men. They analogized lesbianism to fornication in a general sense, even if the technical act of penetration (as defined in Islamic law) is not present. For instance, a report from early Islamic scholarship states: “Lesbianism is zina (illicit sex) between women,” though this statement is traced to some of the Prophet’s companions or early jurists rather than a direct Prophetic hadith. In practice, Muslim jurists ruled that if two women engage in sexual gratification of one another, they should be disciplined and shamed as a deterrent, because it is a grave sin even if not identical to the act of liwat (sodomy) between men. The lack of a specified ḥadd (fixed punishment) for lesbian acts in the primary texts meant that it fell under the category of ta‘zīr (discretionary punishment by a judge), which could involve flogging or other penalties deemed appropriate to prevent the spread of such behavior . All four schools of law agree that such behavior is unlawful and sinful. The Prophet’s general warnings about “immorality (fāḥisha) spreading” would include any sexual deviance outside of marriage – and lesbian relations are no exception. Thus, while our scriptural sources (Qur’an and Sunnah) highlight male homosexual acts more explicitly (perhaps because that was the manifestation present in Lūṭ’s story and more openly in societies), Islamic morality encompasses a clear prohibition of all same-sex erotic behavior, whether male-male or female-female.
In summary, the Hadith literature strongly corroborates the Quranic stance. The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, through his words, expressed dread at the thought of his community falling into homosexuality, explicitly cursed those who engage in it, and indicated that it was to be treated as a major offense under Islamic law . Additionally, he condemned the blurring of gender roles which can be seen as connected to the broader LGBTQ spectrum (like men dressing/acting as women and vice versa). All these hadiths are part of the prophetic effort to preserve the moral purity and natural order for the Muslim community. They also reflect care for society’s well-being – since Islamically, allowing such behaviors to go unchecked could invite divine punishment or social harm.
It’s important to note, however, that while these texts are very stern about the acts, the Prophet ﷺ and Islamic teachings do not encourage hatred or harm toward individuals outside of due legal process. There is a difference between condemning an act as sinful or even criminal in Islamic law, versus how one treats a person who may have fallen into that sin. Later in this article we will discuss how Muslims are advised to engage with or counsel individuals with same-sex attractions or gender dysphoria – with compassion and concern for their Hereafter, much like how a doctor is gentle with a patient while being harsh toward the disease itself.
Scholarly Interpretations (Classical and Modern)
From the time of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ until today, Muslim scholars have consistently understood that homosexual acts are prohibited in Islam. There has been remarkable unanimity (ijmā‘) on this point in mainstream (and Shia) scholarship. Classical Quranic commentators (mufassirīn) and jurists (fuqahā’) discussed the story of Lūṭ’s people and related texts at length, and their verdict was clear: such behavior is a major sin and “against the natural disposition (fiṭrah) which Allah has instilled in humans”. Let’s explore some key interpretations and analyses provided by both classical and modern scholars regarding this issue:
Major Sin and Unnatural Act: All four schools of jurisprudence (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi‘i, Hanbali) list the act of liwat (sodomy, i.e. anal intercourse between men) among the kabā’ir (major sins). Imām Shams ad-Dīn al-Dhahabī (a 14th-century scholar) included homosexuality in his famous book “Al-Kabā’ir” (The Major Sins), citing the Quranic story of Lūṭ in multiple places and the hadith curses against it . He and other scholars mention that “there is scholarly consensus that sodomy is among the major sins forbidden by Allah” . They often describe it as an unnatural perversion of the sexual instinct. For example, Imam Ibn al-Qayyim (13th-14th century) wrote that this act opposes the wisdom of creation in males and females and comes with great harm. He noted that some earlier scholars even considered the crime of the people of Lūṭ worse than ordinary adultery, given that the Quran describes it as unprecedented in human history and because the punishment that befell those people was so severe and multi-faceted (their towns were upturned and then stoned from the sky) ([Surat Hud [11:82-94] - The Noble Qur'an - القرآن الكريم). Ibn al-Qayyim, in his book “Al-Dā’ wa’l-Dawā’” (The Disease and the Cure), lists sodomy as a disease of the heart that a person must strive to cure through repentance and discipline, and he argues that it corrupts the soul and society. Another respected scholar, Imam al-Qurṭubī (13th century), in his tafsīr, states that the verses about Lūṭ leave no room for ambiguity – the behavior is a clear abomination, and the severe punishment on earth (along with warnings of punishment in the Hereafter) indicates how detestable it is to Allah. He and others refuted any attempt to downplay those Quranic passages.
Interpretation of “My Daughters are purer for you”: Many classical exegetes like Ibn Kathīr and Al-Ṭabarī explained Prophet Lūṭ’s offer of his “daughters” to the men as an appeal to their fitrah. Lūṭ was essentially telling them: if you seek sexual fulfillment, do it the right way – through women (via marriage) – not this shameful way. These scholars emphasize that Lūṭ was not offering his own daughters for illegal relations (Allah forbid); rather he was urging lawful marriage. This understanding is supported by the line “they are purer for you”, meaning legitimate and wholesome, as opposed to the impurity of their homosexual acts. This classical interpretation debunks any notion that Lūṭ condoned their behavior in any way; on the contrary, he was directing them to the halal alternative.
Unanimous Condemnation by Scholars: A modern declaration by the Australian National Imams Council (ANIC) in 2018 succinctly states: “From the time of the Prophet until now, all scholars of every time and era have agreed that the practice of homosexuality is a forbidden act and a sin in Islam. There is no doubt in Islam that homosexuality is a major sin which Allah does not permit nor will He be pleased by those who practice it. Anyone who claims otherwise is distorting the true teachings of Islam.” . This reflects the reality that across 14 centuries, orthodoxy has not entertained the permissibility of same-sex sexual relations. Notable classical jurists like Imam Mālik, Imam Abū Ḥanīfa, Imam Al-Shāfi‘ī, and Imam Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal all viewed it as heinous. In fact, Imam Al-Shāfi‘ī reportedly said that when Allah speaks of the people of Lūṭ, it is an indication that “no sin in the world is more abominable in the sight of Allah than this act.” While one might find differences on how to legally punish it (as we will discuss in the next section), none of the recognized scholars ever said the act is acceptable. This consensus covers not just male anal intercourse, but all forms of same-sex erotic contact.
Modern Scholars: Contemporary reputable scholars, whether in the Arab world, South Asia, or the West, continue to uphold the same position. Scholars like Mufti Taqi Usmani, Sheikh Abdul Aziz bin Baz (late Grand Mufti of Saudi), Sheikh Yusuf al-Qaradawi, Mufti Ismail Menk, Ustadh Nouman Ali Khan, and countless others have all spoken or written about the topic, reaffirming that Islam forbids homosexual behavior. Modern scholars often also address the phenomenon of same-sex attraction by distinguishing between the inclination and acting upon it. They encourage those Muslims who might feel such attractions to resist acting on them as a test of faith, just as someone might resist other sinful temptations. They also remind the community to be compassionate and provide support for people struggling, rather than hurl insults. But when it comes to ideologically approving of homosexual acts or same-sex marriages, these scholars unanimously say Islam cannot approve that which Allah has clearly prohibited. As an example, Dr. Yasir Qadhi, a well-known American Muslim scholar, has explained that while we empathize with the struggles individuals face, we cannot change the Quranic injunctions – homosexual acts are sinful in Islam, full stop. Similarly, scholars in Western countries have issued guidance that Muslims cannot attend or celebrate a same-sex wedding, because that would be akin to endorsing something our faith considers wrong.
Reinterpretations Rejected: In recent times, a few individuals have tried to reinterpret the Quranic story of Lūṭ or Hadith to claim that Islam only forbids male rape or that it doesn’t condemn “loving same-sex relationships.” These views are propagated by fringe or progressive voices, not by traditionally trained scholars. Mainstream scholars have critically analyzed and refuted such revisionist interpretations. For instance, a Muslim researcher Mobeen Vaid wrote a detailed critique of pro-LGBTQ revisionist arguments (responding to writers like Scott Kugle who argue for reinterpretation). Vaid and others point out that the revisionists often ignore clear evidence. For example, the Quran explicitly says “you approach men with desire instead of women” – there is no mention that the sin was about non-consensual assault only. It was the very direction of their desire and their chosen action that is condemned. The revisionists also argue that the people of Lūṭ were punished for other sins like inhospitality or rape. Scholars rebut this by noting that each time the Quran mentions their crimes, the homosexual act is front and center, and even when other crimes (like highway robbery) are mentioned in Surah 29, they are listed in addition to – not instead of – the sexual sin. Furthermore, Prophet Lūṭ’s offer of marriage to women and the people’s rejection (“you know what we want”) shows that the issue wasn’t lack of hospitality or rape – they wanted the unnatural act itself whether consensual or not. Thus, classical and contemporary scholars robustly maintain that attempts to make homosexual relations halal (permissible) are baseless from an Islamic standpoint. Such attempts are seen as influenced by modern social pressures rather than honest scholarship. In Islamic legal principles, clear texts (naṣṣ) of Quran and Hadith cannot be overridden by new reasoning; and in this case the texts are extremely clear. As ANIC stated, claiming Islam allows homosexuality is considered a distortion of religion .
Philosophical and Theological Rationales: Scholars have also discussed why Islam forbids these acts. Theologically, it comes down to recognizing Allah’s wisdom and sovereignty – Muslims believe Allah created male and female with complementary natures for the purpose of love, procreation, and continuation of family and society . The natural order (fitrah) in Islam is that sexual relations occur between men and women within marriage. Violating that by either adultery, fornication, or homosexual acts is seen as corrupting the pure nature (much like introducing a harmful unnatural element into a healthy body). Logically, scholars note the biological fact that same-sex couples cannot naturally procreate, indicating that such relations are outside the scope of what nature (and by extension, the Creator) intended for human sexuality . Many also cite health statistics: historically and in modern times, certain diseases have been far more prevalent among men who have sex with men, suggesting a form of harm that results from unnatural conduct. For example, the early 1980s HIV/AIDS crisis heavily impacted gay communities – while Islam does not rejoice in anyone’s illness, scholars commented that it sadly illustrated the Prophet’s warning that “Never does immorality (sexual sin) spread among people openly but that plagues and diseases never known before will spread among them.” (Sunan Ibn Majah 4019). This saying (recorded in Sunan Ibn Mājah) is often interpreted to include all kinds of gross sexual misconduct, and some see its fulfillment in events like the emergence of AIDS (Sunan Ibn Majah 4019).
Difference between Inclination and Act: A point modern scholars clarify (though implicitly understood historically) is that the inclination or orientation itself is not what Islamic law addresses – a person isn’t sinful just for feeling attracted to the same sex, just as a person isn’t sinful for feeling tempted to steal or to commit adultery. The test is in action and self-control. Classical scholars like Imam al-Ghazālī speak about temptations of the heart in general – one might not be able to control initial feelings, but one is accountable for entertaining them willfully or acting on them. So, if someone finds themselves with homosexual feelings, Islamic teachings would urge them to exercise patience (ṣabr) and chastity, just as an unmarried heterosexual is required to be chaste. Many contemporary scholars and imams provide counseling in this regard, encouraging such individuals to seek closeness to Allah, perhaps consider marriage if possible (some with same-sex attraction can still have a level of heterosexual capacity), or to live a life of celibacy in devotion to God if needed. They also encourage the community not to ostracize someone who confides such feelings, but rather to support them in staying on a halal path. This compassionate approach is rooted in the general Islamic principle of helping each other in righteousness and not in sin.
In conclusion, classical and modern scholarship uniformly view homosexual behavior as incompatible with Islamic teachings. While the tone and approach might vary – classical texts often use very harsh language reflecting the norms of their time, whereas modern scholars might use a more empathetic tone towards individuals – the moral ruling remains the same. Islam calls such acts a major sin (kabīrah). The wisdom given is that it contradicts the divinely ordained nature of human sexuality, has harmful consequences, and was strongly condemned by Prophets and the pious throughout history. However, scholars also emphasize that like any sin, there is always a door for repentance. A person who has engaged in homosexual acts can repent to Allah, who is Most Merciful, and strive to reform, just as someone who committed adultery or other sins can repent. The sin is not viewed as some unforgivable identity; it is an action (or series of actions) that can be left behind. Scholars cite that some of the companions of the Prophet were former adulterers, alcoholics, even a former thief – they changed their ways with Islam. Similarly, if someone abstains from this deed for the sake of Allah, seeking His forgiveness, Islam promises that Allah can wipe away the sin and even turn past sins into good deeds due to sincere repentance. Thus, the Islamic scholarly perspective couples the clear prohibition with a call towards compassionate guidance and hope for those who wish to return to the straight path.
Comparison of Schools of Law
All four major schools of law – Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi‘i, and Hanbali – agree that homosexual acts are forbidden. Where they have some differences is primarily in the legal classification and punishment for such acts under an Islamic judicial system. These differences arise from how each school analyzes the scriptural evidence and analogies to other crimes. Here’s a brief overview:
Hanafi School: The Hanafi jurists (followers of Imam Abū Ḥanīfa) hold that while liwat (anal intercourse between men) is an enormity and unequivocally haram, it does not have a fixed ḥadd punishment specified in the Qur’an or Sunnah at the level of zinā (adultery/fornication). In other words, they did not equate it exactly with heterosexual zinā for which the Qur’an prescribes flogging for unmarried offenders and the Sunnah prescribes stoning for married adulterers. Instead, Hanafis classify homosexual acts under ta‘zir: discretionary punishment left to the judge/government. Imam Abū Ḥanīfa’s own opinion was that the offender should be given a harsh discretionary punishment, which could be up to severe beating or even death in extreme cases, but not the automatic ḥadd of stoning. In fact, one narration from Abū Ḥanīfa suggests a punishment akin to what the Qur’an describes for Lūṭ’s people: he said such a person “should be taken to the top of the highest building and hurled down, then pelted with stones.” . This mirrors the fate of Lūṭ’s town (lifted then thrown down and stoned). It’s important to note that Abū Ḥanīfa’s two main students, Imam Abū Yūsuf and Imam Muḥammad al-Shaybānī, disagreed with him here – they favored treating it as a hadd offense like the other schools did. But classical Hanafi law as practiced in courts generally used heavy ta‘zir punishments (e.g. lengthy imprisonment and lashing) for sodomy rather than stoning, unless the ruler/judge saw fit to impose capital punishment due to aggravating circumstances. The Hanafi rationale for not considering it zinā was technical: zinā is defined as illicit vaginal intercourse; other forms of sexual sin, while grave, fall outside that definition and thus don’t trigger the exact same Quranic penalty. However, Hanafis agree it’s “worse than ordinary zinā in sinfulness,” even if the legal penalty differed. In summary, Hanafis say no fixed corporal punishment is mandated by scripture for homosexual acts, but the judge must punish it severely (even possibly with death) to deter it .
Maliki, Shafi‘i, Hanbali Schools: The other three schools take a stricter stance in terms of punishment, largely based on analogy (qiyās) with zinā and the hadith “kill the one who does it and the one it is done to.” They essentially hold that homosexual intercourse merits the death penalty in an Islamic legal system, though they differ on the method:
- The Shafi‘i and Hanbali schools generally ruled that the active and passive partners in sodomy are to be executed by stoning to death – effectively treating it exactly like adultery (if either is muhṣan, i.e. previously married, stoning; if not, some said even then execution because of the hadith). Imam al-Shafi‘i said it doesn’t matter whether the person is married or not in this case – the act itself is so egregious that it warrants death.
- The Maliki school also agrees on death for sodomy. Some Maliki jurists preferred execution by a method other than stoning (for example, by the sword), citing the absence of explicit text to use stoning and perhaps to differentiate it from the case of zinā. But the end result (capital punishment) is the same in classical Maliki fiqh.
- All three schools base their view on reports from the Sahabah (Companions of the Prophet) as well. It is recorded that the fourth Caliph ‘Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib ordered a man guilty of sodomy to be executed (one report says he had him burned, another says he had a wall dropped on him – in either case, a form of capital punishment). Another companion, Ibn ‘Abbās, when asked about the legal ruling for liwat, said: “The most upper part of a building should be found and the person thrown headlong, then stones hurled down at him.”, mirroring what Abū Ḥanīfa said later. These reports of the companions led the majority of jurists to conclude there was a consensus of the Sahabah that it’s a hadd offense punishable by death . Indeed, one fatwa of the companions reads: “Kill the doer and the one done to, in all cases.”
- It’s worth mentioning that even among these schools, if actual anal penetration did not occur but other sexual acts did (like two men engaged in mutual gratification without intercourse), then the punishment might drop to discretionary (ta‘zir) rather than death, according to many jurists. Likewise, lesbian acts, as noted, were typically handled with ta‘zir across all schools, often a strong beating or flogging to send a message, but not treated with the same severity as male sodomy in courts .
Why the Severity? Classical scholars, especially those favoring the death penalty, argued that this sin threatens the moral fabric of society and is so repugnant that it was likened to “waging war against Allah’s creation plan.” They often quote the hadith of Ibn ‘Abbās (cursing it and calling for execution) as prophetic authorization . Additionally, since the Qur’an itself narrates the complete obliteration of an entire people for these acts, jurists felt justified in prescribing the harshest earthly punishment to anyone who dared commit it under an Islamic authority’s watch.
Differences in Method: As alluded:
- Some said burning could be used (based on Abu Bakr’s time incident where a man was reportedly burnt for this crime, though burning as a method is generally discouraged in Islam because the Prophet said “no one should punish with fire except Allah” – so this was not a majority stance).
- Others said throwing from a height then stoning, taking directly from the Qur’anic description of Lūṭ’s people’s fate, as Ibn ‘Abbās advised.
- Others simply stoning, by analogy to adultery.
And others decapitation by sword (a quicker death) to avoid the complexities of other methods.
These differences show that while all agreed on the gravity, the exact legal implementation saw some debate. However, it is crucial to underscore: these punishments would be enacted in a historical or state context where Islamic law is fully in force and the evidentiary standards are met. In practice, as we’ll see in the next section, actual cases of prosecution were rare.
Lesbian Acts: All schools regard it as sin, but legally it was not defined as zinā, so it fell under ta‘zir. A common ruling was that the women be given a disciplinary flogging (e.g., Imam Malik reportedly said they are to be flogged, though not 100 lashes like zinā, rather a lesser but still painful amount) and strongly reprimanded, but not killed . The idea was to punish the wrongdoing and deter others, but since the classical jurists saw the primary harm in the wastage of semen (they had a notion that spilling seed anally is a key aspect that makes liwat so evil because it thwarts procreation and mimics what destroyed nations did), and since lesbian acts don’t involve that, they didn’t warrant capital law. Nevertheless, they emphatically stated it’s haram and a faḥīshah.
In our times, since we do not live under a global Islamic government, these punishments are not applied. Individual Muslims or groups absolutely have no right to harm or harass someone in the name of these laws – vigilantism is forbidden. In Islamic history too, such cases required the judgment of a qualified Qadi (judge) in court with strict evidence. It’s known that convictions for liwat were extremely infrequent because, unlike zinā where pregnancies or public scandals could occur, acts of liwat would typically be hidden. So the stringent Islamic evidentiary rules (four eyewitnesses to the act, etc.) made prosecutions nearly non-existent unless someone shamelessly did it in public or confessed.
The key takeaway is that the legal tradition of Islam viewed homosexual acts as among the most serious sexual crimes, on par with or even worse than adultery, which is why the punishments discussed are so severe . At the same time, Islamic courts historically focused more on stopping the public spread of such behavior than invading people’s privacy. Thus, if it remained a private sin, it was essentially between that person and God (with the person incurring sin but not worldly penalty unless caught or confessed). This perhaps explains why historical records don’t show large numbers of people being punished for this, despite the official stance being strict.
To illustrate the positions in a simple comparative way:
- Hanafi: Sinful and criminal -> punish severely by ta‘zir (could be whipping, imprisonment, even execution at judge’s discretion). No automatic fixed death penalty required, according to Abū Ḥanīfa .
- Maliki: Sinful and criminal -> generally death penalty (some Malikis allowed alternatives like burning or dropping from height). If not death, then very severe punishment.
- Shafi‘i: Sinful and criminal -> death penalty, usually by stoning (treated like adultery).
- Hanbali: Sinful and criminal -> death penalty (method can be decided by the authority – Ahmad bin Hanbal is reported to prefer stoning as well).
All four: If the offense is proven, at minimum it is punished harshly; all four: strongly discourage even the existence of such inclination being acted upon and treat it as a societal evil to be eradicated, not tolerated.
In modern secular states, of course, these punishments are not enforceable – and Muslims are bound by the laws of the lands they live in. So, a Muslim in a non-Muslim country does not seek to implement these penalties extrajudicially. The mention of them here is to convey how Islamic jurisprudence regards the severity of the act, underscoring that our tradition does not treat it lightly or as a mere personal preference.
Finally, it should be noted that all schools agree on forgiveness through repentance. If someone engaged in such acts and then truly turns back to Allah in repentance, Islamic teaching is that their private repentance can absolve them spiritually (no one between them and God). Even in Islamic law, if a person repented before being caught or brought to court, or even after, that repentance is something encouraged. Historically, imams would often discourage people from confessing such sins and instead counsel them to repent privately to Allah to avoid worldly punishment. This is based on the Prophet’s teaching “Whoever has committed a sin should conceal it and repent to Allah; for if he comes to us (the authorities) we have to carry out the law.” The Prophet ﷺ was gentle and turned away a man who came confessing zinā multiple times until the man insisted. Similarly, one who fell into this sin is advised to conceal, repent and seek Allah’s forgiveness – which Islam assures is open to any sinner who sincerely repents.
Historical Context: Attitudes and Handling in Muslim Societies
Understanding the historical context provides insight into how these teachings were applied (or sometimes not applied) in practice. Throughout Islamic history, there have been varying attitudes toward individuals who engaged in homosexual behavior, but the moral stance of Islamic law remained consistently against it. Here’s an overview:
Early Islamic Era: In the time of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ and the early caliphates, there are very few recorded incidents of homosexuality. One reason might be that the strong religious environment prevented it from emerging openly. Another is that those who might have had such inclinations kept them extremely private due to social and religious disapproval. We do have some reports, as mentioned, of the Caliph Abu Bakr’s governor Khalid ibn Walid dealing with a case (some sources say he executed a man who was found in a homosexual act). And Caliph ‘Ali’s reported actions we discussed. These show that the first generation of Muslims took the matter seriously when it arose. However, these cases were rare exceptions, not a common occurrence.
Medieval Period: As the Muslim world expanded and absorbed various cultures (Persian, Hellenistic, etc.), there were periods where, socially, a certain level of tolerance or overlooked existence of homosexual behavior occurred, especially in elite circles. For example, in Abbasid Baghdad or in Andalusia, literature from those times includes homoerotic poetry. Some famous poets penned verses admiring the beauty of boys or engaging in pederastic themes. This suggests that in those societies, though religiously disapproved, such attractions were sometimes idealized in poetry or practiced semi-discreetly. However, this did not mean the law allowed it – it simply means enforcement was not consistent or these behaviors were kept behind closed doors enough that authorities seldom intervened. It’s similar to how drinking wine was forbidden yet some Muslims still drank; poetry on wine exists, etc., but the moral law never changed.
Lenient Enforcement: Historical analysis indicates that legal punishments for homosexual acts were seldom carried out. One reason: the evidentiary bar of four witnesses made legal prosecution almost impossible unless someone was extremely brazen. Scholars also typically advised concealing sins. So what likely happened is that when such behavior occurred, if it was private, it remained between the individuals and God (with scholars condemning it from the pulpit but not necessarily chasing down offenders). If it became public or scandalous, sometimes the offender might be exiled or quietly disciplined rather than full-on execution, depending on the ruler. According to a scholarly review, “historical records suggest that laws against homosexuality were invoked infrequently — mainly in cases of rape or other exceptionally blatant infringement on public morals” . In other words, a consensual discreet relationship might not face legal action unless it crossed into public indecency or abuse. This doesn’t mean it was accepted – rather, society understood it as a sin that should stay hidden if it occurs at all.
Social Attitudes: Public attitude in Muslim societies generally ranged from disapproval to derision towards homosexual behavior. It was often looked upon as a shameful weakness or a taboo. For instance, there were slang and derogatory terms in Arabic, Persian, etc., for men who took the passive role (as that was particularly scorned). In some eras, having a youthful male beloved (for older men) was sadly a cultural trend in poetry (influenced by pre-Islamic Persian and Greek traditions). But even then, those same poets would often publicly say “this is just spiritual love” or metaphor, to avoid religious censure. Underneath, everyone knew what was being hinted, yet it was a social contradiction: officially sinful, unofficially present in some circles. A bit like how drinking might be underground – known but not loudly advertised.
Legal Writings vs Practice: Many Islamic historians note a difference between normative law (what the books say) and practiced law. On the books, as we saw, the law was strict. In practice, execution for sodomy was extremely rare. Most ruling authorities would avoid such cases. There are anecdotes: one Ottoman judge reportedly used a clever trick when two men were accused before him – he asked each privately if they penetrated or were penetrated; each denied doing it (blaming the other), so the judge said since there’s no proof of penetration from the active side, I can’t implement hadd, and dismissed with a lesser ta‘zir punishment or warning. This kind of maneuver was sometimes employed to avoid irreversible punishments, reflecting a preference for leniency where possible.
Ottoman Empire: The Ottomans, who followed Hanafi law (more lenient in procedure here), had instances of open pederasty in certain sultan’s courts and janissary ranks, etc. While the ulema (scholars) never approved it, the fact it occurred indicates that enforcement was lax. In the 19th century, interestingly, the Ottoman Caliphate decriminalized homosexual acts in 1858 as part of their modernization (Tanzimat) reforms influenced by European laws. It wasn’t because Islam changed its view – it was a secular law development. But it shows that by that late period, the Islamic moral view was somewhat separated from state law in that aspect. Still, socially and religiously it remained frowned upon by common people.
“Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” approach: One could say historical Muslim societies often operated on an implicit “don’t ask, don’t tell” with regards to private sins including homosexual behaviors. As long as it was not flaunted, society’s fabric held together. If someone did flaunt or openly declare such behavior, they likely would face strong backlash, possible violence from the public or police action for disturbing order. For example, records from Mamluk or Ottoman times show that if someone cross-dressed or a male prostitute solicited publicly, they could be beaten or paraded in humiliation as punishment (ta‘zir). So public morality was maintained.
Comparative Tolerance Claim: Some academics (like historian Khaled El-Rouayheb) argue that the Muslim Middle East was in some ways less harsh on homosexual behavior historically than medieval Christian Europe was – in the sense that Europe burned people at the stake for sodomy in the Inquisition, while the Muslim world rarely executed people for it. However, this “tolerance” was not based on acceptance; it was more due to legal structure and social hypocrisy – the behavior existed but was officially condemned and ideally suppressed. It wasn’t celebrated in identity terms like today’s LGBTQ movements, it was more of a “sinful indulgence” that some engaged in, similar to wine drinking or visiting courtesans.
19th-20th Century Changes: In the modern era, as Western colonial influence grew, many Muslim-majority regions adopted European-style laws which often criminalized sodomy (ironically, British Victorian laws against homosexuality ended up in the penal codes of places like India, Malaysia, etc.). Some of those remain to this day. Meanwhile, the societal attitude in much of the Muslim world today is still quite opposed to open homosexuality. Even where the law is not enforced, the culture deeply disapproves. This is seen in surveys where majorities in countries from the Middle East to South Asia say they consider homosexuality to be wrong. This modern hostility is often attributed by some Western observers to “Victorian influence” or “Salafi influence” , but in reality, it’s also simply the persistence of traditional Islamic morals among the masses.
Examples: In Islamic history, you won’t find examples of mosques allowing same-sex weddings or imams endorsing such behavior – that would have been unthinkable. The presence of some level of homoeroticism in literature didn’t equate to a theological shift. A figure like Rumi used imagery of male beloveds in poems, but that was largely metaphorical and mystical. If anyone engaged in literal acts, they themselves likely repented later or kept it hidden. Some rulers did have catamites (boy concubines), which was a moral corruption on their part, often criticized by scholars of the time.
To summarize, past Muslim societies viewed homosexual acts as sins and socially deviant. However, enforcement of religious penalties varied – often strict on paper but lax in practice unless things got out of hand. There was certainly no concept of “gay rights” or pride parades; those would have been immediately suppressed. At the same time, there wasn’t an inquisition into people’s private lives to catch every sinner. This historical reality teaches us two things: (1) The Islamic moral stance remained opposed to homosexuality, and (2) human nature being what it is, some people did fall into that sin, and societies dealt with it in different ways but never gave it public legitimacy.
Understanding this context helps Muslims today navigate the balance between holding to our principles and recognizing that hounding people is not how Islamic governance worked – it focused on keeping society’s public morality intact and advising individuals towards repentance. This context also refutes the notion that “Muslim world was always fine with homosexuality until modern Wahhabis made them homophobic” – the truth is it was never fine according to Islam; it was merely under the radar at times.
Common Arguments and Rebuttals
In modern discourse, especially in the West, one hears various arguments claiming that Islam can be reconciled with LGBTQ ideology or that the prohibition on homosexual acts is misunderstood. Here we address some of the common arguments and misconceptions, providing rebuttals grounded in theology, logic, and Islamic principles:
“Islam is a religion of love and compassion, so it should accept loving homosexual relationships.” – It is true that Islam is a religion of compassion, but compassion does not mean permissiveness of sin. Islam’s compassion is shown in caring for people’s souls by guiding them away from actions that displease Allah. The religion certainly acknowledges love – but not every form of love is sanctioned to be expressed sexually. For example, someone might “love” a person already married to someone else; Islam doesn’t allow an affair under the banner of love. Similarly, a blood brother and sister might feel love, but they cannot express it sexually (incest is forbidden). So, love or feelings alone are not the measure of morality in Islam; the Shariah sets boundaries. Two men (or two women) might have a genuine affection for each other – Islam doesn’t forbid friendship or brotherly/sisterly love. What it forbids is turning that love into a sexual/romantic relationship. We believe Allah created love between men and women as the basis of families. The love someone may feel for the same sex can be redirected or controlled in a platonic way. True compassion, from an Islamic view, is to gently steer someone away from actions that could harm their Hereafter, even if their desires incline them to it. As the Qur’an says: “By the soul and He who proportioned it, and inspired it with discernment of its wickedness and its righteousness – Successful is the one who purifies it, and ruined is the one who corrupts it.” (91:7-10). Thus, corrupting the soul by following every desire is not compassion. Real compassion is to help a person live in accordance with the fitrah and attain Allah’s pleasure.
“The story of Lot in the Qur’an is about rape and inhospitality, not a consensual gay relationship. Islam only forbids the aggressive lust of Lot’s people, not loving same-sex unions.” – This argument is flawed and has been refuted by mainstream scholarship. As discussed earlier, the Qur’anic text itself refutes it. The people of Lūṭ did attempt a rape of Lūṭ’s guests (which is inhospitality and aggression), but the Qur’an makes clear that the reason they wanted to rape the guests is that they were men and the townspeople were lecherously interested in men . Prophet Lūṭ’s first words to his people are not “don’t rob my guests” or “don’t rape,” but: “Do you approach males among the worlds and forsake the wives your Lord created for you?”. This directly highlights the homosexual act as the core issue. Also, the people of Sodom were already “committing evil in gatherings” and “practicing your lusts on men” even before the angel guests arrived . So it wasn’t a one-time rape incident; it was an ongoing behavior. When Lūṭ offers his daughters in marriage and they reply “we have no interest in your daughters” , it proves they consciously rejected heterosexual relations. Nothing in the text suggests a caveat like “if you do this lustfully or violently it’s wrong, but if you’re gentle and loving it’s okay.” The act is condemned without such distinction . Moreover, if the only issue was rape, then logically raping women should be equally condemned in the narrative – but the Quran’s emphasis is specifically men with men. Inhospitality is separately a sin (and the Quran mentions other people – like Prophet Shu‘ayb’s people – who cheated guests or were stingy, and their punishment was different). The unique punishment on Lūṭ’s people indicates a unique sin. Thus, claiming it was only about rape or inhospitality is a modern revision not supported by our scripture . Islam forbids both rape and any sexual relations outside a male-female marriage, whether “loving” or not.
“Being gay is an innate orientation (people are ‘born this way’). If Allah made someone gay, how can it be a sin for them to be who they are?” – This argument conflates inclination with action and also makes assumptions about the nature of desire. First, from an Islamic perspective, Allah tests different people in different ways. Some people are naturally predisposed to be very angry or violent – that doesn’t make it permissible for them to hit people unjustly. Some may have strong sexual urges generally – it doesn’t excuse zina. The idea of being “born gay” is itself not a definitive fact; scientific studies have not found a single “gay gene.” Rather, it’s a combination of factors and personal experiences. But even if someone has had same-sex feelings for as long as they remember, Islam would say this is a test of their ability to restrain and channel desires in a halal way. Everyone is born with some challenges – some with propensity to arrogance, others to jealousy, others to addiction, etc. The Qur’an says, “We have certainly created man in hardship (struggle).” (90:4). Life is a test. Having a sinful inclination does not justify acting on it. In Islamic theology, Allah’s justice is absolute: if He forbids something, no one will be punished for not doing it if it was truly impossible to avoid. So we do not accept that acting on homosexuality is “unavoidable.” There are many people with SSA (same-sex attraction) who choose to live in accord with their faith, remaining chaste or even marrying the opposite sex and managing. They show it is possible. Furthermore, Islam doesn’t label people as “gay” or “straight” identities; these are modern constructs. It labels acts as sinful or not. So a person might have the trait of homosexual inclination – that doesn’t define them in Islam. They are still just a Muslim tested with a particular desire. One might even consider it a form of jihad al-nafs (struggle against the soul’s whims) to resist acting on it for Allah’s sake. Such a person, if patient, can attain great reward. So rather than thinking “God made me this way so it must be okay,” a believer thinks “God is testing me with this inclination, and He will reward me immensely if I stay within His limits.”
“What two consenting adults do in private doesn’t harm anyone. Why should it be anyone’s business or forbidden?” – This is a common liberal argument based on the concept of personal freedom. Islam, however, does not agree that morality is determined solely by consent and apparent harm. There are many private sins that “don’t harm others” but are still forbidden because they harm the soul or incur Allah’s displeasure (e.g. viewing pornography – some might argue it’s private and consensual between viewer and video producer, but it’s still morally wrong in Islam). Additionally, Islam considers societal harm and spiritual harm. If every sin done privately was ignored, eventually it might come out openly and affect the moral climate. We believe homosexual acts bring harm in subtle ways: they undermine the institution of the family if normalized, they can lead to health issues (for instance, male-male intercourse has higher risks of transmitting certain diseases) – even if not every individual is harmed, society collectively can be. More importantly, disobedience to Allah is itself a harm. As Muslims, we care about the afterlife. Two people consenting to disobey Allah are actually harming each other’s souls, from our perspective, even if they feel happy at the moment. It’s like two people consensually agreeing to drink poison – the fact they consent doesn’t magically make the poison harmless. That being said, Islam also teaches privacy. If someone is committing a sin privately, it remains between them and Allah until it comes into public or legal purview. There isn’t an Islamic duty to spy on or pry into people’s bedrooms. But if asked, we cannot say the act is okay. We separate the legal public policy (“don’t ask don’t tell” can apply) from the moral truth (it’s still a sin). This argument often also implies “if it doesn’t harm, why a punishment?” We answered: harm can be moral/spiritual, not just physical. And even consenting wrongdoers can invite Allah’s wrath which might affect more than just them (like earthquakes or epidemics). The hadith about plagues spreading once immorality is open is a stern warning (Sunan Ibn Majah 4019).
“Some other religions have accepted LGBTQ members and same-sex marriage. Can’t Islam interpret its texts more progressively with time?” – Islam differs from religions that have adjusted core moral tenets under societal pressure. For instance, some Christian denominations now bless same-sex marriages, but they did so by essentially setting aside their scripture (the Bible, which also considers homosexual acts sinful). In Islam, the Qur’an and authentic Sunnah are immutable. Muslims believe these sources are the final revelation and are protected by Allah from change. The Quran explicitly calls this act a fahisha and describes punishment; a Muslim scholar cannot erase or reinterpret all those verses without completely twisting the language beyond honesty. The Prophet’s condemning words are also explicit. To legalize what the Qur’an clearly forbids is considered unbelief (kufr) because it’s denying the known law of God . So Islam cannot endorse same-sex marriage or sexual relations – doing so would be betraying the faith. Times changing do not allow forbidden things to become halal. The Quran even anticipated this kind of pressure – it says, “If the Truth were to follow their desires, the heavens and earth would be corrupted...” (23:71). Our principles aren’t up for vote. Also, note that the vast majority of global Muslims, including scholars, have not wavered on this. It is an area of moral red line that even very reformist Muslims usually don’t cross, because the evidence is too clear. Those few who try (like the so-called “Imam” in France or the US who performs gay nikahs) are universally rejected by the Muslim community and recognized as having deviated. Islam is meant to be practiced in every era, and yes, we present it with hikmah (wisdom) and beautiful preaching, but we cannot distort it to suit modern trends.
“It’s unfair to expect someone to suppress their innate sexuality; wouldn’t that lead to depression or worse?” – Life is a test of patience. Many people in various circumstances have to suppress or restrain sexual urges for greater goods or due to circumstances: a man who cannot find a wife immediately is expected to remain chaste; a widowed woman may remain unmarried and chaste to raise her kids. In Islam, one’s identity is not based solely on sexual expression. A person can live a fulfilling life even without sex, especially if they sublimate that energy into spirituality, friendships, service, etc. There are people who remain celibate for life (like some scholars who never married). It’s not easy, but the reward is great. Moreover, the claim that not fulfilling sexual desires leads to depression is not generally medically true – what leads to depression often is social stigma or loneliness. A person with same-sex attraction can still have close companionship (brotherly love) with others, even if not sexual. They need supportive friends/family. The Muslim community should not alienate someone just because they have that inclination; rather include them so they aren’t lonely. Additionally, some Muslims with SSA do marry someone of the opposite sex whom they get along with (even if the romantic attraction is less) and make it work, with Allah’s help – they enjoy parenthood, partnership, etc., in a halal way. The bottom line is that jannah (paradise) is worth sacrifices. Any difficulty a person endures to please Allah will be abundantly compensated in the hereafter. This life is short; feelings are not our gods to obey. Allah says, “Have you seen the one who takes his own desires as his god?” (25:43). We are not slaves of desire, rather slaves of Allah, which actually frees us from being chained to impulses. So it is tough, but not unjust. Many individuals testify that they found peace in devoting themselves to Allah and community work, even if they didn’t fulfill a romantic relationship. Islam promises that on the Day of Judgment, Allah will not wrong anyone – if a person truly had a burden, Allah can elevate their rank immensely for bearing it. In contrast, pursuing the desire might give fleeting pleasure now but at the cost of one’s hereafter – which is an unimaginably severe loss (eternal punishment).
“Islam teaches no compulsion in religion; we shouldn’t impose our views on others. A Muslim can personally avoid it but still support LGBTQ rights for others.” – The verse “no compulsion in religion” (2:256) means we cannot force anyone to convert to Islam. It doesn’t mean Islamic morality is optional for Muslims. Within the Muslim community, commanding good and forbidding wrong is a duty. That said, in non-Muslim societies, we can’t enforce Islamic law – but supporting something like gay marriage as a concept is problematic for a Muslim. It’s one thing to tolerate someone’s right to their behavior in a secular law sense, and another to actively advocate it. A Muslim should not advocate for the normalization of what Allah has condemned. We can uphold that people have free will and we aren’t going to harm them, but we cannot say “I support this lifestyle.” Theologically, that borders on endorsing sin. For example, we wouldn’t say “I support the right of people to make idols and worship them,” even though we wouldn’t forcibly prevent it in a non-Muslim country. We simply allow it by law but our heart dislikes the act. Similarly, a Muslim might accept that in a pluralistic society, gay people have civil rights as citizens (no unjust abuse against them, etc.), but we do not march in pride parades or celebrate that which Allah disapproves. “Dawah” (inviting to Islam) actually entails kindly explaining why we believe certain actions are harmful. If Muslims themselves start saying gay relationships are fine, that’s misrepresenting Islam. It’s a tough position in liberal societies, but one can be respectful to individuals while frankly maintaining, “My faith doesn’t allow me to support this practice.” We often find ourselves in such positions on issues like alcohol, interest/usury, etc., which society allows but we don’t partake in or promote.
“Why focus so much on this? Doesn’t Islam have bigger issues, like justice, poverty, etc.?” – It’s true that Islam has a broad message encompassing social justice, helping the poor, fighting oppression – and those must never be neglected. However, Islam is not either/or; it is a complete way of life, including personal morality. Sexual morality is actually a significant part of Islam’s framework for a healthy society. The breakdown of the family and sexual morals does lead to societal problems (e.g., children out of wedlock, STDs, broken homes – all of which cause pain and injustice in their own ways). The people of Lūṭ’s story is repeated in the Quran not without reason – it is a moral lesson Allah wants humanity to remember. So, while a Muslim shouldn’t only harp on homosexuality (and ignore say, corruption or racism), we also shouldn’t shy away from it when asked. Each issue has its context; right now there is a global trend pressuring every religion to accept LGBTQ lifestyles. So it becomes important for Muslims to clarify their stance to avoid confusion. The Prophet ﷺ taught that modesty (ḥayā’) and chastity are integral to faith – “If you have no shame, do as you wish,” he warned, implying that loss of shame leads to moral chaos. Thus, preserving chastity and natural relations is one part of the holistic justice Islam seeks.
In summary, none of the common arguments for reconciling homosexual acts with Islam hold up under scrutiny. Islam’s position is not based on hatred or prejudice; it is based on divine revelation and wisdom (ḥikmah) that sometimes transcends our society’s norms. When refuting these claims, it’s crucial to remain respectful and empathetic. Often, such arguments come from Muslims who are conflicted or from non-Muslims who think our stance is merely archaic. By explaining the rationale – that Islam’s moral compass is God-given and for our benefit – we can help them see that it’s not about hate, it’s about obedience to our Creator and the overall good He wants for us. We can also point out that disagreeing with an action doesn’t mean we want to harm those who do it; we can uphold someone’s humanity and right to dignity while still asserting that the act is sinful or harmful in our belief. This balanced approach is what Islam encourages – “Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good advice.” (16:125). So our rebuttals should be firm in content, but delivered with wisdom and compassion.
Consequences in Society
Islam’s prohibitions are not arbitrary; they aim to prevent harm and promote healthy individuals, families, and societies. From an Islamic perspective, widespread engagement in or acceptance of LGBTQ behaviors can lead to various negative consequences for society. Here are some potential impacts, as guided by Islamic teachings and supported by observation:
Erosion of the Family Unit: The family – built on marriage between a man and a woman – is considered the bedrock of Islamic society. One of the purposes of marriage in Islam is procreation and raising righteous children. If homosexual relationships are normalized, the concept of family shifts drastically. Same-sex couples cannot biologically have children together, which means either the birth rate declines or unconventional methods (surrogacy, sperm donors, IVF with third-parties) become common. Islam is not in favor of such methods when they violate lineage clarity or maternal roles. A society that turns away from the traditional family structure may face population shrinkage, and children might be deprived of either a mother’s or a father’s presence in the home. Islamic wisdom holds that mothers and fathers each provide unique, complementary benefits in upbringing – a balance of tenderness and strength, of role-modeling each gender for the child. If, on a large scale, children grow up without either figure, it could affect their psychological development and their own understanding of gender roles. We are already seeing debates in modern times about children of same-sex couples and the identity issues or social difficulties they sometimes encounter. Thus, the traditional lineage and inheritance system in Islam (which is very detailed) would be disrupted by new definitions of family.
Sexual Morality and Public Decency: When any form of sexual immorality becomes socially accepted, it usually opens the door to more shamelessness (tabarruj) in society. One of the hadiths we cited warns that if fahisha (indecency) spreads openly among people, it can invite plagues and unheard-of diseases (Sunan Ibn Majah 4019). Many Muslim scholars see a link between the sexual revolution in the West (which includes acceptance of homosexuality) and the emergence of diseases like HIV/AIDS – which was first largely spread among men who have sex with men in the 1980s . While that disease now affects broader demographics, the lesson remains that novel sins can lead to novel calamities. Even aside from disease, a society that openly displays LGBTQ themes in media, pride parades, etc., effectively sexualizes the public sphere even more. Already, the over-sexualization from heterosexual promiscuity is a problem (objectification, etc.); adding LGBTQ imagery expands that. It confuses youth about their sexuality at an age when they should perhaps not even be sexually active. From an Islamic view, modesty (ḥayā’) is a shield. When that’s gone, people start boasting of sins. The Qur’an described Lūṭ’s people as doing their lewd deeds “in your gatherings” – publicly. Today, we see pride parades where behaviors occur in streets that are quite explicit. This loss of shame can influence even those who might otherwise have stayed straight or chaste; it normalizes experimenting with desires. As Muslims, we foresee that a community which loses all sexual bounds is on a path of moral decline, which can even undermine its intellectual and spiritual progress (people become slaves to lust rather than focusing on higher aims).
Population Demographics and Continuity: If a significant portion of a society adopted non-heterosexual lifestyles, births would fall. Islam encourages a healthy growth of the ummah – the Prophet ﷺ said “Marry and have children, for I will boast of your number.” A decline in population can have economic and social consequences: aging population without youth to support, labor shortages, etc. While in reality only a small percentage of people might be exclusively homosexual, the broader acceptance leads more people to delay marriage or avoid it, which is already a crisis in some places (people cohabit or stay single and sometimes engage in zina rather than commit to family). So indirectly, the LGBTQ movement’s emphasis on alternative lifestyles contributes to a trend of devaluing marriage and childbearing. This is a concern in many Western countries where birth rates have plummeted (some now rely on immigration to sustain population). Islamically, anything that disincentivizes marriage and having children is seen as harmful to the ummah’s continuity.
Public Health Concerns: The Quran and Hadith imply that unnatural behavior can lead to “diseases not known before.” This was dramatically illustrated by the AIDS epidemic (Sunan Ibn Majah 4019). Even today, statistics (from health organizations like the CDC) show that certain diseases (like HIV, syphilis, and others) have much higher prevalence among men who have sex with men compared to the general population. Anal intercourse is medically riskier in terms of injury and disease transmission (due to the fragility of rectal tissues and exposure to fecal pathogens). Islam’s prohibition thus has a practical wisdom: safeguarding health. Likewise, the transgender movement encourages hormone treatments and surgeries which have many medical risks and side effects, essentially creating new health issues in a body that was otherwise normal. While compassion is needed for people with gender dysphoria, from an Islamic lens, the widespread medicalization of gender-change can be seen as mutilation (muthla) and harmful tampering with one’s body as Allah created it. In some countries now, even minors are given puberty-blocking drugs; Muslims would view this as a grievous harm inflicted due to a social fad. So, societal acceptance of these things can lead authorities to implement policies that physically harm individuals (even if their intention is to “affirm” their identity, the outcome can be harmful).
Loss of Religious and Moral Values: When a society openly defies a fundamental moral law that God has sent down (and this law is not unique to Islam; it exists in Christianity and Judaism traditionally as well), it drifts away from God-consciousness. Approving LGBTQ lifestyles often goes hand-in-hand with a more secular, liberal outlook that marginalizes religion. Indeed, many pushing the LGBTQ agenda demand religious institutions change their doctrines. If Muslims were to capitulate, it would set a precedent of discarding Quranic rulings for societal approval. This slippery slope could then affect other aspects of Islam. Already, arguments are made by some liberalists: “If you change stance on gays, next change stance on premarital sex, on hijab, on interest, etc.” In essence, embracing one major sin tends to open the floodgates for normalizing others, leading to a general loss of Amr bil ma’ruf nahi ‘anil munkar (commanding good, forbidding evil) in society. From a spiritual view, if sins like these become widespread, Allah’s blessings (barakah) might be removed from that society. The Qur’an teaches that past nations were destroyed or faced calamities when they crossed certain lines of moral transgression and ignored warnings.
Psychological and Societal Confusion: In societies where LGBTQ ideology is promoted heavily (especially the “T” – transgender aspect), we see new confusions emerging. For example, children in schools being taught that gender is fluid – causing some kids to question their own identity unnecessarily. There is an observable trend of social contagion, where if it’s “cool” to be trans or queer, more youth identify as such (the numbers of teenagers identifying as LGBTQ in some Western countries have sharply risen beyond what would be expected naturally). This can lead to individuals making life-altering decisions (like surgeries) that they later regret. The chaos of having dozens of “genders” or pronouns, etc., can affect how language and simple social interactions operate (some people even fear speaking lest they offend by using wrong pronoun). Islam values clarity and stability in identity – you are Abdullah or Aminah, not a constantly shifting self-definition. A society that plunges into this sort of identity confusion can face breakdown in social cohesion (people not agreeing on basic reality). We already see controversies in sports, for example: biological males “identifying” as female dominating women’s competitions, which most people sense is unfair. These tensions increase division and resentment. Islam would see this as an example of the fitrah (natural inclination) asserting itself – no matter how much ideology tries to override nature, nature pushes back (as in the bodies of those athletes giving them advantages). The more society tries to force an unnatural worldview (like “men can menstruate too” or “pregnant person” instead of mother), the more cognitive dissonance and conflict arises. Thus, to Muslims, embracing LGBTQ ideology isn’t just “letting people be free,” it’s forcing everyone to partake in a denial of reality and moral truth, which has long-term social costs.
Divine Consequences: Lastly, from a purely faith-based perspective, allowing and normalizing what Allah has forbidden invites His wrath. The Qur’an says Allah destroyed the people of Lūṭ so utterly that “We made their highest part lowest and rained upon them stones”. It also adds a warning: “And such punishment is not far from the wrongdoers.” (Hud 11:83) . Classical scholars sometimes commented that if any community were to do the same as Sodom openly, they fear Allah’s punishment could befall them similarly. We have seen incidents some interpret in this light – for example, when legal gay marriage was enacted in some places, shortly after there were unusual natural disasters (of course, Muslims don’t claim to know for sure that’s why, but the correlation made some reflect). The Prophet ﷺ said: “If immorality (fahisha) spreads such that people commit it openly, plagues and pains will spread that were not known before.” (Sunan Ibn Majah 4019). So beyond material causation, we believe in divine causation: obedience brings blessings (rain, prosperity, safety) and grave public disobedience can bring collective punishments (droughts, epidemics, earthquakes). Thus, for the safety of society, Muslims feel we must oppose normalization of LGBT acts. Even those not committing it might suffer in worldly terms if Allah’s punishment comes to a nation that collectively transgresses. The Qur’an indeed warns that if people don’t enjoin good and forbid evil, eventually Allah may punish the whole society and then the people will pray but not be answered (because they failed to act when they could). So there is a sense of collective responsibility. This is not a popular notion in secular discourse, but it’s part of our faith.
In light of all this, an Islamic viewpoint would say that a society which embraces LGBTQ practices risks both worldly and spiritual harm. These consequences underscore why Islam has such strong language and deterrents against these behaviors. It’s not borne of animosity towards any group of people; it’s borne of genuine concern for human well-being as defined by our Creator. Allah, in His wisdom, didn’t forbid something unless it had more harm than good. We might not see all harms immediately, but over generations they manifest. For example, interest (riba) felt fine to many for decades until huge economic crises showed its harm. Similarly, the full impact of redefining marriage and gender may take decades to truly see – but from our scriptural guidance, we can anticipate much of the harm.
That said, we should balance this by remembering: Muslims do not blame all problems on the LGBTQ issue alone – it is one of many sins. We oppose it along with opposing adultery, substance abuse, injustice, etc. All sins contribute to societal decay. It just happens that today this sin is being promoted as a positive value, which is why we are highlighting its consequences in response.
How Muslims Should Engage with LGBTQ Individuals
Given the Islamic stance on homosexual acts and gender nonconformity, a pressing question is: How should Muslims interact with or treat individuals who identify as LGBTQ? It’s crucial to approach this with nuance, combining adherence to our values with the compassion that our religion teaches. Here are some guidelines for Muslims:
Maintain Kindness and Good Manners: Islam commands us to treat everyone with basic human dignity. The Qur’an says, “And speak to people good [words]” (2:83) – note it says “people” (nāss) in general. The fact that we consider someone’s behavior sinful does not give us license to insult, harass, or harm them. The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ was always gentle and respectful in his dealings, even with people who committed major sins or even with non-Muslims who opposed him – unless they became physically aggressive. Therefore, a Muslim should not bully or use slurs against an LGBTQ person. We separate the sin from the sinner. Hating the sin is part of faith, but showing hatred to the person is not Islamic. We can dislike someone’s actions while still wishing well for them as a fellow human being. Remember, our dawah (invitation) will not reach hearts if we are seen as hateful or cruel. Often, kind conduct can open doors for dialogue about Islam’s teachings.
Do Not Compromise Islamic Values: While we remain cordial, we must not endorse or praise what Allah has forbidden. This means if, for example, an LGBTQ coworker asks for your opinion, you should politely and honestly present Islam’s view (with wisdom). If invited to an event that celebrates LGBTQ pride or a same-sex wedding, a Muslim should excuse themselves – attending would imply approval. It’s a delicate balance: you want the person to know you don’t hate them, but you also cannot lie about your beliefs. One way is to emphasize: “As a Muslim, I follow what my religion teaches, and it does not accept homosexual acts. I can’t support that, but I still value you as a colleague/friend.” This might be difficult, but it is the truthful approach. Some Muslims fear backlash and stay silent or even pretend to agree with things. Each person must judge their circumstance – silence might be an option at times (if speaking will cause undue fitnah or personal harm and it’s not an educative setting). However, one should never outright lie that Islam is okay with it. Honesty with tact is key. At times, our stance itself may be seen as offensive in liberal societies, but we trust in Allah and try to explain it in a way that highlights our concern for morality, not any personal animus.
Offer Guidance Privately if Possible: If an acquaintance or Muslim friend confides that they have same-sex attraction or are involved in such acts, we should approach it like we would any sensitive personal sin: with empathy, confidentiality, and gentle advice. Encourage them towards repentance without shaming them publicly. We can remind them of Allah’s mercy and that many before have overcome such tests. If they are Muslim, bolster their iman (faith) and suggest practical steps (like counseling, increased spiritual activities, perhaps fasting as the Prophet recommended to those who can’t marry, etc.). It’s important not to be disgusted in a way that pushes them away from the deen. Rather, express that “Allah tests us in different ways; this is your test and with His help you can pass it. The door of tawba (repentance) is open and Allah can replace your burden with ease.” Share success stories if you know (without names), or relevant Quranic verses about resisting desires for Allah’s sake (e.g. the story of Prophet Yusuf resisting seduction). If the person is not Muslim, you may gradually introduce them to Islamic beliefs and how Islam provides spiritual fulfillment in lieu of worldly desires. Many have indeed left the gay lifestyle upon converting to Islam, finding a higher purpose and discipline.
Set Boundaries for Yourself and Family: While interacting kindly, a Muslim should still be cautious about not gradually becoming desensitized to the sin. For instance, it’s not advisable to form overly intimate friendships that might normalize attending LGBTQ venues or hearing extensive details of lifestyle that normalize it in your mind. Be friendly but perhaps avoid very close socializing that could put you in compromising situations (like going to a gay bar “just to hang out” – that would be impermissible because it’s being in a venue of immoral activity). For your children, you would obviously not want them to be influenced to think it’s acceptable. If there’s an openly gay relative or friend, you might still visit or invite them (especially if they’re Muslim, maintain ties hoping they’ll reform), but perhaps without exposing young kids to any behavior confusion. If the person respects you, they likely won’t flaunt their lifestyle in front of you knowing your beliefs. If they do, then one may have to distance more. The rule is: we don’t cut off family unless absolutely necessary, but we also don’t expose ourselves to sin approvingly. It requires polite communication. For example, if a Muslim’s sibling is gay and brings a partner to a family event, one might discreetly explain to that sibling that this makes you uncomfortable as it goes against your faith, and see if an understanding can be reached (maybe they attend without the partner or with less public display of affection, etc.). It can be tricky, but a principle is: never compromise your own religious obligations or your dependents’ morals in the name of being polite. We can be kind without participating in haram.
Remember That Guidance Comes from Allah: We do our best to represent Islam’s stance and be kind, but we cannot force anyone to change. If an LGBTQ individual does not accept our advice, we should not cut ties unless their influence is actively harmful. We continue to wish for their guidance. Perhaps over time, seeing practicing Muslims and learning more, something may click in their heart. We shouldn’t give up on people. Many individuals have left that lifestyle after years when they found it ultimately unfulfilling. As Muslims, being consistent in our morals (without being hostile) leaves an impression. They may respect that we stood by our beliefs. Sometimes, when the initial defensiveness fades, they might come back and ask sincerely about Islam. Ensure they know that if they ever want to talk about faith or are seeking spiritual help, you are there for them. Essentially, maintain bridges, don’t burn them – as long as maintaining doesn’t mean endorsing sin. This is the prophetic method: he kept good relations so that even hardcore disbelievers like Abu Sufyan eventually softened and embraced Islam.
Distinguish Between Political Activism vs. Personal Interaction: In Western contexts, Muslims might find themselves asked to align with LGBTQ political causes under the umbrella of “minority solidarity.” Here, one should be principled: we can stand for everyone’s basic human rights (no one should be unjustly persecuted or denied basic needs), but we cannot join a campaign that celebrates what we believe is wrong. For example, Muslims can oppose bullying of any student (including a gay student) because bullying is wrong – but that’s different from participating in a Spirit Day that promotes LGBTQ pride. We have to navigate these wisely. Sometimes explaining our religious constraint garners respect, other times it might not. We should also be fair – if we seek religious freedom, we should also not support any violence or coercion against gay people. In many Muslim countries, private homosexuals are not hunted down; the issue is with the public promotion. We should perhaps articulate that we favor a live-and-let-live approach: we won’t interfere with others’ private lives, but we ask that our religious convictions be respected and not legally penalized either. On a personal level, if we see harassment or harm being done to an LGBTQ person, we should stand against the injustice. For example, if an openly gay person is being beaten by some thugs, a Muslim should help stop that aggression – not because we approve of his lifestyle, but because vigilante violence is not acceptable. Justice and compassion are owed to all. This principled fairness can show others that Muslims are neither hateful nor hypocritical – we simply hold firm to our morality and expect to practice our faith freely just as others do their thing freely.
Invite to Islam through Exemplary Conduct: The ultimate hope is that any person, including one who identifies as LGBTQ, finds the beauty of Islam. Sometimes the best dawah is indirect: showing them a functioning Muslim family with love, showing them how Islam brings tranquility, or involving them in general community service where they experience brotherhood/sisterhood that might be lacking in their life. Many people are drawn to Islam not by debates on specific sins, but by the overall message of tawhid (Oneness of God) and peace of mind. Once their heart inclines to Islam, then dealing with specific lifestyle changes becomes easier with iman’s strength. So, while we don’t hide our stance, we also don’t want to make it the only conversation. If someone is curious about Islam, talk to them about Allah’s mercy, purpose of life, etc., in addition to the moral laws. Sometimes focusing only on the prohibitions gives a skewed picture. We want them to see the holistic appeal. If they accept Allah and His Messenger ﷺ, the rest can follow gradually. We should remember we all have sins; perhaps theirs is apparent, ours are hidden. So humility is key. Approach them as a fellow human in need of Allah’s guidance, as we all are.
In conclusion, Muslims should engage LGBTQ individuals with respectful firmness: respectful in personal demeanor, firm in moral principles. The Prophet ﷺ was once approached by a young man asking permission to commit zina (fornication). Others were upset at the audacity, but the Prophet gently had him sit and reasoned with him: “Would you like it for your mother, sister…?” until the youth said no and understood . Then the Prophet prayed for him and the youth left with his desire quelled. This prophetic example shows how calm dialogue, appealing to conscience, and sincere care can change hearts, rather than angry condemnation. We should attempt a similar approach: explain why we hold these values (maybe ask them how they would feel if they had been born in a society that pushes something against their fitrah, etc.), so they at least see we’re not just blindly bigoted. We couple reasoning with a prayer in our hearts: “O Allah, guide them and keep us steadfast.”
Also, guard our own hearts in the process. It’s easy when being friendly to start adopting the dominant attitudes. Always refresh your connection to Islamic knowledge and community so you don’t waver internally. Seek advice from scholars if unsure how to handle a situation.
By interacting in this balanced way, we aim to embody the Quranic verse: “Invite to the way of your Lord with wisdom and good instruction, and argue with them in a way that is best.” (16:125). We convey the truth without distortion, and we do so in the best manner. If they accept it – alhamdulillah (praise be to Allah). If not, we have at least conveyed the message and shown the beautiful character of a Muslim.
Conclusion
In summary, the Islamic position on LGBTQ issues – derived from the Qur’an, Hadith, and centuries of scholarly consensus – is that homosexual acts and transgender behaviors are not permissible. Islam holds that sexual relations are only valid within a marriage between a man and a woman. This is seen not as a mere “social preference” but as a divine command that aligns with human nature (fitrah). The story of Prophet Lūṭ (Lot) in the Qur’an, along with clear prophetic sayings, leave little room for reinterpretation on this matter. Every school of thought historically viewed these acts as major sins, often warranting severe punishment in an Islamic legal framework (though in practice such punishments were rarely implemented without due process and meeting strict criteria).
Despite intense contemporary pressure to reformulate religious doctrines, Muslims believe that the truth from Allah is timeless. We cannot declare halal what Allah has declared haram. As believers, we trust that Allah’s wisdom underlies these rulings – wisdom aimed at protecting family, morality, and spiritual wellbeing. We have discussed how deviating from these teachings can lead to individual and societal harm, even if those harms are sometimes obscured by modern narratives.
Moving forward, Muslims should approach this topic with confidence in the truth of their faith, but also with compassion and foresight. Internally, we must strengthen our families upon Islamic values so that our children grow up with clarity and are not easily swayed by trends. Education at home and in community settings (like mosques and Islamic schools) about why Islam says what it says on these issues is vital – our youth need satisfying answers, not just “because I said so.” Fortunately, as we’ve seen, there are logical and spiritual answers that resonate even with a young mind when properly explained.
At the same time, as Muslims living in a pluralistic world, we interact with many who do not share our beliefs. We can hold firmly to our stance without hatred towards others. We should continue to show the prophetic model of mercy – caring for all people’s guidance and welfare. Many people in the LGBTQ community have deep spiritual voids or trauma; if they encounter Muslims who are empathetic and upright, they may see an alternative path. Our duty is to convey the message, not to hurl stones (especially in contexts where we have no legal authority to do anything of that sort). Even in Muslim-majority societies, the approach should be to prevent public immorality through education and moral policing in a just way – not witch-hunts.
Muslims must also support each other in resisting the temptations and trials of modern society. Just as we support a brother struggling to give up alcohol or a sister trying to start hijab, we should support those among us who might secretly struggle with same-sex attraction. They should feel that the community is a safe haven to seek counsel and help, not a place of stigma. This internal solidarity will guard our ummah from within.
In conclusion, Islam’s stance can be summed up as: hate the sin, not the sinner; uphold the truth, but in a merciful manner. We believe that ultimate success, in this life and the next, lies in submitting to Allah’s guidance. The modern world will continue to present ideological challenges, but a Muslim’s duty is to remain anchored to Revelation. By doing so with wisdom, we can ensure that we do not drift, and perhaps we can even be a source of light for others in these confusing times.
May Allah grant us understanding, steadfastness, and gentleness. May He protect our communities from indecency and immorality, and guide those who are searching for truth to the beautiful path of Islam. وَالْحَمْدُ لِلّٰهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِينَ – “All praise is for Allah, Lord of the worlds.”
Recommended Books on the Topic
For further reading and deeper study on Islam’s perspective on LGBTQ issues and related moral topics, consider the following works by mainstream scholars and authors:
“The Major Sins (Al-Kabā’ir)” – by Imām Shams ad-Dīn adh-Dhahabī.
A classical treatise listing the gravest sins in Islam. It includes discussion on the sin of the people of Lūṭ and cites Quranic and Hadith evidence. It provides insight into how early scholars categorized and warned against major immoral acts.“The Disease and The Cure” (also known as Al-Dā’ wa’l-Dawā’) – by Imām Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyyah.
A profound book addressing spiritual ailments and their remedies. Ibn al-Qayyim discusses lust and sodomy as diseases of the heart and offers guidance on overcoming desires through strengthening one’s love of Allah. It contextualizes why certain sins, including homosexual acts, are destructive to one’s soul and how to repent from them.“Islamic Guidelines for Sexual Relations” – by Mufti Muhammad Ibn Adam al-Kawthari.
A modern scholar’s work (often in article or fatwa form) that, among other topics, touches on homosexuality from a fiqhi (legal) perspective. He outlines the rulings and explains them in a contemporary context, ensuring readers understand the hikmah (wisdom) behind Islamic sexual ethics. (Often available on his website or as part of Q&A compilations.)“Homosexuality: Islamic Perspective” – by Dr. Bilal Philips.
This is a concise book/pamphlet by a contemporary Islamic teacher, Dr. Abu Ameenah Bilal Philips. It lays out Quranic verses and Hadith about homosexuality and refutes common modern arguments. It’s written in accessible language, making it suitable for both Muslims and non-Muslims who want to know Islam’s stance. It also addresses how a Muslim with same-sex attractions can deal with their situation in a way pleasing to Allah.“Stories of the Prophets” – by Imām Ibn Kathīr (translated by Rashid Ahmad etc.).
Within this collection of prophetic biographies, the story of Prophet Lūṭ (Lot) is narrated with Quranic commentary. It provides historical context and classical tafsīr insights on the people of Sodom. Reading this story in sequence with other prophet stories helps one appreciate the consistent stance of all prophets towards purity and the severity of Lūṭ’s people’s transgression.“Islam and Homosexuality” – Edited by Samar Habib (2 Volumes).
This is an academic compilation of essays (note: not all authors are or even Muslim, and not all viewpoints align with orthodox Islam; some are descriptive/historical). However, it contains valuable research on how homosexual behavior was viewed in various Muslim societies historically, legal approaches of different jurists, etc. It can provide a broad background understanding. Readers should distinguish between factual historical analysis and any normative suggestions. It’s useful for context but for clear rulings stick to scholarly works like the ones above.“Liwat and Sihaq (Sodomy & Lesbianism) – in Light of Qur’an & Sunnah” – by Muhammad bin Abdul Wahhab al-Aqeel.
Originally in Arabic (with possible translations), this book details evidences from Quran and Hadith on the subjects of homosexuality and lesbian acts, and also quotes many classical scholars. It systematically addresses misconceptions and provides a thorough orthodox analysis suitable for serious students of knowledge.