Middle East’s First Gay Pride Parade?
Well, it was more of a press conference really, with dozens of gay people coming out and showing up, part of a three-day event organised by Helem, an Arab gay rights organisation, to coincide with International Day Against Homophobia, which marks the day in May 1990 on which the World Health Organisation took homosexuality off its list of mental disorders.
Plus gay pride parades have been taking place in Israel, which is in the Middle East, over the past decade, the last of which they wanted to hold in Jerusalem.
Still, this being in one of the Arab countries of the Middle East, it can be considered as big as having a real gay pride march.
Helem is the first organisation of it’s kind in the Arab world, and it’s name is the Arabic acronym for Lebanese Protection for Lesbians, Gays, Bisexuals and Transgenders, also means dream in Arabic.
According to the BBC: the organisation is considered legal because the government did not respond negatively to their request for registration within three months of applying. “Basically, they did not know what do with us so they didn’t respond, therefore we’re legal,” George Azzi, the co-ordinator for Helem, said.
In fact the police were there outside the hotel where the event took place to ensure the safety of the event.
So it’s obvious there is, more or less, informal support from the government. Of course they can’t make their support or neutrality towards the subject official yet because of all the religious considerations.
I think my position on the issue of homosexuality has been made clear enough through some of my previous posts, and that it’s basically that I don’t support homosexuality in any way, and am against it being regarded as something natural and normal in our societies.
[More: Beirut Spring, Lebanese Political Journal]
[Source: BBC News]
13 Responses to “Middle East’s First Gay Pride Parade?”
Nas on May 28, 2006 | Reply
“…am against it being regarded as something natural and normal in our societies”
careful bro…lest people call you ‘close minded’ and ‘backwards’
Jonathan on May 28, 2006 | Reply
just to be clear with facts, and i hate to do that… Israel has held gay parades for the last decade, and is still considered a middle eastern country. and as i recall, several, if not quite a lot, of israeli arabs participated in the event.
J.
MMM on May 28, 2006 | Reply
Nas, yeah, lol…
Jonathan, what you said is true, but well the reference was mainly to the Arab countries of the Middle East. But still maybe I should clarify it.
Jonathan on May 28, 2006 | Reply
MMM, oh well…
You know what i mean. Actually, having a gay parade is just another sign of human rights; if you look at what went on yesterday in russia.
Omar Barsawad on May 28, 2006 | Reply
The West, always preaches ‘liberalism’ and ‘human rights’ - under which ‘Gay rights’ fall in to; but these are rights according to them, interpreted by them and dictated by them! They want to impose these so called ‘rights’ on other people and nations! And whoever, goes against these ‘rights’ is considered ‘backwards’ and ‘unprogressive’!
To them - homosexuality is ‘very normal’! But note: our poligamysm is not! To them - our belief that poligamysm is normal - is considered ‘primitive’ and backwards!
They have manipulated scientific research and come up with the ‘homosexuality is normal’ - giving all kinds of reasons; going to as far as pointing out that - even other animals, including primates, have homosexual tendencies; just because they want to support homosexuality! Never pointing out that: if so - then there are so many other traits that other animals have, and should we make them ‘normal’ if/when we imitate them!?
And yet: without any doubt at all - neither God nor Nature, intended Man to be homosexual! Nor is it natural at all! And if we are to justify our doings and certain behaviour just because other animals and primates are doing the same - then I am terribly afraid for Mankind!!
Simcha on May 28, 2006 | Reply
Thank you for this debate-inspiring post, Subzero Blue! I have some views on this issue as well:
1. I can’t say anything about God, because I am not religious, but I do believe that nature, as studied by scientists and the like, does not have a mind or a personality, and therefore has no intentions. Only human beings have intentions.
2. Even if nature did have intentions, an important question would be: is nature right? But because nature has no ethical position, the real question is: are we humans right? Forget about what animals do, it’s about what we do.
3. The term ‘normal’ has no value, scientifically. It is a moral judgement of people by people.
4. In judging homosexuality, the most important question is: does it harm anyone? I think it obviously does not.
5. I have no problem at all with homosexuality, even if it isn’t as ‘normal’ as heterosexuality. It is obvious that homosexuals should have the same rights as people who have never heard of Bach.
bracha on May 29, 2006 | Reply
I don’t think homosexuality is innatural, it wouldn’t be prohibited in the holy texts (Coran or Torah..etc) if G-d didn’t create it (ie if it wasn’t part of the natural order).
Now if you are a good muslim or a good jew, you wouldn’t go and eat pork, but let’s say you DO eat pork, and don’t give a penny to what G-d says(G-d forbid):Why do you want to organize an annual parade of proud pork eaters?????
PS:It is just a coincidence that I post right after simcha each time…lol
bracha on May 29, 2006 | Reply
I don’t think homosexuality is innatural, it wouldn’t be prohibited in the holy texts (Coran or Torah..etc) if G-d didn’t create it (ie if it wasn’t part of the natural order).
Now if you are a good muslim or a good jew, you wouldn’t go and eat pork, but let’s say you DO eat pork, and don’t give a penny to what G-d says(G-d forbid):Why do you want to organize an annual parade of proud pork eaters?????
PS:It is just a coincidence that I post right after simcha each time…lol
Simcha on May 29, 2006 | Reply
@ bracha (means “blessing”, is that a coincidence?): Your comparison of homosexuality to eating pork isn’t completely sound, and here’s why: eating pork is a decision. Homosexuality is not, as far as I know. Don’t get me wrong: following certain fashions in the gay scene or participating in a gay parade are decisions, of course, but the simple fact that someone happens to be homosexual (i.e. happens to be attracted to members of the same gender) is not the result of a decision, is it? But then: religious laws wouldn’t make any sense if we didn’t have free will, right? So an important question is: why do all three monotheistic religions prohibit homosexuality? Why prohibit something that has nothing to do with decisions?
bracha on May 29, 2006 | Reply
Very good point! But remember that monothistic religions (at least as far as I know) do not prohibit the homosexual attraction/feeling/urge itself, because, as you said it is above one’s control (it seems).
However, the DECISIONS that one makes to accomodate those feelings is what is prohibited ( wearing/talking/acting like another gender, and having carnal relations with a member of the same sex)
So now. the pork is on the grill, it smells good and I am hungry, but it is my decision whether I will satisfy my hunger by eating pork or eat the apple in my bag;)
PS:okay, you got me, bracha is not a coincidence
Simcha on May 30, 2006 | Reply
All right. But the question remains: Why is homosexuality forbidden by those religions? Is it dangerous? Do people get hurt or killed? Of course AIDS has been a problem in the gay community, but when those religious laws were formulated (by WHOM is a question I leave to Jews, Muslims and Christians), AIDS and other sexually transmitted deseases were of course unknown. Frankly, I am amazed at Subzero Blue’s recent suggestion that homosexuality is a problem that Arab governments should pay attention to, as if it were a desease.
P.S. Neither is ’simcha’; it means ‘joy’ in Hebrew.
MMM on May 30, 2006 | Reply
Simcha, just a little clarification, in my last post, I talked about homosexuality as an “issue” that is being ignored by the Arab people and governments, and was wondering whether that’s right or not, and how the issue of homosexuality should be handled.
I’m not saying it should be looked at as a problem nor that it shouldn’t be, I’m just thinking out loud about whether the current approach is right or not.
Simcha on May 30, 2006 | Reply
- @ MMM: I apologize for having misinterpreted your post. Thank you for the clarification.
- I think the question should not be “is it natural?” or “is it normal?”, but, rather, “is it harmful?”