The Influence of Genetic Factors on the Ethical and Jurisprudential Ruling on Homosexuality, Rahbarpour and Rouhani

Examining the influence of the genetic factor on the recognition and determination of the ethical and jurisprudential ruling on homosexuality, relying on the subject-matter study in the field of homosexuality and genetics, is the central concern of this research. The basis of this examination is the acceptance of the influence of the genetic factor on psychological characteristics and individual temperament, especially the inclination toward same-sex relations. This influence is constitutive of the subject, and the ruling on a new subject requires a new examination and a new perspective. In this regard, by taking an integrative anthropology as a foundation, an effort is made to arrive at the ethical and jurisprudential ruling on homosexuality. After stating the ruling, suggestions are offered for its better implementation in the current social context.

.

Introduction

Issuing an ethical and jurisprudential ruling requires the precise identification of the subject of the ruling. New and complex subjects must be considered with greater care. The discovery of new influencing factors on old subjects necessitates new examinations to discover a new ruling. Homosexuality is also among the subjects upon which various factors have an impact, and neglecting these factors may cause the ruling to deviate from its natural course. This concept is influenced by cultural, environmental, medical, and genetic factors. Drawing an analogy between this subject and similar subjects that have been discussed previously, without paying attention to these factors, is not correct; even if we ultimately arrive at a single ruling, this conclusion must be formed based on a new examination. The ruling on homosexuality has also been influenced by human rights discourses. Regarding the ruling on homosexuality, two extremes of excess and deficiency have taken shape. Some, without considering the religious and customary limitations of society, have opined for the absolute freedom of this inclination, and some, without considering the various types of this phenomenon and without precision regarding this new concept, refer to an inflexible ruling in this area. Perhaps if a methodical subject-matter study is conducted on this issue, these two approaches will be referred to moderation and a middle ground, and the correct ruling will become clear.

This research pursues three discussions and in each discussion seeks answers to the following questions: a) Subject-matter study; b) Examination of the ethical ruling on this subject; c) Examination of the jurisprudential ruling on this subject with regard to the ethical ruling.

Before addressing these three discussions, we must deal with a fundamental point, which is that the human sciences—that is, sciences whose subject is the human being—are built upon the axis of anthropology. Therefore, it is not justifiable to engage in discussions of the human sciences before refining the foundations in anthropology. This anthropology must be an integration of revealed and empirical anthropology. Revealed anthropology is important because it comes from the Creator and Maker of the human being, and rationally, the one who has made something is more familiar with that thing than others are.

God has described the human being in many verses. God has described the human being in many verses. In God's view, the human being is a creature who was created weak^[1], is hasty^[2], ungrateful^[3], unjust^[4], ignorant^[5], despairing^[6], anxious^[7], ungrateful^[8], miserly^[9], and hopeless^[10]. He disputes much[11], is forgetful, is aware of his own self[12], is arrogant[13], is in distress[14], the structure of his creation is proportionate and good[15], when self-sufficient he transgresses[16], and is in loss[17].

This is a short list of the attributes that God has enumerated for humankind in the Holy Quran. Moreover, the sources of revelation are not confined to the Holy Quran, and one may also seek assistance from certain hadiths in this regard, which would require a far broader scope. It is this kind of anthropology that is worthy of serving as the foundation for the human sciences.

Empirical Anthropology and Revelatory Teachings:

At the next stage, we must also pay attention to empirical anthropology. The findings of empirical anthropology do not fall outside of five scenarios, for either experience has yielded a result or it has not, and revelation has either stated a point or it has not; these two are sometimes in agreement and sometimes in opposition. 1—If the result of experience is in accordance with the statement of revelation, the result of experience confirms and bears witness to our understanding of the revelatory statement, and we can use it to prove the superiority of revelation and its scientific miracle, though we must be careful not to fall into subjective interpretation; 2—If the result of experience is contrary to the statement of revelation and there is mutual contradiction between these two results. Here we must examine through which channel and how the point stated by revelation has reached us. In this context, there is a serious difference between the Quran, mutawatir (mass-transmitted) narrations, and ahad (single-transmitter) narrations, which must be investigated. Whether the matter is an explicit text (nass), an apparent meaning (zahir), or an inferred point (mustanbat) in each of these sources will yield a different outcome. In many cases, the result of experience contradicts our understanding of revelation. In such a case, we must exercise caution and not hastily consider the result of experience as a denial of revelation or deem it erroneous. In such cases, we must refer to the sources with greater precision and, without falling into the trap of subjective interpretation, engage in a re-reading of them; 3—If experience has yielded no result, but revelation has stated a point. Here we must accept the point of revelation until experience reaches a result, or even present the point of revelation to specialists in the scientific field and ask them to engage in experimentation and scientific investigation regarding it; 4—If experience has yielded a result, but revelation has not stated a point. Here we must take this experience to the sources of revelation and present it to them, so that perhaps with the help of a part of revelation that has remained hidden from us until now, we might arrive at an elucidation or inference of the same result or its opposite, in which case this scenario will revert to one of the previous scenarios. If we do not arrive at any point and the experience was conducted based on correct criteria, we can accept it and issue rulings based on it; 5—If experience has yielded no result and revelation has also not stated a point. In such a case, we will have an issue on which no research has been conducted so far, which is both referred to the relevant scientific specialists and the sources of revelation are examined regarding this issue, and the result is one of the previous scenarios, or these investigations lead nowhere, and consequently the issue remains unresolved and studies on it will continue. For a clear reason, the remaining possibilities are rationally ruled out.

Here we must state that scientific experience, under certain conditions, yields certainty, and shirking from it is the very essence of non-adherence to revelation, because reason has most certainly been deemed authoritative by the Author of revelation in the identification of subjects. What has come in the sources of revelation in condemnation of acting upon reason is based on an error in the method of employing reason or its place of use. Utilizing scientific experiences is a form of employing reason, which must be correctly sought for assistance in subject-identification and not in issuing rulings. This matter is not only not prohibited, but abandoning it has also been censured.

After this preliminary point, in summarizing the studies that have been conducted, it can be stated that various factors are involved in creating a tendency toward the same sex. In brief, it can be said that factors are either genetic or environmental. What is meant by environmental in these discussions is any factor that does not have a genetic aspect. Hamer and Copeland have repeatedly stated that we cannot attribute a personality trait solely to the environment or to genetics; rather, these two factors are influential in the formation of personality (Hamer et al., 1382 SH, p. 56), but because the role of genes was unknown until recently, studies have been conducted regarding the role of genes.

Of course, these factors are sometimes medical and sometimes non-medical. The medical factors for same-sex orientation are limited to four: the genetic factor, the hormonal factor, the psychiatric factor, and the physiological factor. The first factor is genetic; the third and fourth are environmental; and the second is sometimes genetic and sometimes environmental.

By the genetic factor, we mean that a gene or genes in the human body cause such an orientation. By the hormonal factor, we mean that certain endocrine glands in the body, stimulated by genes or the environment, secrete hormones that cause such an orientation. The psychiatric factor arises when an individual has been assaulted and, due to subsequent psychological problems, a pathological same-sex orientation manifests. By the physiological factor, we mean the habituation of the body's organs to certain specific sexual acts with the same sex, which, of course, gradually leads to an orientation toward the same sex as well.

Perhaps some overlap can be observed among these factors. This overlap is due to the profound interconnectedness of body and soul in humans. For this reason, these factors may be influenced by one another and operate together.

In this study, only the genetic factor is emphasized, and the remaining factors are left to another research project.

A — The Nature of Same-Sex Orientation

In the context of discussing same-sex orientation, we encounter different concepts. These concepts may be conflated through lax usage or distinguished from one another. It seems there is still no established terminology in this discussion. Here, we will refer to three terms: same-sex orientation (hamjens-garāyi), same-sex desire (hamjens-khwāhi), and same-sex acts (hamjens-bāzi). Since there is no common, fixed term in this regard, we will categorize the mental and objective actions in this domain based on the literal meanings of the words. First, we assume that these three terms do not overlap in meaning. The reason for this assumption is that we are faced with three separate phenomena in reality. Naturally, each phenomenon should correspond to a specific word. This terminological designation usually takes shape slowly, and for a long time, confusion occurs between concepts and their referents. Even now, in a thoroughly scientific context, we see that same-sex orientation is sometimes used completely synonymously with same-sex acts. Of course, the claim of a necessary correlation between the two might be plausible, but the claim of synonymy is unwarranted.

In a general approach, it can be said that the suffix "orientation" (garāyesh) pertains to our desires and motivations, and the suffix "desire" (khwāhesh) pertains to the will and a stage subsequent to orientation. The suffix "acts" (bāzi) pertains to action and conduct. This terminological designation does not require justification from scientists and lexicographers; rather, if these three categories are distinguishable in reality, even if only in the mind, distinguishing them in terminology is a correct practice that will prevent fallacy and ambiguity in interpretations. Even if, based on dictionary definitions, we were to see an identity between "orientation" and "desire," there is certainly a complete difference between "orientation" and "acts," and this much suffices for the analysis in this article.

Let us note that many behaviors may be labeled as sexual only by considering their intent. Having sexual desire is distinguishable in many behaviors; it even seems possible to say that a specific sexual act (penetration) might occur based on a desire to harm and torture, and not purely out of sexual desire. On the other hand, many behaviors may be devoid of sexual desire, such as kissing, shaking hands, embracing, speaking romantic words, and so on. Therefore, merely seeing an act does not allow one to judge someone as having a same-sex orientation or same-sex desire; rather, the individual's intent must also be clarified.

At the stage of orientation, the individual thinks about the same sex, speaks with them in their mind, pays more attention to the same sex than the opposite sex in gatherings, seeks out same-sex friends when looking for companionship, finds the beauty of the same sex more eye-catching, speaks of their beauty, seeks images of the same sex more among pictures, and so on.

In the stage of desire, the individual seeks a same-sex friend and takes steps toward friendship and connection with the same sex, expresses friendship and affection to the same sex, derives greater pleasure from being with the same sex and prefers it, finds conventional physical contact appealing and sometimes overdoes it; this physical contact may have an aspect of sexual pleasure and may be devoid of this pleasure; sometimes this physical contact manifests as conventional embracing and kissing; in this state, the presence or absence of sexual desire is also conceivable; sometimes partial or full nudity, with or without sexual desire, and expressions of ardent, amorous affection… .

In the stage of play, the individual engages in mental, verbal, and behavioral sex, arranges meetings and moves toward the sexual act, nudity, full physical contact, sexual desire and its expression, incomplete or complete sexual behavior… .

Of course, perhaps we cannot easily fit some instances of actions into one category, such as requesting cohabitation and marriage with a person of the same sex.

It is usually the case that a person who engages in homosexual acts is both homodesirous and homosexual, but it is possible for an individual to engage in homosexual acts without having a homosexual orientation. This state is more often the result of moral deviance. The individual is such that their sexual orientation is toward the opposite sex, but they also make use of the same sex for diversion and pleasure. Usually, healthy individuals who do not have a homosexual orientation do not enter into sexual acts with the same sex; they even have an aversion or disgust toward sexual relations with the same sex, even mentally. Exclusively homosexual individuals may also exhibit heterosexual behaviors and marry, but it seems that in this case, these behaviors have occurred under the pressure of environmental factors and are usually prone to failure.

Secrecy is usually greater among passive male homodesirous individuals, and the reason for this is that in our custom, the man is an active and pleasure-seeking being, and this matter is incompatible with the demand to create pleasure for another and passive behaviors, and such an individual is humiliated; to prevent this humiliation, the passive individual usually avoids expressing it. This issue does not hold true for the active homodesirous individual; perhaps, to some extent, the opposite is true regarding the homodesirous woman.

1. The Relationship of Genetic Factors to Homosexual Orientation from the Perspective of Empirical Studies

Genetic studies can change the course of the humanities and draw it in directions humans have never even imagined; of course, the influence of genetics on the humanities occurred in the West long ago, but in our country, these studies have not yet become widespread and have been applied in a limited way in some disciplines. What seems certain is that genetic factors influence personality and one's humanity; of course, this influence can be seen in interaction with the influence of environmental factors. Therefore, the extent of its influence on various subjects must be examined and researched. Dean Hamer (b. 1951) and Peter Copeland (1942-2006), faculty members of the U.S. National Institutes of Health[18], in a detailed study first conducted on the gay gene in 1993 and whose results were published in 1999 in a book titled Living with Our Genes, emphasized the finding that perhaps the most well-known and controversial genetic research on sexuality is the discovery of the gene for homosexual orientation, which took place in 1993. (Hamer et al., 1382 SH, pp. 218-219)

The method they employed in their studies at the National Institutes of Health was to measure at least four factors—attraction, fantasy, behavior, and identification—and the final score for an individual would be the average of the scores obtained in these four areas. (Hamer et al., 1382 Sh., p. 220) Based on the method they used, initial studies showed that the brother of a man with a homosexual orientation was four times more likely to have a homosexual orientation himself, but the cause of this had not been determined. It could be due to genetics or environment. One clue could be family members, such as uncles, cousins, and maternal cousins, who share genes but do not live under the same roof or in the same household. Not only did men with a homosexual orientation have more brothers with the same orientation, but these individuals also had a greater number of male cousins and maternal uncles who had a homosexual orientation. Since these relatives had grown up in different homes—indeed, most of them lived in entirely different parts of the country—the evidence for the role of genes increased. These homosexual relatives were more concentrated on the maternal side. (Hamer et al., 1382 Sh., pp. 225-226)

The findings of this research indicated that a gene on the X chromosome—which every man inherits from his mother—is the cause of the transmission of homosexual orientation, although sexuality is so complex that several genes and environmental factors are likely involved as well. (Hamer et al., 1382 Sh., p. 227)

Hamer and Copeland acknowledged that since there could be thousands of genes, they focused on large segments of DNA rather than individual genes, because sexual orientation, even in men, is only partly genetic and involves multiple genes. What the two were looking for were various factors that influence sexual orientation, not a single powerful gene called the "homosexual orientation gene."

To increase the accuracy of the research, they used two research techniques. First: in the initial stage, they focused only on brothers who definitely had a homosexual orientation; second: they focused on families that exhibited a clear pattern of inheritance and looked for cases where an individual had relatives with a homosexual orientation on the maternal side. Families that included several homosexual women, as well as families with more than two homosexual brothers, were also excluded. This made their research more focused. (Hamer et al., 1382 Sh., pp. 229-231)

The result of the aforementioned research was that a genetic link was found in a region of the long arm of the X chromosome called Xq28, located at the tip of the long arm of the X chromosome. The research indicated an 83% sharing rate, which is significantly higher than the 50% genetic sharing expected to be present there. The results of this research were published in an article by these two American scientists titled "A Linkage Between DNA Markers on the X Chromosome and Male Sexual Orientation" in the journal Science in July 1993. (Hamer et al., 1382 Sh., p. 232)

Two main criticisms were leveled at this article. First: the discovered results were based on only one experiment and on a specific population of homosexual men. Charis Patterson conducted the experiment on another group, and the statistics were examined using two different methods, yielding identical results; second: the experiment did not consider the point that non-homosexual brothers lack the homosexuality gene. For this reason, the experiment was repeated with the inclusion of non-homosexual brothers, and the results provided independent confirmation that Xq28 was involved in sexual orientation—both homosexual and heterosexual orientation. (Hamer et al., 1382 Sh., pp. 233-234)

There is very strong evidence that a gene or genes associated with Xq28 are linked to male sexual orientation, but this matter still requires confirmation, although studies in 1995 did confirm the results of our experiments (Hamer et al., 1382 Sh., p. 235; Smith et al., 1390 Sh., p. 400; Isidoro, 1389 Sh., pp. 393-394)

The conclusion is that same-sex orientation in men is entirely dependent on genetics, though environmental factors also play a role in its development, expression, and control. In women, this dependence is less pronounced, and their orientation is more influenced by the environment (Hamer et al., 1382 Sh., p. 228). Thus, having this orientation is an innate, natural, and genetic matter.

In studies based on interviews rather than genetic research, there is also evidence for the genetic and innate nature of such an orientation. These studies state: "The precursor to an individual's homosexual orientation in adulthood is homosexual feeling, not homosexual activity." Therefore, any simple behavioral and learning-based theory regarding an individual's sexual orientation is rejected, including the folk narrative that says: "A person becomes homosexual as a result of being seduced by someone of the same sex..." (Smith et al., 1390 Sh., p. 399). Of course, it should be noted that these scientists do not deny the activation of a dormant gene's potential for expression; that is, a person may possess the homosexuality gene, but due to the lack of a suitable environment, it may never manifest, at least not fully, and the individual may not become homosexual in practice. However, someone with no genetic predisposition will not develop such an orientation as a result of a single seduction. Thus, a person who lacks this effective genetic factor cannot create this orientation within themselves even if they wanted to, although they might desire it or actually engage in the act. Another point is that such an act with a person who does not have this orientation does not cause this orientation to develop, but it may cause other psychological harms.

The emergence of erotic feelings in homosexual men and women towards persons of their own sex is in no way more voluntary than the emergence of erotic feelings in heterosexual men and women towards persons of the opposite sex (Smith et al., 1390 Sh., p. 399). Therefore, instead of trying to change this orientation and projecting about it, appropriate planning should be done for it.

Dr. J. Michael Bailey[19] writes: "The most important finding whose correlation with adult homosexuality has been proven is childhood gender nonconformity. In these studies, homosexual men typically exhibited girlish behavior in childhood, and homosexual women exhibited boyish behavior in childhood. The connection between sexual orientation and childhood gender nonconformity appears to be universal and is seen across all cultures" (Smith et al., 1390 Sh., p. 400). Of course, Dr. Daryl J. Bem, a colleague of Dr. Bailey, has interpreted these same pieces of evidence in a completely environmental manner based on the "Exotic Becomes Erotic[20]" theory and concludes: "Nevertheless, considering the research, it cannot be said that this theory is entirely correct, and only further research can help reach a final decision" (Smith et al., 1390 Sh., p. 401). In any case, we can examine subsequent investigations on the assumption of the existence of such an effective genetic factor, though these discussions can also be raised considering quasi-deterministic environmental factors, which requires another occasion.

In studies and planning, we must note that sexual orientation is a continuum, with exclusive heterosexuality at one end and exclusive homosexuality at the other, and the either/or conception has been set aside. Kinsey, Pomeroy, and Martin (1948) represented this continuum on a scale from 0 (exclusive heterosexuality) to 6 (exclusive homosexuality) (Santrock, 1388 Sh., p. 84). It seems the same scale exists regarding the tendency toward being passive or active in homosexual sexual acts; interestingly, this holds true for both homosexual men and women. These two scales must be considered in research. The ruling for someone who has both orientations and someone who has one orientation exclusively may differ. The ruling for someone who acts according to their orientation and someone who acts contrary to their orientation may differ. Also, planning for someone who has active desires can differ from planning for someone who has passive desires.

B — The Ethical Ruling on Homosexuality Considering the Genetic Factor

Undoubtedly, the act of homosexuality—given the numerous verses in the Quran concerning this matter—is a reprehensible act. Likewise, according to some verses, initiating its preliminaries is also condemned.[21] Nevertheless, such condemnation is unquestionably based on a voluntary act, not a compelled and involuntary act that a person has committed. In such a case, the censure of this act and its preliminaries is certainly predicated upon a voluntary action, and its otherworldly punishment and worldly penalty are also based on this very will and volition.

Now, if it is scientifically proven that at least some individuals who have an inclination toward and engage in such an act arrived at this inclination involuntarily, and that some of their actions are now also involuntary, can we ethically condemn them, jurisprudentially punish them, and believe that they will be afflicted with the punishment of the people of Lot in the Hereafter?

If such determinism is proven, should such individuals be left to their own devices in whatever they wish to do? Or, based on the rules of ethics and jurisprudence, can we establish regulations for them and impose restrictions upon them as well?

We have said that having a homosexual orientation is now recognized as a natural matter, and such a nature may have arisen due to a genetic mutation. "A genetic mutation is an event that changes the biological traits of some individuals of a species" (Eysenck, 2008, p. 150). If this change is planned and carried out by humans, it is called genetic engineering or genetic manipulation; of course, genetic mutation is not always beneficial for the preservation of the species. "The inheritance of this gene is contrary to the principle of evolution, and this gene should have gradually disappeared" (Hamer et al., 2003, pp. 236-237), yet we are witnessing that the issue of homosexuality is spreading intensely.

The current prevalence of this orientation seems to be mostly environmental, meaning environmental factors have caused this act and subsequently the orientation toward it to spread. Naturally, an individual with this orientation, in order to satisfy it, sometimes uses individuals in whom this orientation is dormant, and this can cause the awakening of this orientation; of course, other environmental factors are also at play, which we will not address in this research.

It seems, considering the principle of evolution and the points regarding the naturalness of the orientation toward the opposite sex, that at some point in human history, this orientation was not natural and no genetic factor influenced it, but later, a mutation occurred for whatever reason. The reason such a gene did not exist before the mutation is that God has testified to this matter in the Quran: "Do you commit an indecent act openly?[22] An act that no one among the people of the world has committed before you.[23] Do you approach men among the people of the world[24] and abandon your wives?[25]"[26] These verses clearly prove the naturalness of the orientation toward the opposite sex and the unnaturalness of the orientation toward the same sex. The principle of evolution also corroborates these verses.

God condemned the people of Lot for a non-genetic matter, which is the act of homosexuality, not the orientation toward the same sex. In our time, the orientation toward the same sex exists genetically and involuntarily in individuals. This matter differs from the matter condemned by God, and a change in the subject necessitates a change in the ruling.

One of the foundations of moral responsibility is volition. God says: "Every soul is held in pledge for what it has earned."[27] This verse and many other verses testify to this principle. The orientation toward the same sex, when influenced by a genetic factor, is also involuntary; therefore, it cannot be the source of moral responsibility. Thus, we cannot ethically reprimand such people, because having such an orientation was not voluntary for them. In the Quran, although we have 34 reasons for the moral prohibition of homosexuality and acts that are preliminaries to the sexual act, no specific verse indicates the moral prohibition of such an orientation—especially if it is involuntary and due to genetic determinism.

Therefore, extending the ethical ruling on the act of Lot's people to homosexuality is a fallacy on two counts: first, it fails to observe the unity of the subject, because Lot's people committed a specific act in the external world, whereas the discussion here concerns orientation, which is a psychological and internal characteristic; second, the act of Lot's people was entirely voluntary and ultimately influenced by certain environmental factors, whereas the origin of this orientation is genetic traits.

Although the factors of genetic mutation are not natural, once an orientation becomes genetic, it will be considered a natural orientation[28] and, because same-sex orientation is natural, it gives rise to rights for such individuals. On the other hand, while this orientation is in the minority, the minority, like the majority, has rights and duties that must be articulated so that both sides observe these rights and duties.

8. Individuals have the right to undergo sex reassignment if they wish, although this does not apply in all cases of homosexuality. In this regard, it is recommended that before doing so, a committee consisting of a psychologist, a psychiatrist, and an applied ethics specialist counsel the individual on this matter. Such an action may cause the individual to suffer from identity disorder.

9. In specific cases, there must be a possibility for the individual to leave the country and obtain residency in another country for those who do not intend to control this inclination within themselves. We have no duty towards those who do not wish to adhere to religious standards. Such a person is not deserving of the hadd punishment either, because they are neither necessarily denying a necessary ruling of Islam nor committing the act of sodomy. They merely desire to commit a transgression and a major sin, in which case we should ultimately only advise them and remind them that such an act may have many worldly and otherworldly consequences for them. Such a person, if they commit this act, is a criminal and will be punished in an Islamic country, but no restriction should be placed on their leaving the country. This matter is in no way an instance of assisting in sin, because what the government does is merely prepare the preliminaries for their travel, and these preliminaries are a remote preliminary in relation to the act of homosexuality, and the noble verse will not include such preliminaries, for otherwise many of our actions would be forbidden. Also, individuals should not be compelled in this matter, because the right to reside in one's birthplace is a natural right of all individuals.

10. The government must provide the expenses for scientific studies to find ways to treat these individuals through genetic engineering and the costs of treatment by this means.

11. In exchange for these individuals' exclusion from certain occupations, the government must give them priority in and support them in some occupations that do not pose a threat to them or society.

The government and society also have rights over these individuals:

1. Society has the right to prevent the public display of acts based on homosexual inclination, such as walking hand-in-hand in the street, unconventional kisses, inappropriate embracing, sexual acts, etc.

2. Society has the right to be assured that these individuals do not engage in sexual acts with the same sex, even in their privacy, without a homosexual inclination. This is for the peace of mind of the majority of society.

3. Society has the right to be assured of these individuals' willingness to control themselves regarding this inclination.

4. Society has the right to ask these individuals to find a solution for their situation (treatment, control, or leaving the country).

5. Society has the right to ask these individuals to refrain from employment in occupations that are dangerous for them and others, in exchange for support in safe occupations.

Of course, naturally, in these rights and duties, the right of society has been observed more, and that is due to the priority and preference of society over the individual. This matter must be understandable for homosexual individuals: they are a minority whose existence is detrimental to the preservation of the majority, and despite this, society has considered rights for them.

Of course, in Islam, many things have been mentioned regarding the etiquette of friendship and the rights of religious brothers.[29] (Kulayni, 1405 AH, pp. 635-670; Majlisi, 1403 AH, vol. 74, pp. 75 and 420, vol. 75, p. 469, vol. 76, p. 64) Those afflicted with such an inclination can only associate with their friends within the framework of these religious limits. These rights and etiquettes cover many of the outward manifestations of homosexual inclination, and it seems that Islam, by emphasizing the establishment of human relations among believers, has sought to find a way to satisfy the feeling and inclination of same-sex affection in which sexual purposes are not involved. If some homosexuals are truthful in their claim of having a purely humanitarian and aesthetic feeling towards their own sex and the absence of any intention of sexual pleasure, these rulings of Islam can be noteworthy. These rulings fulfill an emotional relationship between believers, the elaboration of which requires further research.

C. The Jurisprudential Ruling on Homosexuality with Regard to the Genetic Factor

A jurisprudential ruling must always be issued based on an ethical ruling. (Fanāʾī, 1384 SH, p. 18) The jurisprudential ruling regarding having a homosexual orientation is that such an individual does not deserve punishment, and as long as they are diligent in controlling their orientation, they are not subject to any restrictions. They enjoy equal citizenship rights with others, and mockery, ridicule, and discrimination against them must be subject to religiously prescribed discretionary punishment (taʿzīr).

Any propaganda or promotion of this orientation is a crime and must be prosecuted. Any manifestation or symbol of this orientation must be removed from society. Seducing individuals and using them to satisfy this orientation is a crime.

Engaging in homosexual acts such as using affectionate or even romantic words, shaking hands (muṣāfaḥa), kissing on the cheek (muʿānaqa), and embracing in public is unobjectionable under two conditions: it must be without sexual desire and suspicion (rība), and it must be conventional. In this case, these acts will not be a prelude to a forbidden act, nor will they incite others to a forbidden act. We have narrations that include social intercourse between men, in which some of these acts are even recommended.[30]

Engaging in homosexual acts in private is unobjectionable under one condition: that there is no possibility of reaching a sexual act. That is, in private, if these acts are performed even with desire or in an unconventional manner, there is no jurisprudential reason for their prohibition. Of course, the existence of such a possibility seems very unlikely, but if this possibility is realized, the jurisprudential ruling is non-prohibition. Naturally, this absence of possibility also includes masturbation in that same private setting or at another time.

Perhaps the question arises as to what benefit such a ruling has. Those who advocate for the rights of sexual minorities are not satisfied with this ruling and say: "Ultimately, the ruling on sodomy remains as it was, and no change has occurred." Conversely, those who oppose granting such rights say: "This ethical ruling opens the space for the expansion of such an orientation."

In response, it must be said that when this matter is at the level of a mere orientation and the general atmosphere of society is against performing sexual acts with the same sex, the bearer of this orientation feels intense guilt, and this feeling of guilt causes this thought and orientation to be repeated in the individual's mind over and over again. This repetition leads to mental obsession, which is a psychological illness and disorder. This psychological illness is exacerbated by society's strictness and pressure, and by disregarding natural rights and the feeling of rights being trampled, removing the individual from a normal state and increasing the likelihood of violence and abnormal behavior in them. Such behavior encourages other homosexuals and wounds the sentiments of society. Due to its wounded sentiments, society engages in harsher confrontation with these acts, and this entire cycle intensifies this orientation and expands it.

Instead of this vicious cycle, we can, based on the evidence we have presented, respect the rights of some homosexuals. Such a matter leads to the removal of psychological pressure and prevents extreme and violent acts. In this case, there is no longer any punishment, and the homosexual individual respects society and becomes socialized. This issue prevents the encouragement and promotion of homosexual orientation and curbs its expansion. In particular, promoting the laws and etiquettes of Islamic brotherhood in society can greatly assist in this matter.

Conclusion

It seems that merely having a homosexual orientation, especially one with a genetic basis, is not at all subject to moral blame or jurisprudential-legal punishment. Rather, for such individuals in society, there are mutual ethical rights that must be fulfilled. The reason for this is that, on the one hand, this orientation does not have a voluntary origin in them, and an involuntary act does not entail moral responsibility. However, any act that is detrimental to the preservation of the human species and arises from this orientation is forbidden and prosecutable according to jurisprudence and ethics.

Recommendations

It is recommended:

1. Genetic studies should be expanded in various fields related to human personality.

2. Genetic ethics must be deepened and expanded based on an integrative anthropology.

3. Laws based on this new ethics must be enacted.

Endnotes

[1]. An-Nisa: 28.

[2]. Al-Isra: 11; Al-Anbiya: 37.

[3]. Hud: 9; Al-Isra: 67; Ash-Shura: 48.

[4]. Al-Ahzab: 72.

[5]. Al-Ahzab: 72.

[6]. Fussilat: 49.

[7]. Al-Ma'arij: 19.

[8]. Al-'Adiyat: 6.

[9]. Al-Isra: 100.

[10]. Hud: 9; Al-Isra: 83; Fussilat: 49.

[11]. Al-Kahf: 54.

[12]. Al-Qiyama: 14.

[13]. Al-Infitar: 6.

[14]. Al-Balad: 4.

[15]. At-Tin: 4.

[16]. Al-'Alaq: 6-7.

[17]. Al-'Asr: 2.

[18]. The U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) is a branch of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, tasked with leading and overseeing biomedical research in the United States.

[19]. J. Michael Bailey

[20]. EBE: Exotic-Becomes-Erotic

[21]. In another writing, we will examine the totality of the verses on this subject.

[22]. "While you were looking on" (An-Naml: 54)

[23]. "And [mention] Lot, when he said to his people, 'Do you commit immorality'" (Al-A'raf: 80; An-Naml: 54); "And [mention] Lot, when he said to his people, 'Indeed, you commit immorality'" (Al-'Ankabut: 28).

[24]. "No one has preceded you with it from among the worlds" (Al-A'raf: 80; Al-'Ankabut: 28)

[25]. "Indeed, you approach men with desire" (Al-A'raf: 81; An-Naml: 55); "Do you approach males among the worlds" (Ash-Shu'ara: 165); "Do you indeed approach men" (Al-'Ankabut: 29)

[26]. "Instead of women" (Al-A'raf: 81; An-Naml: 55); "And you leave what your Lord has created for you as mates" (Ash-Shu'ara: 166).

[27]. Al-Muddaththir: 38.

[28]. Five meanings can be enumerated for being natural: 1—In accordance with the law of nature. The law of nature is inviolable, like the law of causality; 2—Healthy, and unnatural meaning ill. Illness and health themselves are not voluntary, and their causes must be examined; if the cause is voluntary, the illness itself is considered voluntary, otherwise not; 3—Unnatural, meaning behavior that not even animals engage in; 4—Prevalent, dominant, and common. 5—In accordance with function. (Naraghi, 2014 CE) According to the first, second, third, and fifth meanings, homosexuality is a natural matter, and the fourth meaning is not a source of moral judgment; that is, we accept that same-sex orientation is not common, but this minority must attain their rights, and their moral dignity should not be trampled due to the lack of prevalence among the majority. In fact, "In the conflict of rights, the majority and minority are not the criterion; the importance of the right is the criterion." (Fanai, Akhlaq-e Din-Shenasi, 1392 Sh., p. 101)

[29]. The references mentioned in the text pertain to the book "al-ʿIshra," which generally outlines the etiquettes of social intercourse. In these references, abundant material related to the subject under discussion can be seen, and the extraction, categorization, and analysis of this material could itself be the subject of an independent article.

[30]. See: Narrations in the book "al-ʿIshra" in the chapter on embracing, handshaking, and the expression and declaration of affection.

.

---

.

Bibliography

The Holy Quran.

Asaduro, Lester. (1389 Sh.). Psychology. Translated by Jahanbakhsh Sadeghi, Tehran: The Organization for Researching and Composing University Textbooks in the Humanities (SAMT), Third Edition.

Smith, Edward E., Susan Nolen-Hoeksema, Barbara L. Fredrickson, Geoffrey R. Loftus, Daryl J. Bem, Stephen Maren. (1390 Sh.). Atkinson & Hilgard's Introduction to Psychology. Translated by Hassan Rafiei and Mohsen Arjmand, Tehran: Arjmand Publications.

Eysenck, M. W. (1387 Sh.). Fundamentals of Human Cognition with an Emphasis on Biological Psychology. Translated by B. Kusha, First Edition.

Dehkhoda, Ali-Akbar. (1388 Sh.). Dehkhoda Dictionary. Tehran: University of Tehran Press, Second Edition, First Printing.

Santrock, John W. (1388 Sh.). Psychology. Translated by Mehrdad Firouzbakht, Tehran: Rasa Cultural Services Institute, Fourth Edition.

Fanai, Abolqasem. (1384 Sh.). Religion in the Scales of Ethics. Tehran: Serat, First Edition.

Fanai, Abolqasem. (1392 Sh.). Ethics of Religious Studies. Tehran: Negah-e Moaser, First Edition.

Kulayni, Muhammad ibn Ya'qub. (1405 AH). Usul al-Kafi. Edited by Ali-Akbar Ghaffari, Beirut: Dar al-Adwa.

Majlisi, Muhammad Baqir. (1403 AH). Bihar al-Anwar. Beirut: Dar Ihya al-Turath.

Naraghi, Arash. (1387 Sh.). On Sexual Minorities. Electronic presentation at:

http://ketabnak.com/comment.php?dlid=31586.

Hamer, Dean. Copeland, Peter. (1382 Sh.). The Role of Genes in Shaping Personality. Translated by Ali Motavallizadeh Ardakani, Tehran: Chehr Publications, Volume One, First Edition.

.

---

.

Authors:

Mohammad Reza Rahbarpour: Assistant Professor, Department of Criminal Law and Criminology, Allameh Tabataba'i University, Tehran, Iran. (Corresponding Author)

Email: [email protected]

Mohammad Sadegh Rouhani: Graduate of Advanced Levels of the Islamic Seminary, Qom, Iran.

.

---

.

The influence of genetic factors on moral and legal judgment of homosexuality

Mohammad Reza Rahbarpour

Mohammad Sadegh Ruhani

Abstract

The effect of genetic factors in human sciences, especially moral and legal judgment based on the theme of homosexuality and lesbianism in the field of genetic research is concerned. The basis of this review, the acceptance of same-sex attraction has been the influence of genetic factors. The impact of the issue and the verdict was a new issue, a new look and a new study is based on a combination of anthropology research needs. After expressing moral judgment and jurisprudential issue recommendations for better implementation of the current space provided.

Keywords

Homosexuality, Genetic Factors, Moral Judgment of Homosexuality, Homosexuality Legal Rule

.

---

.

Download PDF of the article The Influence of Genetic Factors on the Ethical and Jurisprudential Ruling on Homosexuality

Download from first server | Download from second server

.

---

.