A recent post by my blogfather highlights an issue which, unfortunately, is not being addressed as it should by the so-called “gay movment”:

…[I]n Germany, Islamists (you know, followers of the religion of peace) are attacking gays. And since it’s “taboo” to ever say anything critical of Islam, the events go mostly unreported and discussed.

Other than blogs by gay gun nuts, where are American gays supposed to go to read about such things as Islamic attacks and Islamic attitudes on homosexuality? Do they have to have to read WorldNetDaily? (That last article is a must read, by the way!)
Well, why isn’t the mainstream “gay movement” giving these things the attention they should?
Why is there so much silence about Islamic sodomy Laws and homosexuality?
Let’s start by taking a look at the map of world sodomy laws.
In many Islamic countries (especially those under Shariah Law), the penalty for homosexuality is death. This should not surprise anyone who does the most minimal research into so-called “Islamic Law” — especially as promulgated by “traditionalists.” This, a translation from Ibn Taymiya, is typical:

The Companions of the prophet did not vary in opinion as to putting the sodomite to deathm, but they did differ about the form of death he was to suffer. It is related from Abu Bakr as-Siddiq, may Allah bless him, that he should be burned, others said that he should simply be put to death. Some others said that a wall should be caused to fall on him so that he might die under the falling stones. Others said that both the active and the passive sodomites should be shut up in the most rotten place until they died. Some said that he should be lifted to the highest wall in the neighbourhood and then thrown down and stones thrown at him, as Allah did to the people of Lot. This is one (saying) related by Ibn ‘Abbas. Another, related also by him, is that the sodomite is to be stoned. This latter view is agreed upon by most of the early jurists from the pure analogy of the stoning of the people of Lot (with stones from Heaven).

Here’s some background on Ibn Taymiya — a man considered the father of Wahhabist Islam.
Jeff linked to this German story, which gives the following reason for the official silence about anti-gay attacks by Muslims:

the nearness of Islam to violence and oppression against minorities remains a taboo topic in Germany.

I guess that shouldn’t be terribly surprising.
What is surprising is that American gay rights leaders downplay Islam’s uniquely pathological, genocidal hatred towards homosexuals.
Here’s Michelangelo Signorile, who, right after admitting that homosexuals are routinely put to death by Islamic governments, compares their struggle to that of gay Christians in the United States:

Like gay and lesbian Christians in this country who are embroiled in their own war with the religious right, Sulayman X and other gay Muslims maintain that Islam is being misused. ?Islam is an elegant, simple religion that values humankind and places much emphasis on the here and now?creating just societies,? he says. ?Islam has been hijacked by extremists, and when you read about Muslims in the newspaper, invariably it?s about Muslims who are killing people or resorting to violence to get what they want. But that?s not Islam. That?s people using Islam as a political tool to achieve political ends.?

Sorry, but I have to ask one question.
Is it really fair to compare the fate of being stoned or burned to death, or being crushed by walls, to the struggle over things like gay marriage?
Another group of gay activists against Israel compares the murderous Palestinian Authority to the City of San Francisco:

Palestine is by no means unique in being a place where gay people are threatened, abused or tortured by the police. It happens in every western society, including in San Francisco. Palestinian queers are also not alone in being in danger in the small conservative towns and villages where their families live, or in being threatened with violence from their own families.

Lest anyone think they spend their time targeting Islamic Law, their most visible target has been Starbucks!

The group selected Starbucks for the location of their first settlement in Berkeley because Starbucks founder and CEO, Howard Shultz, is a major supporter of the Israeli state and the corporation has become the prime target of an international boycott of corporations with ties to Israel (http://www.inminds.co.uk/boycott-israel.html). ?Since Mr. Shultz clearly believes it is okay for one group of people to grab land belonging to another and say they have a right to it, we figure he won?t mind if we take some of his,? a QUIT leaflet explains.
Workers in the caf? were surprisingly unruffled as the Queer Defense Forces entered the caf? and announced over a loudspeaker that the land had been confiscated by the Queer National Fund and curfew for straights would begin in five minutes.
Several ?patrons? were forcibly ejected from the caf? by means of SuperSoakers (which were especially popular with a three-year-old settler). Many coffee drinkers quickly cleared out, but one group of chess players steadfastly ignored the group, who vow to set up more settlements in the coming months.

Fortunately, this swinish behavior didn’t go unnoticed in the blogosphere. Little Green Footballs commented wryly that activist Kate Raphael (QUIT’s cause celebre):

fights for the rights of those who want to execute lesbians and gays by stoning.

Need I remind my readers about the fate of homosexuals in Palestine?

According to Halevi, one young man discovered to be gay was forced by Palestinian Authority police “to stand in sewage water up to his neck, his head covered by a sack filled with feces, and then he was thrown into a dark cell infested with insects.” During one interrogation Palestinian police stripped him and forced him to sit on a Coke bottle.
When he was released he fled to Israel. If he were forced to return to Gaza, he said, “The police would kill me.”
An American who foolishly moved into the West Bank to live with his Palestinian lover said they told everyone they were just friends, but one day they “found a letter under our door from the Islamic court. It listed the five forms of death prescribed by Islam for homosexuality, including stoning and burning. We fled to Israel that same day,” he said.
The head of a Tel Aviv gay organization told Halevi, “The persecution of gays in the Palestinian Authority doesn’t just come from the families or the Islamic groups, but from the P.A. itself.”
Palestinian police have increasingly enforced Islamic religion law, he said: “It’s now impossible to be an open gay in the P.A.” He recalled that one gay man in the Palestinian police went to Israel for a short time. When he returned to the West Bank, Palestinian Authority police confined him to a pit without food or water until he died.
A 17-year-old gay youth recalled that he spent months in a Palestinian Authority prison “where interrogators cut him with glass and poured toilet cleaner into his wounds.”

Why the silence by gay activists? Is there a lesson to be learned from the fate of openly gay Pim Fortuyn?

Just as musical silences can be as eloquent as any note struck, political silences can speak volumes. The silence of America’s national gay organizations after the assassination of gay Dutch politician Pim Fortuyn is revealing. Let me summarize it this way: If you are gay and perceived to be on the political right, do not send to know for whom the bell tolls. It does not toll for thee.
Fortuyn, an outspoken defender of the rights of gays and women against intolerant Muslims who enjoy his country’s public benefits while attacking its values, was widely and falsely characterized by news reports as a racist, right-wing extremist — despite the racial diversity in his own party. Responding to media distortions is normally the stock in trade of the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, yet in this prominent case GLAAD has had nothing to say.
The Human Rights Campaign has been quick to issue press releases and organize vigils when it connected the killings of gay people to a climate of hate. Yet now, when an openly gay candidate is murdered after being demonized by establishment politicians and journalists, HRC is silent. And the National Gay and Lesbian Task Force, which considered the Persian Gulf War a vital gay issue, sees no relevance when a man who stood a good chance of becoming the world’s first openly gay head of government is savagely cut down.

Whatever happened to the slogan “SILENCE = DEATH?
At least I can trust that gay gun nuts like my blogfather will refuse to live under this deadly veil of silence.
Lastly, I have an idea. An old idea, really. But I think it’s right for the times. I don’t want the Islamic bigots and their supporters to imagine that the Pink Triangle can ever be used the way the Nazis used it.
So I offer a modest revision.
Thanks Jeff! (Sorry for the poor quality; I wish I knew how to use PhotoShop!)
UPDATE: A talented PhotoShopper just came to my rescue! Sol at Solomonia sent me this note along with a gif:

Was a bit bored so I made you a graphic. I’m not that great with Photoshop, either, but I thought what the hell. One’s a .gif with a transparent background, the other is a .jpg. The AK says terrorist to me, so I did more of a “good guy” weapon. 😉

Here it is:
Wish I could do that! Thank you Sol! As to the “good guy” issue, well, even though many of the good guys traded their Colts for Kalashnikovs, what I think would really be a “good guy” weapon would be the Galil!)
Readers should check out Sol’s blog; one of the most fascinating things I have ever seen is there right now: a very realistic baby dragon in formaldehyde.
Here’s what the poor thing must have looked like when it was alive:
MORE: Sol just outdid himself by supplying a Galil!
I declare Sol the winner of this contest! And CHECK OUT SOL’S LINK!
UPDATE: Wow is right! My sincerest thanks to Roger L. Simon for kindly linking to this post, and adding his own invaluable insight:

…[W]e are engaged in a War on Islamofascism (or Islamism–call it what you will). The real question is–is this war (honestly named) worth fighting? To believe that, which I do, you have to believe that we are engaged on some level in a War of Civilizations against a dangerous ideology. Scheie’s post, which is about the violent discrimination against gays under Sharia where homosexuality is punishable by death, speaks directly to this question. A vast proportion of the Islamic world does not share our view of basic human rights (women’s equality, separation of church and state, etc.) and, to make matters worse, does not wish to coexist with us on this subject. I think these rights are worth fighting to preserve and, yes, to extend.

Precisely why gays are hated; their very existence is a reminder of the natural right to be different, and NOT to follow the herd — which is the essence of simple human freedom.
Thank you Roger!