If I understand Mr. Huq correctly, many religious leaders nowadays approve the use of birth control measures contrary to their past stance on this issue. This clearly indicates that religious interpretations are not necessarily unalterable which in my view is consistent with Ijtihad, the process of making decisions by independent interpretation of the sources of Islamic law. I agree with Mr. Mallik that one should not "take decision fully depending on science all the time." Perhaps it is also fair to say that one should not take decision fully depending on religious faith all the time either especially when we know that religious interpretations can change over time.

I further agree with Mr. Mallik that theists outnumber atheists in Bangladesh. However, that does not mean that theists can dictate how atheists should get married. An atheist should have the right to get married to "accept the usual norm of society to legalise one's sexual bond" as pointed out by Mr. Huq in a non-religious manner. Note that the option to get married in a non-religious manner does not jeopardise marriage based on religious rituals. It only provides people with the freedom to choose how one wants to get married in accordance with one's belief. The same is true for same-sex marriage. The recognition of same-sex marriage by the state will only ensure that a person has the right to get married to "accept the usual norm of society to legalise one's sexual bond" independent of one's sexual orientation. It won't violate or compromise the freedom of anyone because at a personal level, people will be free to decide whether or not they will endorse same-sex marriage in accordance with their religious faith. The recognition of same-sex marriage by the state also won't harm "the procreation process" or "reproduction and survival of progeny" as straight people will be free to get married and raise family according to their beliefs.

I would like to point out that the issue of gay marriage in developed countries is politically quite complex. The secular and democratic culture of these countries makes it very difficult for anyone (Christian, Jewish, or Muslim) to question gay rights; any attempt to do so is seen as prejudiced, narrow-minded behaviour in the same way as racism or sexism. Gay culture, like South Asian culture or even Muslim culture, has become an accepted part of Western culture.

Given this fact, it is not obvious that Muslims in the West should oppose gay marriage. Indeed, Muslims already consider it their duty to encourage men and women around them to form stable marriages, and discourage them from having extra-marital sexual relationships; so perhaps they should also consider it their duty to support gay marriage as a way of limiting extra-marital homosexual activity.Certainly extramarital sex carries with it the same public health issue of HIV/AIDS infection regardless of whether the couples involved are straight or gay. In fact, the absence of religion in state culture in the West dictates that the issue of marriage be seen as a secular public health issue rather than a religious one.

Zeeshan Hasan, London School of Economics