The summer of 2016 might well be regarded as a key moment when human rights under Islam gained national attention. On June 12^th, Omar Mateen shot fifty people at a gay night club in what is widely seen as a jihadi attack on gay Americans. There are rumors that Mateen himself might have been struggling with repressed homosexuality.

Most secular and traditional Muslim Americans have attempted to redirect the national conversation to issues of gun rights and racial tensions, while simultaneously denying that Islam punishes homosexuality. My own upbringing as an Afghan and South Asian Muslim paints a different picture, one that is a mirror image of millions of Muslim lives. In these communities, homosexuality is seen as a disease justifying the subsequent dehumanization. While gay Muslim Americans aren’t hanging by the neck at the end of the crane – as they do under the Iranian regime – they are still too often punished in other ways. They’re ostracized from their families; the ‘stain’ of their sexuality overshadowing their identity and autonomy as individuals. It is not uncommon to have forced heterosexual marriages, or to blame failed marriages on rumors of homosexuality. And yet, at the same time, sexual slurs are freely used to shame people. Members of the same community called me a “dyke” for years because I felt it was against my nature to ‘date around’. And for other parts of the community, being a “dyke” was a good enough reason to strip a woman of any merit or voice, as if what you have to say no longer holds any value.

The national Muslim response that wavers been blanket denial and delusion doesn’t show the depth of complexity Muslim Americans – and Muslims worldwide – face when ‘dealing with’ homosexuality.

What the conversation doesn’t factor is an intelligent and critical reflection on Islamic scripture or history. Islamic history demonstrates a liberal attitude toward homosexuality, evident in art and literature. It’s a dialogue that is only now surfacing post Orlando. Classically trained imams will say the Quran itself doesn’t outright condemn homosexuality except in reference to territories and cities that were described as amoral. Yet these territories were characterized as hosting homosexuality, thereby associating immorality with homosexuality even if the association was unintended. Religious codification that came after the time of the Prophet Muhammad shows more severe punishment, which fundamentalists will argue isn’t without its limits – a failed argument I’ll soon unravel.

While the average Muslim will tell you Islam is a flawless faith passed from the Heavens to mankind in timeless perfection, the reality is that Islam is one of the most hybrid, evolving (and devolving) faiths. It is deeply complex. Much of what is seen as “Islam” today is Islamic law and interpretation codified into religion. That codification took place over centuries by Islamic scholars. Today, in addition to a Clash of Civilizations between the East and West, we have another clash – a clash between Muslim traditionalists and Muslim progressives. This clash is between the old guard of Islamic scholars who have taken the most literal interpretation of scripture and merged ideology with theology, and the new guard of reformers and critical thinkers who are ushering an overdue evolution. Muslim reformers, dissidents and critical thinkers are the new wave of Mutazilites – Islam’s original free thinkers from the 10^th century. And we’re going up against some of the most indoctrinated forms of ideological tyranny, cemented not only in the hearts and minds of Muslim fundamentalists, but also cemented with stone structures that are seen as beacons of scholarly thought in the Islamic world; the best of what Islam has to offer today.

Egypt’s Al-Azhar University is one of them. Seen as the highest point of authority in Islamic scholarship, the institution is a mausoleum of original thought and its crypt keeper is a sheikh by the name of Ahmad Al-Tayyeb.

Al-Tayyeb recently went on MEMRI (Middle East Research Institute), just four days after the Orlando shooting, to deliver this thoughts on apostasy. Al-Tayyeb defended against the idea that apostasy, defined as the abandonment or renunciation of religious beliefs, warrants punishment in Islam.

“If apostasy comes in the form of a crime, transgression, or high treason, it is only natural that it will be treated as a crime that must be fought, and must carry a certain punishment. But if apostasy does not constitute a danger or a crime against society, I believe that society does not need to deal with this issue. We should be aware that the concepts of human rights are full of ticking time-bombs. My opinion was – and I said this (in the West) – that no Muslims society could ever consider sexual liberty, homosexuality, and so on to be a personal right. Muslim societies consider these things to be diseases which must be fought and treated.”

Al-Tayyeb’s views are reflective of wider Muslim communities and Muslim culture, even in otherwise secular Muslim families. On the domestic level, this attitude defines how parents shape the reality of their children. We’re taught that love and acceptance is conditional based on approved behavior. Your value as a human is dependent on how well you conform and obey.

Love is conditional. Acceptance is conditional. Your freedoms are conditional. It’s a monstrous view. Islamists like CAIR, as well as secular Muslims, push the narrative that only certain conversations can be had. All minority or non-conformist views must be attacked, silenced, or shamed.  At their core, fundamentalists see all ‘deviant’ acts of behavior as misleading a society.

This is a systematic pattern of behavior that is fundamentally at odds with Western values and the Western way of life, a life where freedom is not conditional. It’s a pattern of behavior fundamentally at odds with the widely accepted Universal Declaration of Human Rights, which recognizes freedom is an inherent right of all people.

As we move forward and wade through the onslaught of issues before us – immigration, radical Islam, Islamism, and even foreign policy – we must be aware of the reality of what we’re facing. We’re facing a mutilated theology that has been codified, bastardized and radicalized from the time of its prophet – who was very likely manipulated by his own people to favor violence and war over a purist understanding of Islam. That manipulation continues today in the hands of people like Al-Tayyeb, CAIR, and soft Islamists who are so very well-versed in manipulating liberal societies.

Al-Tayyeb says it himself:

“The problem is that the (Islamic and Western) civilizations are different. Our civilization is based on religion and moral values, whereas their civilization is based on personal liberties and some moral values.”

What you’re seeing is Islamic supremacy that sees freedom as a threat, freedom as a “ticking time-bomb.” It’s a supremacy that doesn’t just deny individual autonomy among its own people, it denies the right of any conflicting ideology – and that includes all of us. This is not an ideology that sneaks into the night and snuffs group by group. We’re dealing with a deadly and powerful ideology that sees itself superior to any other way of life. It is not an ideology that will assimilate or peacefully co-exist. It is designed to dominate and destroy all other competing ideas.