'The Big Chill?', a specially researched Time magazine cover story dated February 16 1987, startled the world with horrifying details of a new disease – AIDS. Since AIDS is infectious and fatal, it has produced a new breed of untouchables from whom both men and women flee in fear of their very lives. Publicity on the subject has created such a scare that barbershops in western countries often display signboards bearing the unlikely legend: “No Shaves Here.”
Government officials have described such a reaction as 'AIDS hysteria.' Barbers, however, maintain that even the AIDS victims’ perspiration, or drops of blood from tiny cuts made during shaving, can transmit the virus and that it is, therefore, necessary to keep away from them.
After making detailed investigations, Time's team of experts confirmed that the prime cause of this deadly disease is promiscuity.
Since it is transmitted mainly by homosexuals, it has come to be known as the “Gay Disease.” This disease spreads so rapidly that its explosion in the world of today has been geometric. Chilled by the fatality of AIDS, one of its victims exclaimed: “What will happen in this world, if we have to die when we make love? AIDS is the century’s evil.”
Promiscuity, euphemistically referred to as 'free love' in the western world, has brought down a curse upon humanity. It was estimated that by 1991, two hundred and seventy thousand (270,000) people would have contracted this disease in the U.S., and that doctors would find it impossible to treat such a large number of patients. The situation would be completely beyond control. The government has started an anti-AIDS campaign whose slogan is: 'Love carefully.' This same advice, differently worded, would read: 'Love within the bonds of marriage. Stop loving outside it.'
In the modern age, one of the great influences towards socially 'legitimising' promiscuity was D.H. Lawrence’s novel, Lady Chatterly’s Lover, first published in 1928. At the time of publication, this work was considered obscene and almost immediately banned. Then, with a gradual change of moral climate, permission was given to republish it in 1959. Many young people in America were deeply affected by this novel and, with a whole spate of similar literature having followed it, promiscuity began to be the rule rather than the exception. Now, once again, there is a public outcry to ban Lady Chatterly’s Lover and other such works.
Such a complete about-face has been caused by the devastating effects of AIDS. It has forced the west to re-think the whole question of free sex – a development which seems little short of miraculous. Swingers of all persuasions may sooner or later be faced with the reality of a new era of sexual caution and restraint.
People had been delighted at having discovered the key to unlimited enjoyment in freeing themselves from the curbs of religion, for, according to divine law, a sexual relationship between a man and a woman was permitted only within the bonds of marriage. But now the realities of nature are finally forcing man to forsake the path of free love and follow the path of sexual restraint. It has taken the fatalities of the final quarter of the twentieth century to convince people that divine law and 'the law of nature' are one. Too late, it has dawned on “free lovers” that promiscuity could be a killer. Time's cartoon, showing a man and a woman encircled by a deadly snake, epitomises one of today’s major human dilemmas.
It was not without good reason that the Quran, Allah's Book, commanded that sexual relationships should be confined within the bonds of marriage; it states what means: “…[Lawful in marriage] are chaste women from among the believers and chaste women from among those who were given the Scripture before you, when you have given them their due compensation, desiring chastity, not unlawful sexual intercourse or taking [secret] lovers…” [Quran: 5:5]
This has been interpreted by Quranic commentators as a clear injunction to establish sexual relations only through marriage, and that there should be no extra-marital relationships. The Quran states what means: "…And those who guard their private parts, except from their wives or those their right hands possess, - for indeed, they are not top be blamed – But whoever seeks beyond that, then they are the transgressors." [Quran: 70:29-31]
Experiments have shown that this is the only right and natural way. Marital relationships and fornication are not just matters of approval or disapproval by religious authorities, but matters of life and death. The married state is a blessing for human society; any other is a curse; Allah says what means: "And of His signs is that He created for you from yourselves mates that you may find tranquillity in them; and He placed between you affection and mercy. Indeed in that are signs for a people who give thought." [Quran: 30:21]
Islamic doctrines and traditions which succeeded in institutionalising a solid system of sexual behaviour, arranging and shaping a unique Muslim perception of sexual relationships, has also shielded the Muslim world from being easy prey to AIDS. Yet, arguing that the Muslim world is largely AIDS free or that the epidemic has little presence among Muslims is a mere fantasy, a fantasy that could lead to disaster.
Most Arab and Muslim countries fall into the gap of the impoverished half of the world, a reality that is known to be a producer of many grievous phenomena, besides people's failure to guarantee a suitable home and nutritious food. Poverty in many parts of the world lays the foundation for extremely dangerous social illnesses such as prostitution, drug addiction and others. Such problems constitute a golden opportunity for AIDS to strike.
It is significant that the new education plan released by the U.S. government stresses sexual abstinence as a preventive measure. This public exhortation to observe the rules of old-fashioned morality is a clear indication of the superiority of divine law over man-made law.
A believer in Divine Law, who errs by entering into an illicit sexual relationship, and contracting AIDS in the process, will be considered to have deviated from the principles of divine law. However, one who belongs to western civilisation and contracts such a disease as the result of promiscuity will be said to have shown the error of the principle of western civilisation itself. The former case proves the error of man while the latter case proves the error of the principle of an entire civilisation.