Baha’i Rants

Baquia, I think you have twisted the Baha’i view of homosexuality here.
There is a clear discussion about the causes of homosexuality and the physical and genetic roots of it. Although not comprehensive it does touch on several subjects.

Our appetites and inclinations are strongly influenced by the condition of our physical makeup, and our bodies are in varying degrees of health, depending upon factors such as heredity, environment, nourishment and our own treatment of them. Genetic variations occur, producing conditions which can create problems for the individual. Some conditions are of an emotional or psychological nature, producing such imbalances as quickness to anger, recklessness, timorousness, and so forth; others involve purely physical characteristics, resulting not only in unusual capacities but also in handicaps or diseases of various kinds.

The view that homosexuality is a condition that is not amenable to change is to be questioned by Bahá’ís. There are, of course, many kinds and degrees of homosexuality, and overcoming extreme conditions is sure to be more difficult than overcoming others. Nevertheless, as noted earlier, the Guardian has stated that “through the advice and help of doctors, through a strong and determined effort, and through prayer, a soul can overcome this handicap.”

Baquia, I think you have twisted the Baha’i view of homosexuality here.
There is a clear discussion about the causes of homosexuality and the physical and genetic roots of it. Although not comprehensive it does touch on several subjects.

Our appetites and inclinations are strongly influenced by the condition of our physical makeup, and our bodies are in varying degrees of health, depending upon factors such as heredity, environment, nourishment and our own treatment of them. Genetic variations occur, producing conditions which can create problems for the individual. Some conditions are of an emotional or psychological nature, producing such imbalances as quickness to anger, recklessness, timorousness, and so forth; others involve purely physical characteristics, resulting not only in unusual capacities but also in handicaps or diseases of various kinds.

The view that homosexuality is a condition that is not amenable to change is to be questioned by Bahá’ís. There are, of course, many kinds and degrees of homosexuality, and overcoming extreme conditions is sure to be more difficult than overcoming others. Nevertheless, as noted earlier, the Guardian has stated that “through the advice and help of doctors, through a strong and determined effort, and through prayer, a soul can overcome this handicap.”

Groan, here we go again. After 5 years on this blog Anon, I would have thought you would have learnt something by now.

Groan, here we go again. After 5 years on this blog Anon, I would have thought you would have learnt something by now.

The whole point of any religion is to subdue our physical appetites and acquire spiritual qualities. If you believe that a religion is from God then you obey the rules of that religion regardless of how painful it may be. No Baha’i would blame a homosexual for having homosexual tendencies. Nor would a Baha’i blame a non-Baha’i homosexual from following those tendencies. But to be a Baha’i means to follow the laws of the Baha’i Faith. If that means giving up sex then so be it. But even in the case of a Baha’i homosexual following his/her homosexual tendencies, a Baha’i is never judgmental. However I don’t know what action a local assembly would take in the case of public display of homosexual behavior by a Baha’i.

The whole point of any religion is to subdue our physical appetites and acquire spiritual qualities. If you believe that a religion is from God then you obey the rules of that religion regardless of how painful it may be. No Baha’i would blame a homosexual for having homosexual tendencies. Nor would a Baha’i blame a non-Baha’i homosexual from following those tendencies. But to be a Baha’i means to follow the laws of the Baha’i Faith. If that means giving up sex then so be it. But even in the case of a Baha’i homosexual following his/her homosexual tendencies, a Baha’i is never judgmental. However I don’t know what action a local assembly would take in the case of public display of homosexual behavior by a Baha’i.

5 years? Try a few months…By the way Craig, if you are reading, I am almost done with my responses…Nothing special, just my views I am tied with work and school and family…

5 years? Try a few months…By the way Craig, if you are reading, I am almost done with my responses…Nothing special, just my views I am tied with work and school and family…

I think I recall reading part of a letter from the UHJ that admits the possibility of homosexual tendencies being biological, rather than environmental, but the stance of the Faith would still be the same regardless of what science finds. The thing is, even if the Faith recognizes that homosexuality could be the product of biology rather than environment, that is still a huge leap forward from the past 3,000 years in which religious institutions, almost unquestionably stated that it was simply a ‘perversion.’ The Faith won’t change its position, and it can’t be expected to, honestly. But just by accepting that homosexual tendencies could be ‘natural’ is a big step forward in religious history.

It could certainly remove the stigma gay people have as a targeted group, and all people with natural inclinations would be thrown in together. It could also be kept in mind that Shoghi Effendi wrote these letters in the 1930′s and 40′s. That doesn’t ‘excuse’ his tones at times, but it could explain it somewhat. No man is above his era completely.

I’m not ‘defending’ the Baha’i position. I still think it is an unnecessary teaching that doesn’t befit such a progressive Faith.

I think I recall reading part of a letter from the UHJ that admits the possibility of homosexual tendencies being biological, rather than environmental, but the stance of the Faith would still be the same regardless of what science finds. The thing is, even if the Faith recognizes that homosexuality could be the product of biology rather than environment, that is still a huge leap forward from the past 3,000 years in which religious institutions, almost unquestionably stated that it was simply a ‘perversion.’ The Faith won’t change its position, and it can’t be expected to, honestly. But just by accepting that homosexual tendencies could be ‘natural’ is a big step forward in religious history.

It could certainly remove the stigma gay people have as a targeted group, and all people with natural inclinations would be thrown in together. It could also be kept in mind that Shoghi Effendi wrote these letters in the 1930′s and 40′s. That doesn’t ‘excuse’ his tones at times, but it could explain it somewhat. No man is above his era completely.

I’m not ‘defending’ the Baha’i position. I still think it is an unnecessary teaching that doesn’t befit such a progressive Faith.

As generations Bahai, Persian-American and GAY, I thought I’d be dying to make a comment here. But you know what? Why bother? The UHJ and the typical conservative Bahais that post here are entrenched in their views. So nothing I say will make any difference. Keep thinking that I’m just not praying/trying hard enough. Keep throwing quotes from Shoghi Effendi at me. Blah blah blah. We’ve heard it all before. In the meantime, gays (and more importantly those who sympathize for justice) will continue to find a home outside of the Bahai community. We will build life affirming relationships that are spiritual and lead to families. We will fight for the right to adopt and have our own children- you will see us with our kids at PTA meetings, daycare centers, parks, churches and God-willing Bahai Feasts one day….

As generations Bahai, Persian-American and GAY, I thought I’d be dying to make a comment here. But you know what? Why bother? The UHJ and the typical conservative Bahais that post here are entrenched in their views. So nothing I say will make any difference. Keep thinking that I’m just not praying/trying hard enough. Keep throwing quotes from Shoghi Effendi at me. Blah blah blah. We’ve heard it all before. In the meantime, gays (and more importantly those who sympathize for justice) will continue to find a home outside of the Bahai community. We will build life affirming relationships that are spiritual and lead to families. We will fight for the right to adopt and have our own children- you will see us with our kids at PTA meetings, daycare centers, parks, churches and God-willing Bahai Feasts one day….

I’ve often wondered to myself, what would happen if a same sex couple with kids approached an LSA and signed their declaration cards to officially join the Baha’i Faith? would their enrollment be accepted? would they be asked to divorce? what policy would the AO follow? has this happened already? anyone know? I’m simply curious.

I’ve often wondered to myself, what would happen if a same sex couple with kids approached an LSA and signed their declaration cards to officially join the Baha’i Faith? would their enrollment be accepted? would they be asked to divorce? what policy would the AO follow? has this happened already? anyone know? I’m simply curious.

Hi Baquia. It really depends on the lcoal community. If a community is centered on the mystical/spiritual side of the Faith- then more than likely they would care less and welcome the couple fully. I’ve heard of very few instances of this (of course it was from people online so I can’t verify if true or not). But the majority of communities emphasize so much administration and rules- that more than likely they will make the couple so uncomfortable that they would leave on their own accord. As far as the UHJ, I don’t know what their official policy is. Maybe someone should ask. I’d venture to guess that they will pull out Shoghi Effendi quotes saying homosexuals are welcome but they have to overcome their homosexuality and that the family is centered around a man/woman. Which to me means- yeah they have to get a divorce and maybe even give up their kids. Don’t know.

Hi Baquia. It really depends on the lcoal community. If a community is centered on the mystical/spiritual side of the Faith- then more than likely they would care less and welcome the couple fully. I’ve heard of very few instances of this (of course it was from people online so I can’t verify if true or not). But the majority of communities emphasize so much administration and rules- that more than likely they will make the couple so uncomfortable that they would leave on their own accord. As far as the UHJ, I don’t know what their official policy is. Maybe someone should ask. I’d venture to guess that they will pull out Shoghi Effendi quotes saying homosexuals are welcome but they have to overcome their homosexuality and that the family is centered around a man/woman. Which to me means- yeah they have to get a divorce and maybe even give up their kids. Don’t know.

[quote comment=""]Hi Baquia. It really depends on the lcoal community. If a community is centered on the mystical/spiritual side of the Faith- then more than likely they would care less and welcome the couple fully. I’ve heard of very few instances of this (of course it was from people online so I can’t verify if true or not). But the majority of communities emphasize so much administration and rules- that more than likely they will make the couple so uncomfortable that they would leave on their own accord. As far as the UHJ, I don’t know what their official policy is. Maybe someone should ask. I’d venture to guess that they will pull out Shoghi Effendi quotes saying homosexuals are welcome but they have to overcome their homosexuality and that the family is centered around a man/woman. Which to me means- yeah they have to get a divorce and maybe even give up their kids. Don’t know.[/quote]

I find this discussion fascinating. I remember 2 gay Baha’is in our community, both male. Both into the arts and very cool people. I think they were partners or something…I was a kid at the time and I didn’t pay attention too much. But now I reflect and look back I remember how our community was and there was no real tension or whispering going on. I think they just ignored it and focused on being part of the community. I remember going to firesides or feast at their place. I think the Assembly made it known once and then left it up to them. I dont think any of this would be an issue if there was just a realization that as long as its not so obvious, just like heterosexual couples getting all smoochy in front of people, people live and let live. Leave the rest to God. Unfortunately, both of them later died of AIDS.

[quote comment=""]Hi Baquia. It really depends on the lcoal community. If a community is centered on the mystical/spiritual side of the Faith- then more than likely they would care less and welcome the couple fully. I’ve heard of very few instances of this (of course it was from people online so I can’t verify if true or not). But the majority of communities emphasize so much administration and rules- that more than likely they will make the couple so uncomfortable that they would leave on their own accord. As far as the UHJ, I don’t know what their official policy is. Maybe someone should ask. I’d venture to guess that they will pull out Shoghi Effendi quotes saying homosexuals are welcome but they have to overcome their homosexuality and that the family is centered around a man/woman. Which to me means- yeah they have to get a divorce and maybe even give up their kids. Don’t know.[/quote]

I find this discussion fascinating. I remember 2 gay Baha’is in our community, both male. Both into the arts and very cool people. I think they were partners or something…I was a kid at the time and I didn’t pay attention too much. But now I reflect and look back I remember how our community was and there was no real tension or whispering going on. I think they just ignored it and focused on being part of the community. I remember going to firesides or feast at their place. I think the Assembly made it known once and then left it up to them. I dont think any of this would be an issue if there was just a realization that as long as its not so obvious, just like heterosexual couples getting all smoochy in front of people, people live and let live. Leave the rest to God. Unfortunately, both of them later died of AIDS.

Wow anon. I finally agree with you! well somewhat…
The problem to me is this is NOT the scenario I’m talking about- don’t ask don’t tell. Just a few decades ago, this is the best you could hope for in the Bahai community- and yes a lot of that was going on. But it’s a new generation. Will the Bahai community accept me when I walk in with my “partner” who I introduce as my partner- or maybe even husband? (some gays are starting to use that word; although I don’t care for it myself). I don’t think the majority of Bahai communities are ready for this. If you are closeted or just live under the radar, then you’ve always been accepted in the Bahai community. That’s just not gonna cut it anymore.

Wow anon. I finally agree with you! well somewhat…
The problem to me is this is NOT the scenario I’m talking about- don’t ask don’t tell. Just a few decades ago, this is the best you could hope for in the Bahai community- and yes a lot of that was going on. But it’s a new generation. Will the Bahai community accept me when I walk in with my “partner” who I introduce as my partner- or maybe even husband? (some gays are starting to use that word; although I don’t care for it myself). I don’t think the majority of Bahai communities are ready for this. If you are closeted or just live under the radar, then you’ve always been accepted in the Bahai community. That’s just not gonna cut it anymore.

This morning I heard on interesting podcast on what I understand to be a Swedish study on divergence between congenital twins. It seems that the causes of homosexual orientation are not, well, homogeneous:

6/29/2008
New study sheds light on genetic vs environmental contributions to sexuality.

http://www.theskepticsguide.org/5×5/index.asp

This morning I heard on interesting podcast on what I understand to be a Swedish study on divergence between congenital twins. It seems that the causes of homosexual orientation are not, well, homogeneous:

6/29/2008
New study sheds light on genetic vs environmental contributions to sexuality.

http://www.theskepticsguide.org/5×5/index.asp

P, I don’t think the guidelines will change, but only the implementation by the LSA and communities. All of this really makes me want to read more into it. I’m convinced its chemical or genetic ergo subject to scientific influence. But, at the same time I have know and read about environmentally and conscious decisions to become gay or take part in that behavior. That is rather strange to me. If someone is wired that way from the womb, then thats a different story. But, when someone is consciously choosing, although they have the right to, I don’t believe its moral or what God intended.

P, I don’t think the guidelines will change, but only the implementation by the LSA and communities. All of this really makes me want to read more into it. I’m convinced its chemical or genetic ergo subject to scientific influence. But, at the same time I have know and read about environmentally and conscious decisions to become gay or take part in that behavior. That is rather strange to me. If someone is wired that way from the womb, then thats a different story. But, when someone is consciously choosing, although they have the right to, I don’t believe its moral or what God intended.

Anon, you can answer your own questions. When were you wired to be with a woman (if you are straight)? Why don’t we spend scientific dollars to figure that out? Homosexuality exists among anmials- it is not uncommon. In fact it’s very natural.
99% of gay men I know knew from the very start that they wanted to be with men. But because of society’s pressures (which includes religion) they push it back down until they finally have to come to terms with it. Yes there are some very sexual people that are open to many expierences, and there are a very few that actually have attraction to both sexes, but they are not the norm. The majority of gay men and women I know really want the same things that others do- the stability of a relationship. Unfortunately we have to figure out how to do this ourselves because we certanly don’t get any support from the majority of religions we were brought up. When you are told that it doesn’t really matter if you have one life partner that you are committed to or a different sexual partner every week- that it’s all immoral… well it doesn’t help gays build healthy relationships. I wonder if those two gentlemen in your community who died of AIDS, if they had been in a supportive community where they could openly serve, where their relationship would have been honored and they would have been encouraged to raise kids- I just wonder would the outcome have been different? Maybe they still would be with us today…

Anon, you can answer your own questions. When were you wired to be with a woman (if you are straight)? Why don’t we spend scientific dollars to figure that out? Homosexuality exists among anmials- it is not uncommon. In fact it’s very natural.
99% of gay men I know knew from the very start that they wanted to be with men. But because of society’s pressures (which includes religion) they push it back down until they finally have to come to terms with it. Yes there are some very sexual people that are open to many expierences, and there are a very few that actually have attraction to both sexes, but they are not the norm. The majority of gay men and women I know really want the same things that others do- the stability of a relationship. Unfortunately we have to figure out how to do this ourselves because we certanly don’t get any support from the majority of religions we were brought up. When you are told that it doesn’t really matter if you have one life partner that you are committed to or a different sexual partner every week- that it’s all immoral… well it doesn’t help gays build healthy relationships. I wonder if those two gentlemen in your community who died of AIDS, if they had been in a supportive community where they could openly serve, where their relationship would have been honored and they would have been encouraged to raise kids- I just wonder would the outcome have been different? Maybe they still would be with us today…

I don’t know about those two, But I do remember some very good times.

But about homosexuality being natural I would like to make a point. being natural in a sense it does happen, yes. There are documented cases of it happening in many species but if we are to rely on the assumption that the purpose of a species is to reproduce and have progeny, then it is a disadvantage in nature, biologically speaking because, naturally, they cannot not reproduce by themselves. Moreover, if we also acknowledge that mutation or disorders are also natural, that does not infer that they are natural in a sense that it is a normal or natural behavior, only that it happens. At this point I just would like to say I imagine that this may seem very insensitive or offensive and I apologize in advance, but I think the discussion is worth having so people can lift some of thier hurtful views. I have a ton of gay friends and co-workers and I have noticed my gay friends have always been different in a cooler way.

In any case, homosexuality along with heterosexuality are simply behaviors we share with other species as part of our evolutionary culmination as a species. This has been a purely scientific discussion so far, but it does change significantly when we change gears into a spiritual discussion.

I have no doubt that sincere love is felt between two individuals. No one doubts that. But if we detract the relationship with others, and focus on our relationship with God, there is the World that must be removed as the only obstacle from reunion with Him. Nothing but complete self annihilation on the part of the soul, meaning that it must be as pure as crystal water and free from every Earthly attachment and inclination. Nearly impossible in this World, but it is something that we have been exhorted to do by Baha’u'llah Himself.

Moreover, the whole concept of sex is also downplayed, and the only place where Baha’u'llah talks about sex and marriage is where he says we are to “bring forth servants”. Now, of course this begs the question, why don’t gay couples adopt children and raise them as Baha’is? Isnt there a big reward in that–adoption and raising them a Baha’i? It is a very interesting question. In the big picture, homosexuality is categorized not as the terrible sins like “backbitting” or others…it is a condition that must be dealt with. With all of the other no no’s out there, I think there has been too much attention to the subject.

I don’t know about those two, But I do remember some very good times.

But about homosexuality being natural I would like to make a point. being natural in a sense it does happen, yes. There are documented cases of it happening in many species but if we are to rely on the assumption that the purpose of a species is to reproduce and have progeny, then it is a disadvantage in nature, biologically speaking because, naturally, they cannot not reproduce by themselves. Moreover, if we also acknowledge that mutation or disorders are also natural, that does not infer that they are natural in a sense that it is a normal or natural behavior, only that it happens. At this point I just would like to say I imagine that this may seem very insensitive or offensive and I apologize in advance, but I think the discussion is worth having so people can lift some of thier hurtful views. I have a ton of gay friends and co-workers and I have noticed my gay friends have always been different in a cooler way.

In any case, homosexuality along with heterosexuality are simply behaviors we share with other species as part of our evolutionary culmination as a species. This has been a purely scientific discussion so far, but it does change significantly when we change gears into a spiritual discussion.

I have no doubt that sincere love is felt between two individuals. No one doubts that. But if we detract the relationship with others, and focus on our relationship with God, there is the World that must be removed as the only obstacle from reunion with Him. Nothing but complete self annihilation on the part of the soul, meaning that it must be as pure as crystal water and free from every Earthly attachment and inclination. Nearly impossible in this World, but it is something that we have been exhorted to do by Baha’u'llah Himself.

Moreover, the whole concept of sex is also downplayed, and the only place where Baha’u'llah talks about sex and marriage is where he says we are to “bring forth servants”. Now, of course this begs the question, why don’t gay couples adopt children and raise them as Baha’is? Isnt there a big reward in that–adoption and raising them a Baha’i? It is a very interesting question. In the big picture, homosexuality is categorized not as the terrible sins like “backbitting” or others…it is a condition that must be dealt with. With all of the other no no’s out there, I think there has been too much attention to the subject.

then it is a disadvantage in nature, biologically speaking
——————-
not really. In nature many times what happens is that it is the younger/weaker male that ends up with another young male because they can not get the female. This allows the stronger male to breed with the females. Also the act among the younger males upon each other may be teaching them to eventually mount the female.
NOW all this is extremely funny when applied to human relations. But it’s just as funny to me when I read in the Bahai writings that I’m against nature. Heterosexual monogomy is against nature and it’s one of the worst ways to ensure that the species multiplies in nature.

But back to the topic of homosexuality and sprituality. You said “but complete self annihilation on the part of the soul” is what we are put on earth for. I agree to some extent. I just don’t see how love expressed sexually is hurtful spiritually when two people are committed to each other and wish to raise a family. If what you say is true, then there is no need for Bahai marriage. Why are straight people allowed to express something as banal as sexual pleasure? It is no longer needed for procreation. A man and a woman can bring a child to this world without having sex. I also remember reading in youth classes a letter from a Abdul-Baha explaining to a Bahai woman that she needs to have relations with her husband- as this was very much a part of Bahai marriage. I don’t think sex is downplayed at all when Shoghi Effendi extols Bahai youth to marry while young and in possesion of their youtfhul vigor. What do you think he was talking about? Except when it comes to gays/lesbian Bahai youth, we are told how wonderful and spiritual enhancing celibacy can be. Sorry, but even Bahaullah didn’t have very kind words about celibacy- read his tablet to the monks.
And finally you asked: “Now, of course this begs the question, why don’t gay couples adopt children and raise them as Baha’is?”
Hey, I’d love to. Be kind enough to write the Universal House of Justice and see if it’s cool with them. )

then it is a disadvantage in nature, biologically speaking
——————-
not really. In nature many times what happens is that it is the younger/weaker male that ends up with another young male because they can not get the female. This allows the stronger male to breed with the females. Also the act among the younger males upon each other may be teaching them to eventually mount the female.
NOW all this is extremely funny when applied to human relations. But it’s just as funny to me when I read in the Bahai writings that I’m against nature. Heterosexual monogomy is against nature and it’s one of the worst ways to ensure that the species multiplies in nature.

But back to the topic of homosexuality and sprituality. You said “but complete self annihilation on the part of the soul” is what we are put on earth for. I agree to some extent. I just don’t see how love expressed sexually is hurtful spiritually when two people are committed to each other and wish to raise a family. If what you say is true, then there is no need for Bahai marriage. Why are straight people allowed to express something as banal as sexual pleasure? It is no longer needed for procreation. A man and a woman can bring a child to this world without having sex. I also remember reading in youth classes a letter from a Abdul-Baha explaining to a Bahai woman that she needs to have relations with her husband- as this was very much a part of Bahai marriage. I don’t think sex is downplayed at all when Shoghi Effendi extols Bahai youth to marry while young and in possesion of their youtfhul vigor. What do you think he was talking about? Except when it comes to gays/lesbian Bahai youth, we are told how wonderful and spiritual enhancing celibacy can be. Sorry, but even Bahaullah didn’t have very kind words about celibacy- read his tablet to the monks.
And finally you asked: “Now, of course this begs the question, why don’t gay couples adopt children and raise them as Baha’is?”
Hey, I’d love to. Be kind enough to write the Universal House of Justice and see if it’s cool with them. )

[quote comment=""]why don’t gay couples adopt children and raise them as Baha’is?”
Hey, I’d love to. Be kind enough to write the Universal House of Justice and see if it’s cool with them. )[/quote]

P, you don’t need permission anymore than a straight couple does in order to adopt But I guess you know that.

I agree the time has past for the “don’t ask, don’t tell” stage and that Bahai communities need to be more welcoming of diversity. For me it is not an issue whether it’s nature or nurture, but an issue of equality. Though -if- the research B mentioned ends up being solid (the samples are v. small) that would help force Bahais to address how they go about welcoming gay couples as equals.

and on a completely unrelated note:
For my study on engagement in mixed reality art projects, I’ve made a questionnaire to test a hypothesis. I need many many many responses.
So if you have a few minutes, go to: http://www.sonjavank.com/faces
thanks!

[quote comment=""]why don’t gay couples adopt children and raise them as Baha’is?”
Hey, I’d love to. Be kind enough to write the Universal House of Justice and see if it’s cool with them. )[/quote]

P, you don’t need permission anymore than a straight couple does in order to adopt But I guess you know that.

I agree the time has past for the “don’t ask, don’t tell” stage and that Bahai communities need to be more welcoming of diversity. For me it is not an issue whether it’s nature or nurture, but an issue of equality. Though -if- the research B mentioned ends up being solid (the samples are v. small) that would help force Bahais to address how they go about welcoming gay couples as equals.

and on a completely unrelated note:
For my study on engagement in mixed reality art projects, I’ve made a questionnaire to test a hypothesis. I need many many many responses.
So if you have a few minutes, go to: http://www.sonjavank.com/faces
thanks!

Sonja I took your survey. I saw Mishkin Qalam in there…very cool. His grandson was in my community. He recently passed away but left a lot of the calligraphy his grandfather to the Faith.

In any case, about the homosexuality. There will be more and more evidence and testing to come showing that the most dominant form of it, where the individual has no control over their attraction to the opposite sex, is in fact a physiological trait reinforced by psychological factors and environment. I am sure too that there will eventually be some trail blazing idealist who funds the research to cure homosexuality. I really do not want to offend people but lets use our brains for a moment. Lets examine the different degrees of the issue.

1. Transexuality is a physical manifestation of the wrongly wired physiology. We have people sometimes born with part of or even both organs sometimes. However, they define themselves as one gender or another.

2. Severe gender identity crisis applies to people who simply can’t tolerate living in the body they do. Extreme measure are taken to make the switch.

3. a-typical homosexual who is attracted to the same sex but is not so intolerant of there identity as that sex. It should be noted that there is a wide spectrum of people who fall under this category and by no means is it comprehensive.

4. bi-sexuals tend to be the gray area and indeed have attractions both emotional and intimate to both sexes. However, I have read that some simply choose the lifestyle for various preferential reasons. So it would appear that there is a gray area as well.

5. Heterosexuals…

Hormone treatment and surgery have all been used to date to alleviate the problems these people have to deal with. It would be naive to think that there are individuals who suffer from a great deal of pain as a result of their condition. It would also be naive to think that they wish they were not born that way. At this point I think it prudent to say that we all should be compassionate and understanding, informed and aware of the issues. No one should contribute to the pain or problem of another. On a personal note, my own reason for discussing this subject is to understand it better. I see some Baha’is who, according to their own understanding, without the knowledge of the written guidance, get really uncomfortable when you mention gay Baha’is. I see others very sympathetic. The UHJ is simply following the rules and in my opinion has really gone out of its way to ensure the validity and reality of the fact that there is indeed gay Baha’is and there is no reason why they should be treated any differently (yes i realize that the writings themselves say otherwise, but they are just applying the law).

All in all the is much still to be understood and I think science is almost there.

Sonja I took your survey. I saw Mishkin Qalam in there…very cool. His grandson was in my community. He recently passed away but left a lot of the calligraphy his grandfather to the Faith.

In any case, about the homosexuality. There will be more and more evidence and testing to come showing that the most dominant form of it, where the individual has no control over their attraction to the opposite sex, is in fact a physiological trait reinforced by psychological factors and environment. I am sure too that there will eventually be some trail blazing idealist who funds the research to cure homosexuality. I really do not want to offend people but lets use our brains for a moment. Lets examine the different degrees of the issue.

1. Transexuality is a physical manifestation of the wrongly wired physiology. We have people sometimes born with part of or even both organs sometimes. However, they define themselves as one gender or another.

2. Severe gender identity crisis applies to people who simply can’t tolerate living in the body they do. Extreme measure are taken to make the switch.

3. a-typical homosexual who is attracted to the same sex but is not so intolerant of there identity as that sex. It should be noted that there is a wide spectrum of people who fall under this category and by no means is it comprehensive.

4. bi-sexuals tend to be the gray area and indeed have attractions both emotional and intimate to both sexes. However, I have read that some simply choose the lifestyle for various preferential reasons. So it would appear that there is a gray area as well.

5. Heterosexuals…

Hormone treatment and surgery have all been used to date to alleviate the problems these people have to deal with. It would be naive to think that there are individuals who suffer from a great deal of pain as a result of their condition. It would also be naive to think that they wish they were not born that way. At this point I think it prudent to say that we all should be compassionate and understanding, informed and aware of the issues. No one should contribute to the pain or problem of another. On a personal note, my own reason for discussing this subject is to understand it better. I see some Baha’is who, according to their own understanding, without the knowledge of the written guidance, get really uncomfortable when you mention gay Baha’is. I see others very sympathetic. The UHJ is simply following the rules and in my opinion has really gone out of its way to ensure the validity and reality of the fact that there is indeed gay Baha’is and there is no reason why they should be treated any differently (yes i realize that the writings themselves say otherwise, but they are just applying the law).

All in all the is much still to be understood and I think science is almost there.

I re-read and I should just clarify…

It would be naive to think that there are not individuals who suffer a great deal of pain as a result of their condition. It would also be naive to think that they dont wish they were not born that way.
The UHJ is simply following the rules and in my opinion has really gone out of its way to ensure the validity and reality of the fact that there is indeed gay Baha’is and there is no reason why they should be treated any differently (yes i realize that the writings themselves say that it is a *condition*, but they are just applying the law).

I re-read and I should just clarify…

It would be naive to think that there are not individuals who suffer a great deal of pain as a result of their condition. It would also be naive to think that they dont wish they were not born that way.

The UHJ is simply following the rules and in my opinion has really gone out of its way to ensure the validity and reality of the fact that there is indeed gay Baha’is and there is no reason why they should be treated any differently (yes i realize that the writings themselves say that it is a *condition*, but they are just applying the law).

I really do not want to offend people but…
——————————
You have. You have insulted me- a gay man who’s only time of depression was when he was trying to fit into the Bahai mold (I’m very happy now believe it or not). You’ve insulted my transgender friend who has seen most of her friends commit suicide because of society’s inability to understand (that includes your version of the Bahai Faith). I take it you also believe Shoghi Effendi when he says that UHJ will eventually have to decide how to punish all homosexuals? That will never change in your view either, right? When the UHJ says that maybe there will be a way to “fix” a fetus so it doesn’t come out homosexual (yes they put out a scary letter like this), then you just throw your head down and obey? Whitewash it all you want Anon- YOU CAN NOT veil what you say in words of ‘sensitivity’. It’s pure, hurtful bigotry. Fortunately I know enough Bahais that don’t think like you. Some day the UHJ will change the enforcement of this law and hopefully gays will be truly welcome into the Bahai community. Until then we see your words for what they are- insulting and hurtful.

I really do not want to offend people but…
——————————
You have. You have insulted me- a gay man who’s only time of depression was when he was trying to fit into the Bahai mold (I’m very happy now believe it or not). You’ve insulted my transgender friend who has seen most of her friends commit suicide because of society’s inability to understand (that includes your version of the Bahai Faith). I take it you also believe Shoghi Effendi when he says that UHJ will eventually have to decide how to punish all homosexuals? That will never change in your view either, right? When the UHJ says that maybe there will be a way to “fix” a fetus so it doesn’t come out homosexual (yes they put out a scary letter like this), then you just throw your head down and obey? Whitewash it all you want Anon- YOU CAN NOT veil what you say in words of ‘sensitivity’. It’s pure, hurtful bigotry. Fortunately I know enough Bahais that don’t think like you. Some day the UHJ will change the enforcement of this law and hopefully gays will be truly welcome into the Bahai community. Until then we see your words for what they are- insulting and hurtful.

Does anyone else see Anon’s words (and similar words by other conservative Bahais) very similar to the antiquated pyschiatry of the turn of the century? you know where women were given lobotomies to keep them from being too ‘sexual’ (that was a disease too back then). Or were left handed kids were forced to use their right hands? It really is scary to me that Bahais like him share such views with souther baptists, shiite musmilms and other groups that wish to get rid of homosexuality.

Does anyone else see Anon’s words (and similar words by other conservative Bahais) very similar to the antiquated pyschiatry of the turn of the century? you know where women were given lobotomies to keep them from being too ‘sexual’ (that was a disease too back then). Or were left handed kids were forced to use their right hands? It really is scary to me that Bahais like him share such views with souther baptists, shiite musmilms and other groups that wish to get rid of homosexuality.

Some day the UHJ will change the enforcement of this law and hopefully gays will be truly welcome into the Bahai community.
————————-
And by the way, I do believe it is a law. Not from Bahaullah, but from Shoghi Effendi’s interpretation. As long as the UHJ wants to follow SE’s interpretations as law, then all we can hope for is loose enforcement of it. But I also pray for the day when the UHJ will wake up and realize it doesn’t have to follow every letter, phrase and utterance that SE made. I wish we had a real direct vote for the UHJ so that maybe, just maybe more open-minded men would get elected. Unfortunately, there is no true democracy. Everyone knows that the future members are hand-picked from the Teaching Centers by the incumbents- and the NSA’s just follow along in electing them. So we’ll just end up with the same ol’ same ol’ for the UHJ probably for a while unless the change the system.

Some day the UHJ will change the enforcement of this law and hopefully gays will be truly welcome into the Bahai community.
————————-
And by the way, I do believe it is a law. Not from Bahaullah, but from Shoghi Effendi’s interpretation. As long as the UHJ wants to follow SE’s interpretations as law, then all we can hope for is loose enforcement of it. But I also pray for the day when the UHJ will wake up and realize it doesn’t have to follow every letter, phrase and utterance that SE made. I wish we had a real direct vote for the UHJ so that maybe, just maybe more open-minded men would get elected. Unfortunately, there is no true democracy. Everyone knows that the future members are hand-picked from the Teaching Centers by the incumbents- and the NSA’s just follow along in electing them. So we’ll just end up with the same ol’ same ol’ for the UHJ probably for a while unless the change the system.

P,

I apologize again if I offended you but at least I am trying to understand the issues. You can’t deny that there is a physiological foundation for homosexuality. The science is showing that. In my view this is a big leap forward in understanding the dynamic and root of it.

P,

I apologize again if I offended you but at least I am trying to understand the issues. You can’t deny that there is a physiological foundation for homosexuality. The science is showing that. In my view this is a big leap forward in understanding the dynamic and root of it.

As their is a foundation for someone to develop straight, but we don’t try to fix that. As long as you see it as a disease that needs to be fixed (per Shoghi Effendi and the present UHJ), then anything you say is insulting. As it is insulting to a left-handed person being told he has a disease and should really try to use his right hand. Believe what you want to believe. But I feel for those kids (and some grown ups who are still in the community) beating themselves over the head because you represent the best understanding they can hope for inside the Bahai community.

As their is a foundation for someone to develop straight, but we don’t try to fix that. As long as you see it as a disease that needs to be fixed (per Shoghi Effendi and the present UHJ), then anything you say is insulting. As it is insulting to a left-handed person being told he has a disease and should really try to use his right hand. Believe what you want to believe. But I feel for those kids (and some grown ups who are still in the community) beating themselves over the head because you represent the best understanding they can hope for inside the Bahai community.

Oh btw Anon, when I do have kids, yes I plan to educate them in the Bahai Faith. But it’s not what you think. It will probably be in a loving/accepting place like the Unitarian church. And for sure my children will be taught to use their own brains and ask questions- not blind Faith as I was taught. And from what I’ve seen, kids being brought up by gay parents tend to be way more understanding and accepting of ALL of humanity than even Bahai kids. So mine will probably be super kids since they’ll get the best of both worlds!

Oh btw Anon, when I do have kids, yes I plan to educate them in the Bahai Faith. But it’s not what you think. It will probably be in a loving/accepting place like the Unitarian church. And for sure my children will be taught to use their own brains and ask questions- not blind Faith as I was taught. And from what I’ve seen, kids being brought up by gay parents tend to be way more understanding and accepting of ALL of humanity than even Bahai kids. So mine will probably be super kids since they’ll get the best of both worlds!

[quote comment="53748"]
And by the way, I do believe it is a law. Not from Bahaullah, but from Shoghi Effendi’s interpretation. As long as the UHJ wants to follow SE’s interpretations as law, then all we can hope for is loose enforcement of it. But I also pray for the day when the UHJ will wake up and realize it doesn’t have to follow every letter, phrase and utterance that SE made. .[/quote]

I’ve found what you’ve said to be very interesting, P. I myself am a Bahai and being a ballet dancer, I meet quite a few homosexual guys. What proof do you have that the law prohibiting homosexuality is not one of Baha’ullah but rather of Shoghi Effendi? Another question I had was are you still a registered Bahai? If so, how do you teach the faith to homosexuals? Whenever I do talk, it eventually runs into what is the Bahai position on homosexuality and well it sort of ends there.

[quote comment="53748"]
And by the way, I do believe it is a law. Not from Bahaullah, but from Shoghi Effendi’s interpretation. As long as the UHJ wants to follow SE’s interpretations as law, then all we can hope for is loose enforcement of it. But I also pray for the day when the UHJ will wake up and realize it doesn’t have to follow every letter, phrase and utterance that SE made. .[/quote]

I’ve found what you’ve said to be very interesting, P. I myself am a Bahai and being a ballet dancer, I meet quite a few homosexual guys. What proof do you have that the law prohibiting homosexuality is not one of Baha’ullah but rather of Shoghi Effendi? Another question I had was are you still a registered Bahai? If so, how do you teach the faith to homosexuals? Whenever I do talk, it eventually runs into what is the Bahai position on homosexuality and well it sort of ends there.

P,

The classification of homosexuality as a disease is kind of a little off if you ask me. That’s not what I said. A disease is something else…I think homosexuality is a condition, like people with other kinds of anomalies like extremely high IQs but are anti-social, or people who are artist genius but can’t look you in the eye…Let’s face the fact, if we simply unaware organisms the homosexuals would be unable to reproduce.

Can you blame me for trying to understand it better? Its kind of tell tale to see you react so emotionally. I wan’t to have a dialog and approach it from a different angle to further my own reasoning. The way I see it, from an evolutionary standpoint and a reproductive standpoint, purely biological, it is something that would eventually be stamped out by nature as a part the darwinian model. Im sure you know, the theory is only the genes or traits that are useful or advantageous are inherited and passed on. This process takes thousands of years, if not millions.

In no way shape or form should we shun or disavow our gay Baha’is. I do not make a distinction and I even wonder about some of my friends who have never had a girl friend…They are very active in the faith too. In any case, I highly doubt UHJ will change. It is calling on us to deny our physical inclination and arise spiritually…When we do this there is always the attachments to our own systems. I have trouble answering the call myself…we all do…But I don’t think the admonishment to arise will go away or change in character.

P,

The classification of homosexuality as a disease is kind of a little off if you ask me. That’s not what I said. A disease is something else…I think homosexuality is a condition, like people with other kinds of anomalies like extremely high IQs but are anti-social, or people who are artist genius but can’t look you in the eye…Let’s face the fact, if we simply unaware organisms the homosexuals would be unable to reproduce.

Can you blame me for trying to understand it better? Its kind of tell tale to see you react so emotionally. I wan’t to have a dialog and approach it from a different angle to further my own reasoning. The way I see it, from an evolutionary standpoint and a reproductive standpoint, purely biological, it is something that would eventually be stamped out by nature as a part the darwinian model. Im sure you know, the theory is only the genes or traits that are useful or advantageous are inherited and passed on. This process takes thousands of years, if not millions.

In no way shape or form should we shun or disavow our gay Baha’is. I do not make a distinction and I even wonder about some of my friends who have never had a girl friend…They are very active in the faith too. In any case, I highly doubt UHJ will change. It is calling on us to deny our physical inclination and arise spiritually…When we do this there is always the attachments to our own systems. I have trouble answering the call myself…we all do…But I don’t think the admonishment to arise will go away or change in character.

Mooseus,

A lot of things came from Baha’u'llah that we have or have not done. Did you know that Iranian Baha’is in Iran have rules that we in the west do not. Homosexuality is derived from the Aqdas and the authority Shoghi Effendi had as interpreter has lead to the Baha’i position as it is today.

Homosexuality in the Middle East, at that time was not what you think of. Even today, the idea of uniquely defined segments of gays is not part of the culture or lingo (see Ahmadinejad). Of course it happened and does happen and many people are indeed identifying themselves as gay today. But, in those days there is strong evidence to state that was not the case. Baha’u'llah condemned the social ill of pediastry because it was the closest thing to it and those who perpetrated it, although child abusers were most often married men with families. It was not as clearly defined culturally for different reasons. But, if we compare it to other places where Baha’u'llah talks about marriage between man and women this interpretation is consistent with the subject…

This is simply my view and I know P will probably say im a fundamentalist or something…

Mooseus,

A lot of things came from Baha’u'llah that we have or have not done. Did you know that Iranian Baha’is in Iran have rules that we in the west do not. Homosexuality is derived from the Aqdas and the authority Shoghi Effendi had as interpreter has lead to the Baha’i position as it is today.

Homosexuality in the Middle East, at that time was not what you think of. Even today, the idea of uniquely defined segments of gays is not part of the culture or lingo (see Ahmadinejad). Of course it happened and does happen and many people are indeed identifying themselves as gay today. But, in those days there is strong evidence to state that was not the case. Baha’u'llah condemned the social ill of pediastry because it was the closest thing to it and those who perpetrated it, although child abusers were most often married men with families. It was not as clearly defined culturally for different reasons. But, if we compare it to other places where Baha’u'llah talks about marriage between man and women this interpretation is consistent with the subject…

This is simply my view and I know P will probably say im a fundamentalist or something…

One thing Anon and I will end the conversation with you. When the Bahai Faith asks straights to NEVER have sex (you don’t need sex to procreate anymore), then at least I can say that the Faith is fair in how treats all its members. Otherwise, it’s discrimination. And it is considered a disability (maybe that’s the word I should have used, but it’s all the same to me); if you believe Shoghi Effendi, then I am handicapped with a disability. I find this pity utterly insulting, especially when I see people with true disabilities living in this world.

One thing Anon and I will end the conversation with you. When the Bahai Faith asks straights to NEVER have sex (you don’t need sex to procreate anymore), then at least I can say that the Faith is fair in how treats all its members. Otherwise, it’s discrimination. And it is considered a disability (maybe that’s the word I should have used, but it’s all the same to me); if you believe Shoghi Effendi, then I am handicapped with a disability. I find this pity utterly insulting, especially when I see people with true disabilities living in this world.

What proof do you have that the law prohibiting homosexuality is not one of Baha’ullah but rather of Shoghi Effendi?
—————–
Bahaullah condemned sex with a slave boy. And in another instance he forbade sodomy (which could be for men or women if we are striclty speaking of anal sex). However, there is great discussion on what exactly sodomy (and the story of sodom) means. So how do I explain the Faith to gay friends, just like I would explain any judeo-christian religion. There is a spiritual side to the Faith and a cultural side based on laws that were revealed in a certain social setting. To only accept the laws at face value without understanding the social norms in which He brought those laws is a true diservice to the Bahai Faith (we were not meant to be a religion of fundamentalism).
My personal take is that the Universal House of Justice (if we were one day able to actually have a true voice in electing those 9 men) can move away from Shoghi Effendi’s interpretation which condemns all forms of homosexuality (even kissing I would guess), but still remain loyal to Bahaullah’s law in the social context in which he revealed them. Also, since the idea of gay marriage is not spoken of in the Aqdas, then the UHJ could very well legislate some type of union allowed between gay Bahais. It’s all doable, but it depends on the leadership.

What proof do you have that the law prohibiting homosexuality is not one of Baha’ullah but rather of Shoghi Effendi?
—————–
Bahaullah condemned sex with a slave boy. And in another instance he forbade sodomy (which could be for men or women if we are striclty speaking of anal sex). However, there is great discussion on what exactly sodomy (and the story of sodom) means. So how do I explain the Faith to gay friends, just like I would explain any judeo-christian religion. There is a spiritual side to the Faith and a cultural side based on laws that were revealed in a certain social setting. To only accept the laws at face value without understanding the social norms in which He brought those laws is a true diservice to the Bahai Faith (we were not meant to be a religion of fundamentalism).
My personal take is that the Universal House of Justice (if we were one day able to actually have a true voice in electing those 9 men) can move away from Shoghi Effendi’s interpretation which condemns all forms of homosexuality (even kissing I would guess), but still remain loyal to Bahaullah’s law in the social context in which he revealed them. Also, since the idea of gay marriage is not spoken of in the Aqdas, then the UHJ could very well legislate some type of union allowed between gay Bahais. It’s all doable, but it depends on the leadership.

And oh yes Mooseus, I am registered generations Bahai. But haven’t been active in years. I go to the Unitarian church every so often, where I can profess my Bahai beliefs without any judgement. Maybe the Bahai community will change in my life time, so I’ll feel comfortable enough to return. But I’m not holding my breath.
So yep, I’m still a carded member; hmmm, although, I have no idea where my card is….

And oh yes Mooseus, I am registered generations Bahai. But haven’t been active in years. I go to the Unitarian church every so often, where I can profess my Bahai beliefs without any judgement. Maybe the Bahai community will change in my life time, so I’ll feel comfortable enough to return. But I’m not holding my breath.
So yep, I’m still a carded member; hmmm, although, I have no idea where my card is….

P,

I really think you are being too touchy.

You havn’t said much regarding my scientific approach, I admit I am a little dense regarding this issue, thats why I am trying to talk about it.

P,

I really think you are being too touchy.

You havn’t said much regarding my scientific approach, I admit I am a little dense regarding this issue, thats why I am trying to talk about it.

As I think you are being fundamentalist. You want to eradicate homosexuality with the use of science one day in the future. Yeah, I guess that makes me a bit ‘touchy’. Did u look up that letter from the UHJ talking about the possiblity of altering a fetus so it comes out straight, instead of just empahtically saying that would be wrong. Of course, maybe it’s not wrong in your eyes? Yeah, I’m very touchy when I confront evil…
If you want it all to be fair, then stop having sex EVER. Are you married, have a spouse? If so, don’t EVER introduce them as your spouse, actually hide them and pretend they are just a friend. Live in seperate homes too, please.
I wnat to stop writing to you, but geez I’m so hopeful that you will wake up one day. We need more progressive minded Bahais in the community for any change to happen.

As I think you are being fundamentalist. You want to eradicate homosexuality with the use of science one day in the future. Yeah, I guess that makes me a bit ‘touchy’. Did u look up that letter from the UHJ talking about the possiblity of altering a fetus so it comes out straight, instead of just empahtically saying that would be wrong. Of course, maybe it’s not wrong in your eyes? Yeah, I’m very touchy when I confront evil…
If you want it all to be fair, then stop having sex EVER. Are you married, have a spouse? If so, don’t EVER introduce them as your spouse, actually hide them and pretend they are just a friend. Live in seperate homes too, please.
I wnat to stop writing to you, but geez I’m so hopeful that you will wake up one day. We need more progressive minded Bahais in the community for any change to happen.

For anyone who is interested. Here is the letter from the UHJ regarding the possibility of “treating” a fetus for the disability of homosexuality: http://bahai-library.com/file.php5?file=uhj_homosexuality_biology&language=All

For anyone who is interested. Here is the letter from the UHJ regarding the possibility of “treating” a fetus for the disability of homosexuality: http://bahai-library.com/file.php5?file=uhj_homosexuality_biology&language=All

[quote comment=""]What proof do you have that the law prohibiting homosexuality is not one of Baha’ullah but rather of Shoghi Effendi? Another question I had was are you still a registered Bahai? If so, how do you teach the faith to homosexuals?[/quote]

P, said it all, but I’ve already stated this a number of times on Bahai Rants, that thousands of letters written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi by numerous (it would be interesting if some one could find who these were and for which periods) secretaries is not the same as something that is penned by Shoghi Effendi. Especially when you consider how articulate and how excellent his English was.

He didn’t write a single word on the topic of sexuality, as far as I know.

So I’d go a step further than P, and say that it would (I’ve love to say “will”, but I try as I might, I can’t see into the future) be great when the people (including Bahai Institutions) stop treating these letters as if they were scripture. They are not.

P, I was born left-handed and was slapped with a ruler for a number of years. Then when I was around 8 or so, the nuns must have either decided that a left-handed child was better than one who couldn’t write or perhaps they convinced my parents it was better to allow me to follow my ‘nature’. Anyway all I know is that once I moved into the middle classroom I didn’t have to hide my lefthand, and I then started to write. If I’d been born with homosexual tendencies with the severity that I am left-handed, I’m not sure how I would handle being a Bahai. Other kids switched over to the other hand, I just couldn’t. I even play instruments left-handed.
It is all very easy for a right-handed person to say, ah but it is not such a big deal, I mean I can do a lot of things with my right hand that a right-handed person can’t. Some people think I’m ambidextrous because I draw with both hands or use the mouse with either, but deep down, I am -lefthanded-. And though life is harder that way, that’s who I am and I shouldn’t have to hide this. Shouldn’t have to apologize, nor pretend to be right-handed.

When you are in majority in a situation it is easy to overlook things. And easy to see things as right or wrong. Or that is it just an issue of a bit of abstainance. When in fact nature is so diverse. So I understand how a right-handed person might say, but you can abstain from using your left hand. See you are coping, and that’s not inequality. Not noticing that inside I’m hurting on hearing those words ((again) with oodles of good intention). Perhaps they’d even call me touchy.

My question is what is the harm? What is wrong with being gay?
How is being gay, in some way immoral? Any more or less moral than a heterosexual I mean. Please don’t get me started on trans-gender identity. Sexuality is like the nature of colour. We see divisions but there are none, just varying intensities of where we feel most comfortable. I have yet to meet a gay parent who was abusive (I am sure there are plenty around (gays being human and all that). I’ve met many abusive straight parents

Anyway, Anonnymouz I found your posting offensive, not just to gays but to myself as a Bahai. I DO NOT share your views but I also found it odd that you thought what you wrote was scientific. But don’t worry, the future will make things clearer for us all

and on the unrelated note: There were more Bahai faces inserted into that questionnaire, but the point of it was about ‘how we judge / look at faces’.
In September I can say more about this if anyone asks. Then my paper will be written.
And nice to hear about Mishkin Qalam, if there’s ever an opportunity to share some of that work with the world, ask the grandson to go to http://www.bahai-library.com/bafa and make contact.
It would be nice to have a page on him one day.

P the link you posted is a tricky one. I mean, yes, it is headed up as if it was a letter from the UHJ, but it is actually from the Research Department who seem to be giving advice, not making a law or statement of rule. I found the wording also odd in some places. But yes, the whole tone is very fundamentalist.

[quote comment=""]What proof do you have that the law prohibiting homosexuality is not one of Baha’ullah but rather of Shoghi Effendi? Another question I had was are you still a registered Bahai? If so, how do you teach the faith to homosexuals?[/quote]

P, said it all, but I’ve already stated this a number of times on Bahai Rants, that thousands of letters written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi by numerous (it would be interesting if some one could find who these were and for which periods) secretaries is not the same as something that is penned by Shoghi Effendi. Especially when you consider how articulate and how excellent his English was.

He didn’t write a single word on the topic of sexuality, as far as I know.

So I’d go a step further than P, and say that it would (I’ve love to say “will”, but I try as I might, I can’t see into the future) be great when the people (including Bahai Institutions) stop treating these letters as if they were scripture. They are not.

P, I was born left-handed and was slapped with a ruler for a number of years. Then when I was around 8 or so, the nuns must have either decided that a left-handed child was better than one who couldn’t write or perhaps they convinced my parents it was better to allow me to follow my ‘nature’. Anyway all I know is that once I moved into the middle classroom I didn’t have to hide my lefthand, and I then started to write. If I’d been born with homosexual tendencies with the severity that I am left-handed, I’m not sure how I would handle being a Bahai. Other kids switched over to the other hand, I just couldn’t. I even play instruments left-handed.
It is all very easy for a right-handed person to say, ah but it is not such a big deal, I mean I can do a lot of things with my right hand that a right-handed person can’t. Some people think I’m ambidextrous because I draw with both hands or use the mouse with either, but deep down, I am -lefthanded-. And though life is harder that way, that’s who I am and I shouldn’t have to hide this. Shouldn’t have to apologize, nor pretend to be right-handed.

When you are in majority in a situation it is easy to overlook things. And easy to see things as right or wrong. Or that is it just an issue of a bit of abstainance. When in fact nature is so diverse. So I understand how a right-handed person might say, but you can abstain from using your left hand. See you are coping, and that’s not inequality. Not noticing that inside I’m hurting on hearing those words ((again) with oodles of good intention). Perhaps they’d even call me touchy.

My question is what is the harm? What is wrong with being gay?
How is being gay, in some way immoral? Any more or less moral than a heterosexual I mean. Please don’t get me started on trans-gender identity. Sexuality is like the nature of colour. We see divisions but there are none, just varying intensities of where we feel most comfortable. I have yet to meet a gay parent who was abusive (I am sure there are plenty around (gays being human and all that). I’ve met many abusive straight parents

Anyway, Anonnymouz I found your posting offensive, not just to gays but to myself as a Bahai. I DO NOT share your views but I also found it odd that you thought what you wrote was scientific. But don’t worry, the future will make things clearer for us all

and on the unrelated note: There were more Bahai faces inserted into that questionnaire, but the point of it was about ‘how we judge / look at faces’.
In September I can say more about this if anyone asks. Then my paper will be written.
And nice to hear about Mishkin Qalam, if there’s ever an opportunity to share some of that work with the world, ask the grandson to go to http://www.bahai-library.com/bafa and make contact.
It would be nice to have a page on him one day.

P the link you posted is a tricky one. I mean, yes, it is headed up as if it was a letter from the UHJ, but it is actually from the Research Department who seem to be giving advice, not making a law or statement of rule. I found the wording also odd in some places. But yes, the whole tone is very fundamentalist.

P,

WOW….That letter is truly scary. It almost sounds like Nazi eugenics or something, but couched in much ‘nicer’ terms.

P,

WOW….That letter is truly scary. It almost sounds like Nazi eugenics or something, but couched in much ‘nicer’ terms.

If you found it offensive i’m sorry. And I don’t expect nor am I asking people to agree with me. I still would like to know more about the cause and reasons for homosexuality. I have said it before and I will say it again…I don’t discriminate and I have gay friends. Some of the nicest people I know…and the most stylish.

Anyway…Sonja your left hand analogy was not really applicable given there is no natural disadvantage to it. You may rebut with saying something like “all sorts of products and ergonomic factors hinder you” but if it wasn’t for the man-made obstacles your condition wouldn’t hinder you. They did the same thing to my mom in Iran because she was left handed. My sister and grandma too…

Homosexuality has become a cultural and political issue which is highly debated. I am avoiding that if you haven’t noticed. You dismiss my analytical approach to different degrees and spectrum of sexuality, but I still do not see the issue you raise. If you call it unscientific and illogical, back it up. I gave evidence for my statements but you didn’t. Of course I am biased and I appear insensitive. But, perhaps I should apologize more or patronize. I am not trying to convince anyone of my views, I am simply trying to get to scientific grounds of the issue. How is this fundamentalist?

If you found it offensive i’m sorry. And I don’t expect nor am I asking people to agree with me. I still would like to know more about the cause and reasons for homosexuality. I have said it before and I will say it again…I don’t discriminate and I have gay friends. Some of the nicest people I know…and the most stylish.

Anyway…Sonja your left hand analogy was not really applicable given there is no natural disadvantage to it. You may rebut with saying something like “all sorts of products and ergonomic factors hinder you” but if it wasn’t for the man-made obstacles your condition wouldn’t hinder you. They did the same thing to my mom in Iran because she was left handed. My sister and grandma too…

Homosexuality has become a cultural and political issue which is highly debated. I am avoiding that if you haven’t noticed. You dismiss my analytical approach to different degrees and spectrum of sexuality, but I still do not see the issue you raise. If you call it unscientific and illogical, back it up. I gave evidence for my statements but you didn’t. Of course I am biased and I appear insensitive. But, perhaps I should apologize more or patronize. I am not trying to convince anyone of my views, I am simply trying to get to scientific grounds of the issue. How is this fundamentalist?

Anyway…Sonja your left hand analogy was not really applicable given there is no natural disadvantage to it.
———–
there you go with the natural disadvantage stuff. What’s the natural advantage of monogomy? It certainly isn’t practiced by most animals. If the Bahai Faith truly cared about the propagation of species (if that is what you are so worried about), then polygamy is the way to go. Make sure women stay pregnant as much as possible and stay home to take care of the millions of kids; while men bring home the food. THAT is the natural way. We are spiritual beings and I know for a fact that gay couples are raising beatiful families that would put some Bahai families I have seen to shame. Conservative Bahais have nothing to stand on when arguing against this discramanatory law except “because Shoghi Effendi said so”.

Anyway…Sonja your left hand analogy was not really applicable given there is no natural disadvantage to it.
———–
there you go with the natural disadvantage stuff. What’s the natural advantage of monogomy? It certainly isn’t practiced by most animals. If the Bahai Faith truly cared about the propagation of species (if that is what you are so worried about), then polygamy is the way to go. Make sure women stay pregnant as much as possible and stay home to take care of the millions of kids; while men bring home the food. THAT is the natural way. We are spiritual beings and I know for a fact that gay couples are raising beatiful families that would put some Bahai families I have seen to shame. Conservative Bahais have nothing to stand on when arguing against this discramanatory law except “because Shoghi Effendi said so”.

And thank you Sonja for understanding. AND really thank you for continuing to be a card-carrying Bahai- that’s what we need more of. I checked out the survey, but there was no category for HOT for Angelina. Oh no, are you turing me straight? Hey maybe that’s the magic pill the UHJ is looking for- pics of Angelina Jolie shown over and over again to a fetus before it’s born!

And thank you Sonja for understanding. AND really thank you for continuing to be a card-carrying Bahai- that’s what we need more of. I checked out the survey, but there was no category for HOT for Angelina. Oh no, are you turing me straight? Hey maybe that’s the magic pill the UHJ is looking for- pics of Angelina Jolie shown over and over again to a fetus before it’s born!

P you are assuming that I am approaching this from a Baha’i view. Not really, I am from a scientific approach…perhaps I should look elsewhere for another point of view.

P you are assuming that I am approaching this from a Baha’i view. Not really, I am from a scientific approach…perhaps I should look elsewhere for another point of view.

Sonja: your observations and reflections embody the very essence of the Spirit of Baha. Your heartfelt sentiments convey the expression of authentic Baha’i principles of gender equality and the elimination of prejudice. There can be no better example of the ideals upon which the Baha’i Faith was founded. All else is rust and deformity and merits no further comment let alone refutation. Good luck with your paper and may God bless you in all your future endeavors. You are a true Baha’i.

“Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity. Hate destroys a man’s sense of values and his objectivity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true. Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice. Justice at its best is love correcting everything that stands against love.” (Martin Luther King Jr.)

Sonja: your observations and reflections embody the very essence of the Spirit of Baha. Your heartfelt sentiments convey the expression of authentic Baha’i principles of gender equality and the elimination of prejudice. There can be no better example of the ideals upon which the Baha’i Faith was founded. All else is rust and deformity and merits no further comment let alone refutation. Good luck with your paper and may God bless you in all your future endeavors. You are a true Baha’i.

“Like an unchecked cancer, hate corrodes the personality and eats away its vital unity. Hate destroys a man’s sense of values and his objectivity. It causes him to describe the beautiful as ugly and the ugly as beautiful, and to confuse the true with the false and the false with the true. Power at its best is love implementing the demands of justice. Justice at its best is love correcting everything that stands against love.” (Martin Luther King Jr.)

[quote comment="53773"]And thank you Sonja for understanding. AND really thank you for continuing to be a card-carrying Bahai- that’s what we need more of. I checked out the survey, but there was no category for HOT for Angelina. Oh no, are you turing me straight? Hey maybe that’s the magic pill the UHJ is looking for- pics of Angelina Jolie shown over and over again to a fetus before it’s born! [/quote]

I have heard that there really IS an as yet un-translated tablet on this method. This IS the magic pill and WILL be FULLY documented in the future. The effectiveness of the method will be as “plain as the Noon Day Sun”. It is TOTALLY scientific and will be fully proven in double blind studies. Only the photos are of Jennifer Aniston NOT Angelina! The official name is “The Tablet of What Was Brad Thinking?”

http://www.jenaniston.net/gallery/

Early research shows that looking at these photos causes ACTUAL CHANGES in the brain functioning of fetuses!

http://www.jenaniston.net/gallery/

Unfortunately this effect won’t last long in turning every man on Earth straight.

There is ANOTHER tablet called “The Tablet of Pulling the Plug” where the UHJ will announce that no one on Earth is allowed to have sex EVER AGAIN. No exceptions. No appeal. No due process. Period. Neither heterosexual sex nor homosexual sex. Anyone who violates this will lose their voting rights. Because the Creator of Mankind has said in this revealed Tablet that based upon our behavior as human beings He/She/It is calling the entire human experiment off. We are no longer permitted to procreate. No sex ever. Period. EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY. The Creator says in explicit language that the human experiment failed and had major problems and has been terminated.

It seems the entire world was completely straight for EXACTLY 24 hours until the other Tablet was announced. And then it was all over.

No. Humans. Permitted. Ever. Again. Period.

Within 90 years of the UHJ’s implementation of the Tablet we were COMPLETELY GONE as a species.

Cats took over the planet as the highest life form. They really were from another Universe ALL ALONG (as many suspected) and were sent here as spies. The reports on us were not good. And we were terminated as a life form.

[quote comment="53773"]And thank you Sonja for understanding. AND really thank you for continuing to be a card-carrying Bahai- that’s what we need more of. I checked out the survey, but there was no category for HOT for Angelina. Oh no, are you turing me straight? Hey maybe that’s the magic pill the UHJ is looking for- pics of Angelina Jolie shown over and over again to a fetus before it’s born! [/quote]

I have heard that there really IS an as yet un-translated tablet on this method. This IS the magic pill and WILL be FULLY documented in the future. The effectiveness of the method will be as “plain as the Noon Day Sun”. It is TOTALLY scientific and will be fully proven in double blind studies. Only the photos are of Jennifer Aniston NOT Angelina! The official name is “The Tablet of What Was Brad Thinking?”

http://www.jenaniston.net/gallery/

Early research shows that looking at these photos causes ACTUAL CHANGES in the brain functioning of fetuses!

http://www.jenaniston.net/gallery/

Unfortunately this effect won’t last long in turning every man on Earth straight.

There is ANOTHER tablet called “The Tablet of Pulling the Plug” where the UHJ will announce that no one on Earth is allowed to have sex EVER AGAIN. No exceptions. No appeal. No due process. Period. Neither heterosexual sex nor homosexual sex. Anyone who violates this will lose their voting rights. Because the Creator of Mankind has said in this revealed Tablet that based upon our behavior as human beings He/She/It is calling the entire human experiment off. We are no longer permitted to procreate. No sex ever. Period. EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY. The Creator says in explicit language that the human experiment failed and had major problems and has been terminated.

It seems the entire world was completely straight for EXACTLY 24 hours until the other Tablet was announced. And then it was all over.

No. Humans. Permitted. Ever. Again. Period.

Within 90 years of the UHJ’s implementation of the Tablet we were COMPLETELY GONE as a species.

Cats took over the planet as the highest life form. They really were from another Universe ALL ALONG (as many suspected) and were sent here as spies. The reports on us were not good. And we were terminated as a life form.

Craig that was really funny and I am going to drop the homosexual subject for now because it appears to be causing too much pain.

Hmmm…whats news…Israel and Iran may be going to war soon…ergo WWIII.

Could it happen? Nah…too political, Obama is a shoe in and he is going to cool things off, im sure.

In Persian “oo ba ma’eh” means “hes with us”

Craig that was really funny and I am going to drop the homosexual subject for now because it appears to be causing too much pain.

Hmmm…whats news…Israel and Iran may be going to war soon…ergo WWIII.

Could it happen? Nah…too political, Obama is a shoe in and he is going to cool things off, im sure.

In Persian “oo ba ma’eh” means “hes with us”

[quote comment=""]Craig that was really funny and I am going to drop the homosexual subject for now because it appears to be causing too much pain.
[/quote]

Anon,

Thanks.

Actually I toyed with this idea for a movie script. That in the future the entire human race decided to end it. That no one would have a child as a supreme spiritual act to the Universe to end the catastrophe of the human race. Perhaps some future religion taught this as the new Divine Morality and achieved a huge worldwide following. That it was time to voluntarily PULL THE PLUG on a species that did so much damage to the Universe and to themselves.

I wonder what would happen? I wonder if the entire world would do it? It would be a good study. Perhaps a novel world be better as a vehicle for such a tale? Perhaps a family of time travelers came back to our time so they could have a child? Perhaps that is what would happen. That the human race could not go forward in time as a supreme spiritual act of penance to the Universe. But it caused people to colonize previous time so they could have a child? Hummm. I wonder what people would do? Maybe I can sell one of my movie scripts and start hanging out with a better class of people? Maybe that would cheer me up?

[quote comment=""]Craig that was really funny and I am going to drop the homosexual subject for now because it appears to be causing too much pain.
[/quote]

Anon,

Thanks.

Actually I toyed with this idea for a movie script. That in the future the entire human race decided to end it. That no one would have a child as a supreme spiritual act to the Universe to end the catastrophe of the human race. Perhaps some future religion taught this as the new Divine Morality and achieved a huge worldwide following. That it was time to voluntarily PULL THE PLUG on a species that did so much damage to the Universe and to themselves.

I wonder what would happen? I wonder if the entire world would do it? It would be a good study. Perhaps a novel world be better as a vehicle for such a tale? Perhaps a family of time travelers came back to our time so they could have a child? Perhaps that is what would happen. That the human race could not go forward in time as a supreme spiritual act of penance to the Universe. But it caused people to colonize previous time so they could have a child? Hummm. I wonder what people would do? Maybe I can sell one of my movie scripts and start hanging out with a better class of people? Maybe that would cheer me up?

I think Einstien said time travel was impossible, so I like to imagine more plausible things in the future like planet colonization and more space exploration. Mars is completely doable.

Back on earth I am trying to go organic with compost and riding my bike to work. Ever heard of the caveman diet?

I think Einstien said time travel was impossible, so I like to imagine more plausible things in the future like planet colonization and more space exploration. Mars is completely doable.

Back on earth I am trying to go organic with compost and riding my bike to work. Ever heard of the caveman diet?

[quote comment=""]I think Einstien said time travel was impossible, so I like to imagine more plausible things in the future like planet colonization and more space exploration. Mars is completely doable.
[/quote]

Einstein is so, well, 1955. He didn’t accept Quantum Mechanics either. Sorry. It explains alot.

I like this site:
http://everythingforever.com/st_order.htm

BTW, have you ever heard of Ong’s Hat?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ong's_Hat

One of the great mysterious myths of the Internet about a whole town in New Jersey or something that time travelled to another dimension back in the 1940′s or 1950′s. I think time travelling out of New Jersey is a damn good idea. As long as you can take your Springsteen and Jon Bon Jovi albums and Joe Piscopo footage doing Frank on SNL.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=k99h5aikc4g&feature=related

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BDBUJB7j9-c

http://youtube.com/watch?v=EVBCYZgvfnQ

[quote comment=""]I think Einstien said time travel was impossible, so I like to imagine more plausible things in the future like planet colonization and more space exploration. Mars is completely doable.
[/quote]

Einstein is so, well, 1955. He didn’t accept Quantum Mechanics either. Sorry. It explains alot.

I like this site:
http://everythingforever.com/st_order.htm

BTW, have you ever heard of Ong’s Hat?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ong's_Hat

One of the great mysterious myths of the Internet about a whole town in New Jersey or something that time travelled to another dimension back in the 1940′s or 1950′s. I think time travelling out of New Jersey is a damn good idea. As long as you can take your Springsteen and Jon Bon Jovi albums and Joe Piscopo footage doing Frank on SNL.

http://youtube.com/watch?v=k99h5aikc4g&feature=related

http://youtube.com/watch?v=BDBUJB7j9-c

http://youtube.com/watch?v=EVBCYZgvfnQ

Anon wrote:

[quote post="193"]You can’t deny that there is a physiological foundation for homosexuality. The science is showing that. In my view this is a big leap forward in understanding the dynamic and root of it.[/quote]

A couple of points:

1) We have to be careful here about what we are seeing in those results presented in Baquia’s article. Is it the cause of homosexuality or the effect of homosexuality? Is a person’s brain chemistry and activity predetermined at conception or is it a product of its environment? What if they were to scan the brains of heavily masculinised but heterosexual women, or feminized but heterosexual men?

2) Tampering with fetuses to repair “mistakes” or “disorders” is an ethical minefield. How do we know that it isn’t what God or nature intended?

Firstly you’d have to be able to identify which fetuses were prone to developing homosexuality, which would mean identifying some kind of definitive genetic marker, which they haven’t got yet because homosexuality isn’t just genetic in origin, its a combination of factors including environment, personality, and random chance. If it was genetic, then you could test the genetics of the parents sperm and ova to test what combinations would produce a homosexual person.

Supposing you could identify the gene or genes that contribute to homosexuality it could not be easily changed because current techniques in genetics are not precise enough to safely modify genes in cells without killing some of the cells, because sometimes essential DNA is broken, making the cells non-viable.

To modify the DNA of a fetus would require a viral treatment that would target either all the cells, or specifically cells in the brain, a very difficult or impossible task.

Are you prepared for the possibility of killing a potential human being, a living functioning organism with a soul attached (according to the Writings), to “fix” what nature might have intended? Pro-life movements would stand against that.

Supposing it is possible, where will the tampering stop? Will we end up having designer babies to “fix” everything from short people, fat people, weak people, and aggressive people?

Anon wrote:

[quote post="193"]You can’t deny that there is a physiological foundation for homosexuality. The science is showing that. In my view this is a big leap forward in understanding the dynamic and root of it.[/quote]

A couple of points:

1) We have to be careful here about what we are seeing in those results presented in Baquia’s article. Is it the cause of homosexuality or the effect of homosexuality? Is a person’s brain chemistry and activity predetermined at conception or is it a product of its environment? What if they were to scan the brains of heavily masculinised but heterosexual women, or feminized but heterosexual men?

2) Tampering with fetuses to repair “mistakes” or “disorders” is an ethical minefield. How do we know that it isn’t what God or nature intended?

Firstly you’d have to be able to identify which fetuses were prone to developing homosexuality, which would mean identifying some kind of definitive genetic marker, which they haven’t got yet because homosexuality isn’t just genetic in origin, its a combination of factors including environment, personality, and random chance. If it was genetic, then you could test the genetics of the parents sperm and ova to test what combinations would produce a homosexual person.

Supposing you could identify the gene or genes that contribute to homosexuality it could not be easily changed because current techniques in genetics are not precise enough to safely modify genes in cells without killing some of the cells, because sometimes essential DNA is broken, making the cells non-viable.

To modify the DNA of a fetus would require a viral treatment that would target either all the cells, or specifically cells in the brain, a very difficult or impossible task.

Are you prepared for the possibility of killing a potential human being, a living functioning organism with a soul attached (according to the Writings), to “fix” what nature might have intended? Pro-life movements would stand against that.

Supposing it is possible, where will the tampering stop? Will we end up having designer babies to “fix” everything from short people, fat people, weak people, and aggressive people?

Hi grover,

I read your points and you raise some issues. Frankly im not qualified to talk about it and when I try to, I only end up offending people so I have chosen to drop it in good faith.

I hope you understand.

Hi grover,

I read your points and you raise some issues. Frankly im not qualified to talk about it and when I try to, I only end up offending people so I have chosen to drop it in good faith.

I hope you understand.

Anonymouz, although I found your categories of sexually offensive, that doens’t mean you should stop expressing your views. Afterall, in hearing them then it is possible to confront or respond to them, but of course, I not saying you have to continue either.

[quote comment=""]your left hand analogy was not really applicable given there is no natural disadvantage to it.[/quote]

It was a great {{natural}} disadvantage for my first two years of school. I was not allowed to write with my left-hand.

Imagine the psychological damage – luckily I’m stubborn and having 2 years of struggling with my right hand and not getting anywhere hasn’t been really been damaging but to a more sensitive soul it might have damaged their ability to write for life.

Now imagine a similiar situation for a decade or more, when it comes to developing an adult loving relationship, or even friendship, for friendship usually comes before love.

I can understand your dismissing my left-handed story because around you, you see left-handed people and you only see the physical restrictions as minor things. Although, I do think not being allowing to write is a major thing. The real damage done to me as kid, was pyschological.
Even though, I did catch up in writing with the kids in my class, I always knew I had the “devils” hand, was wrong in some way. Did the kids pick on me because I was left-handed or for some other reason. I’ll never know. But I was the kid in the primary school that was the outcast (I’ll stop that story there:).

You might consider this irrelevant but I assure you, it was a pain and suffering that could have been avoided if people’s ideas about what is normal nature had not been so persistent.

Now although I’m talking about some kid who did manage to overcome a lot of stuff by the age of about 13 or so. However, my understanding that all that stuff about left-handed being wrong was nonsense, was because the society around me had this view. So ‘outing’ as a lefty at high school, was such a non-issue that it became a sign of distinctiveness -of diversity.
How would I feel if as a teenager I had to continue to hide my ‘deviant’ nature. (here I”m being ironic, my argument is that no nature is deviant – we are all flowers of the same garden). Or as an adult in my Bahai commmunity? Because somehow my identity as a left-handed would be associated with ideas of immorality, or worse people would be wondering if as a left-handed would I being having sex or not. Insulting and irrelevant you would say. Yes I would agree.

My argument is not really about finding ways of fitting into a right-handed world, but about being allowed to be left-handed in the world of culture so that society can benefit from the other perspectives of life I may have as a result of this.

The Bahai community, in general (I add this because I know there are some Bahais who are not persecuted for being openly married and gay) is missing out on the wonderful perspectives and strengths of gays on equal terms with heterosexuals. I’d take it a step further, given such a loving environment, Bahai communities could show the world that sexuality is really as much of a non-issue as being left-handed is with our beautifully diverse communities.

I can imagine that in say 100 years from now, some Bahai might say, ‘well, the homosexuality analogy was not really applicable given there is no natural disadvantage to it.’

Anonymouz, although I found your categories of sexually offensive, that doens’t mean you should stop expressing your views. Afterall, in hearing them then it is possible to confront or respond to them, but of course, I not saying you have to continue either.

[quote comment=""]your left hand analogy was not really applicable given there is no natural disadvantage to it.[/quote]

It was a great {{natural}} disadvantage for my first two years of school. I was not allowed to write with my left-hand.

Imagine the psychological damage – luckily I’m stubborn and having 2 years of struggling with my right hand and not getting anywhere hasn’t been really been damaging but to a more sensitive soul it might have damaged their ability to write for life.

Now imagine a similiar situation for a decade or more, when it comes to developing an adult loving relationship, or even friendship, for friendship usually comes before love.

I can understand your dismissing my left-handed story because around you, you see left-handed people and you only see the physical restrictions as minor things. Although, I do think not being allowing to write is a major thing. The real damage done to me as kid, was pyschological.
Even though, I did catch up in writing with the kids in my class, I always knew I had the “devils” hand, was wrong in some way. Did the kids pick on me because I was left-handed or for some other reason. I’ll never know. But I was the kid in the primary school that was the outcast (I’ll stop that story there:).

You might consider this irrelevant but I assure you, it was a pain and suffering that could have been avoided if people’s ideas about what is normal nature had not been so persistent.

Now although I’m talking about some kid who did manage to overcome a lot of stuff by the age of about 13 or so. However, my understanding that all that stuff about left-handed being wrong was nonsense, was because the society around me had this view. So ‘outing’ as a lefty at high school, was such a non-issue that it became a sign of distinctiveness -of diversity.
How would I feel if as a teenager I had to continue to hide my ‘deviant’ nature. (here I”m being ironic, my argument is that no nature is deviant – we are all flowers of the same garden). Or as an adult in my Bahai commmunity? Because somehow my identity as a left-handed would be associated with ideas of immorality, or worse people would be wondering if as a left-handed would I being having sex or not. Insulting and irrelevant you would say. Yes I would agree.

My argument is not really about finding ways of fitting into a right-handed world, but about being allowed to be left-handed in the world of culture so that society can benefit from the other perspectives of life I may have as a result of this.

The Bahai community, in general (I add this because I know there are some Bahais who are not persecuted for being openly married and gay) is missing out on the wonderful perspectives and strengths of gays on equal terms with heterosexuals. I’d take it a step further, given such a loving environment, Bahai communities could show the world that sexuality is really as much of a non-issue as being left-handed is with our beautifully diverse communities.

I can imagine that in say 100 years from now, some Bahai might say, ‘well, the homosexuality analogy was not really applicable given there is no natural disadvantage to it.’

Sonja,

Thank you for your response and I sympathise with your experience. Although I can’t speak as a lefty or a homosexual, I can speak as someone who has experienced discrimination based on nationality or religion (some pockets of the US are simply backward).

I am still having trouble obtaining the scientific and evolutionary evidence necessary for me to understand how homosexuality is not natural. The act of sodomy as no biological function. On the other hand, I recognize and realize the love that exists between individuals, mm ff or mf. But, when it takes a sexual form outside of marriage between a man and a women, or any other combination per Abdul’Baha, it is displeasing to God. This is the purest form of my reasoning and it would be as well the culmination of pages and pages of proofs, citations reasoning and logic–both spiritual and scientific. Some people call this discriminatory or prejudicial, but I am not making the rules.

Here is a little FYI

If it were up to me, I could care less. But, since as Baha’is we are called upon to deny the physical and ephemeral and embrace the spiritual and follow the directions given in the text pertaining to the way we live and conduct our marital and administrative affairs, this position will not change–if it does its breaking away from what Baha’u'llah said.

It is rather jarring being so cut and dry and of course people do not accept it this way–that is between them and God–not me–I am a friend to all–gay and strait alike.

Sonja,

Thank you for your response and I sympathise with your experience. Although I can’t speak as a lefty or a homosexual, I can speak as someone who has experienced discrimination based on nationality or religion (some pockets of the US are simply backward).

I am still having trouble obtaining the scientific and evolutionary evidence necessary for me to understand how homosexuality is not natural. The act of sodomy as no biological function. On the other hand, I recognize and realize the love that exists between individuals, mm ff or mf. But, when it takes a sexual form outside of marriage between a man and a women, or any other combination per Abdul’Baha, it is displeasing to God. This is the purest form of my reasoning and it would be as well the culmination of pages and pages of proofs, citations reasoning and logic–both spiritual and scientific. Some people call this discriminatory or prejudicial, but I am not making the rules.

Here is a little FYI

If it were up to me, I could care less. But, since as Baha’is we are called upon to deny the physical and ephemeral and embrace the spiritual and follow the directions given in the text pertaining to the way we live and conduct our marital and administrative affairs, this position will not change–if it does its breaking away from what Baha’u'llah said.

It is rather jarring being so cut and dry and of course people do not accept it this way–that is between them and God–not me–I am a friend to all–gay and strait alike.

Ok Anon you win. So change me. How do you propose that I change? Are the Bahais going to start a group like Exodus to help train Bahai youth to become heteros? What? You can’t just throw a black/white opinion out and offer no solution. The UHJ in a letter states that “The statistics which indicate that homosexuality is incurable are undoubtedly distorted by the fact that many of those who overcome the problem never speak about it in public, and others solve their problems without even consulting professional counselors…”
So you would think if there were sooo many Bahais who have succesfully overcome this disability, then they would spearhead a group to help those of us who haven’t. There are Bahai groups to help with alcoholism, sex addiction, drug use, you name- so where is one that will give a step by step plan to show LGBT gays how to overcome? I’m waiting, so please find the answer as soon ASAP, because according to you I am in direct oppostion to Bahaullah. I need help!

Ok Anon you win. So change me. How do you propose that I change? Are the Bahais going to start a group like Exodus to help train Bahai youth to become heteros? What? You can’t just throw a black/white opinion out and offer no solution. The UHJ in a letter states that “The statistics which indicate that homosexuality is incurable are undoubtedly distorted by the fact that many of those who overcome the problem never speak about it in public, and others solve their problems without even consulting professional counselors…”
So you would think if there were sooo many Bahais who have succesfully overcome this disability, then they would spearhead a group to help those of us who haven’t. There are Bahai groups to help with alcoholism, sex addiction, drug use, you name- so where is one that will give a step by step plan to show LGBT gays how to overcome? I’m waiting, so please find the answer as soon ASAP, because according to you I am in direct oppostion to Bahaullah. I need help!

I am still having trouble obtaining the scientific and evolutionary evidence …
————-
Here Anon, start with this book. I haven’t read it yet, but I’ve heard it pretty fascinating in explaining the myths in regard to homosexuality being a human phenomenon:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=031225377X/scottbidstrupshoA/
It exists in nature with no detriment to the survival of the species.

I am still having trouble obtaining the scientific and evolutionary evidence …
————-
Here Anon, start with this book. I haven’t read it yet, but I’ve heard it pretty fascinating in explaining the myths in regard to homosexuality being a human phenomenon:
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ISBN=031225377X/scottbidstrupshoA/
It exists in nature with no detriment to the survival of the species.

[quote comment=""]Ok Anon you win. So change me. How do you propose that I change? Are the Bahais going to start a group like Exodus to help train Bahai youth to become heteros? What? You can’t just throw a black/white opinion out and offer no solution. The UHJ in a letter states that “The statistics which indicate that homosexuality is incurable are undoubtedly distorted by the fact that many of those who overcome the problem never speak about it in public, and others solve their problems without even consulting professional counselors…”
So you would think if there were sooo many Bahais who have succesfully overcome this disability, then they would spearhead a group to help those of us who haven’t. There are Bahai groups to help with alcoholism, sex addiction, drug use, you name- so where is one that will give a step by step plan to show LGBT gays how to overcome? I’m waiting, so please find the answer as soon ASAP, because according to you I am in direct oppostion to Bahaullah. I need help![/quote]

Dear P,

Im not sure how to answer this because I know you are being sarcastic. But, some people who may be reading may truly want to know so here goes…I think this all comes down to how the individuals feels and how willing they are to take the directions clearly laid out in the text. Baha’u'llah will always love you, but how eager are you to please him? Only you know this.

Secondly, I think those statistics the UHJ sites are from broader samples, not necessarily Baha’i populations. Perhaps it would be a good idea to start a group of people spiritually willing.

As I said, I do not think the consequences of homosexuality are particularly harmful–as opposed to backbiting or covenant breaking. You are responsible to no one except God, and He never turns away those who pursue Him.

[quote comment=""]Ok Anon you win. So change me. How do you propose that I change? Are the Bahais going to start a group like Exodus to help train Bahai youth to become heteros? What? You can’t just throw a black/white opinion out and offer no solution. The UHJ in a letter states that “The statistics which indicate that homosexuality is incurable are undoubtedly distorted by the fact that many of those who overcome the problem never speak about it in public, and others solve their problems without even consulting professional counselors…”
So you would think if there were sooo many Bahais who have succesfully overcome this disability, then they would spearhead a group to help those of us who haven’t. There are Bahai groups to help with alcoholism, sex addiction, drug use, you name- so where is one that will give a step by step plan to show LGBT gays how to overcome? I’m waiting, so please find the answer as soon ASAP, because according to you I am in direct oppostion to Bahaullah. I need help![/quote]

Dear P,

Im not sure how to answer this because I know you are being sarcastic. But, some people who may be reading may truly want to know so here goes…I think this all comes down to how the individuals feels and how willing they are to take the directions clearly laid out in the text. Baha’u'llah will always love you, but how eager are you to please him? Only you know this.

Secondly, I think those statistics the UHJ sites are from broader samples, not necessarily Baha’i populations. Perhaps it would be a good idea to start a group of people spiritually willing.

As I said, I do not think the consequences of homosexuality are particularly harmful–as opposed to backbiting or covenant breaking. You are responsible to no one except God, and He never turns away those who pursue Him.

No anon. You can’t get out of it that easily. You are right, I am being sarcastic. But one day your own son may come to you with this “disability”, what will you tell him? You will look in his eyes and honestly tell him that ‘Bahaullah loves you, BUT you are not pleasing Him” and send him off to do what?
Hopefully by that day, if it occurss, the Bahai Faith will be more like what Sonja hopes to see and less of what you propose as the truth.

No anon. You can’t get out of it that easily. You are right, I am being sarcastic. But one day your own son may come to you with this “disability”, what will you tell him? You will look in his eyes and honestly tell him that ‘Bahaullah loves you, BUT you are not pleasing Him” and send him off to do what?
Hopefully by that day, if it occurss, the Bahai Faith will be more like what Sonja hopes to see and less of what you propose as the truth.

[quote comment=""]No anon. You can’t get out of it that easily. You are right, I am being sarcastic. But one day your own son may come to you with this “disability”, what will you tell him? You will look in his eyes and honestly tell him that ‘Bahaullah loves you, BUT you are not pleasing Him” and send him off to do what?
Hopefully by that day, if it occurss, the Bahai Faith will be more like what Sonja hopes to see and less of what you propose as the truth.[/quote]

P,

I am married and I do have a son and the thought had crossed my mind. I was confused at a young age myself and I even thought I was gay. But then later that day I figured out that no, i wasn’t attracted to the same sex, I just wasn’t attracted to sex period. I have always been kind of a dreamer…thinking about different levels of heaven and so forth. May not seem like it I know, but to dwell on this particular point is especially constraining because as souls, so much more defines us. Sexuality in general is a blip on the scale of experience between worlds.

[quote comment=""]No anon. You can’t get out of it that easily. You are right, I am being sarcastic. But one day your own son may come to you with this “disability”, what will you tell him? You will look in his eyes and honestly tell him that ‘Bahaullah loves you, BUT you are not pleasing Him” and send him off to do what?
Hopefully by that day, if it occurss, the Bahai Faith will be more like what Sonja hopes to see and less of what you propose as the truth.[/quote]

P,

I am married and I do have a son and the thought had crossed my mind. I was confused at a young age myself and I even thought I was gay. But then later that day I figured out that no, i wasn’t attracted to the same sex, I just wasn’t attracted to sex period. I have always been kind of a dreamer…thinking about different levels of heaven and so forth. May not seem like it I know, but to dwell on this particular point is especially constraining because as souls, so much more defines us. Sexuality in general is a blip on the scale of experience between worlds.

I agree Anon. SO it’s unfortunate that religious conservatives are so adamant about their black/white understanding of sexuality and not in the least bit open to the possibility of changes in the future. Sexuality really should not be something to dwell on, but unfortunately when I hear of Bahais who suffer in bad marriages until they finally wake up and leave, or that lonely youth that kills him/herself and everyone is hush hush about why, etc. etc.- those are the things that make dwell on it. Btw, I know you aren’t trying to sound condescending, BUT your line “Baha’u’llah will always love you, but how eager are you to please him?” is full of it. How many times have you heard a Christian look at you with pitiful eyes and say “Jesus loves, but…” because you are a Bahai. How does that make you feel? That’s how you made me feel.

I agree Anon. SO it’s unfortunate that religious conservatives are so adamant about their black/white understanding of sexuality and not in the least bit open to the possibility of changes in the future. Sexuality really should not be something to dwell on, but unfortunately when I hear of Bahais who suffer in bad marriages until they finally wake up and leave, or that lonely youth that kills him/herself and everyone is hush hush about why, etc. etc.- those are the things that make dwell on it. Btw, I know you aren’t trying to sound condescending, BUT your line “Baha’u’llah will always love you, but how eager are you to please him?” is full of it. How many times have you heard a Christian look at you with pitiful eyes and say “Jesus loves, but…” because you are a Bahai. How does that make you feel? That’s how you made me feel.

[quote comment="53811"]

Anon wrote:

P,

I am married and I do have a son and the thought had crossed my mind. I was confused at a young age myself and I even thought I was gay. But then later that day I figured out that no, i wasn’t attracted to the same sex, I just wasn’t attracted to sex period. I have always been kind of a dreamer…thinking about different levels of heaven and so forth. May not seem like it I know, but to dwell on this particular point is especially constraining because as souls, so much more defines us. Sexuality in general is a blip on the scale of experience between worlds.[/quote]

Anon,

As you can tell I have toned down. My last post about New Jersey was, of course, a joke. I’m going back to playing my electric guitar as my therapy after four years of ranting in cyber space. My neighbors may start to hate me depending on their taste in obscure blues artists. Only time will tell. But, then again, I might just stay acoustic. Right now I’m working on John Mayer’s version of “Free Falling”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFOCvuii96w

But then again, maybe I will go with an electric version from my front porch and get arrested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkIyYH7IVvo

I feel the fate of the BAO is sealed for whatever reason evolutionary biology has in mind. I don’t think SE not appointing a Living Guardian like he was both commanded and required to do can ever be overcome. I have tried and tried to find a way for it to work. The only thing that could save his bacon is if the voices of 7 billion people on the Internet itself becomes the Living Guardian of the Faith over the next 850 years. The technology could make this possible. Absolutely no one on Earth would ever “officially” join the Baha’i Faith, but everyone would live out the highest ideals of the World Age channeled into this plane of consciousness by Baha’u'llah. So I think I will just try to find simple common ground with people.

P’s point about your son has also crossed my mind about your support for Glenford Mitchell’s attitude toward the sacrifice of American soldiers slain in battle and the monstrous psychological indifference of the Administrative Order of the Baha’i Faith to the entire history of the 20th Century. The only time this very strange disconnected attitude seemed to have been broken was in the great passion in the streets in the 1960′s and 1970′s which seemed to have even affected for a very, very brief time the very BAO! But, alas, control was eventually gained again by the forces of self identity for some people through lifetime incumbency in the system.

I work with a guy who I have known since he was a single young man of 21 back in 1995. I love this guy very much as a fellow software engineer/programmer who is a professional joy to work with even though he is as rabid right wing as anyone could ever get! He is all for the use of American military power at the drop of a hat even though he, himself, has never served in the Armed Forces of the United States. It is now 13 years later and he is 34 years old and is married with 5 beautiful little boys! They are all about a year apart in age. So it crosses my mind when he is strident in his views. Silent tears well up in my eyes on the inside. Because he does now know. He does not know the terrible, terrible price of war. Yes, as EP said, I know that sometimes was is necessary. But it is never to be taken lightly. And people do take it lightly now
because there is no draft and they, themselves, do not have to serve. But the price of war is eventually one’s own sons. People should be very careful for what they wish for. Divine Judgment is always at the doors. What goes around, comes around. People these days do not seem to have this level of Cosmic insight. Didn’t someone once say “The Universe is perfect justice did ye but know?”

I think Jesus said it best when He said “Judge not lest ye be judged, by the same measure ye judge others, so shall ye be judged.”

Walking in someone else’s shoes may be what the next world is all about 24/7.

Just a thought.

Everyone have a nice weekend! Life is good! The Pittsburgh Pirates beat the NEW YORK YANKEES last night in a cross league game in a 7th inning 2 run homer here in my beloved city where Martha Root started out. Many people from where I work were at the game and had a great time with their families!

[quote comment="53811"]

Anon wrote:

P,

I am married and I do have a son and the thought had crossed my mind. I was confused at a young age myself and I even thought I was gay. But then later that day I figured out that no, i wasn’t attracted to the same sex, I just wasn’t attracted to sex period. I have always been kind of a dreamer…thinking about different levels of heaven and so forth. May not seem like it I know, but to dwell on this particular point is especially constraining because as souls, so much more defines us. Sexuality in general is a blip on the scale of experience between worlds.[/quote]

Anon,

As you can tell I have toned down. My last post about New Jersey was, of course, a joke. I’m going back to playing my electric guitar as my therapy after four years of ranting in cyber space. My neighbors may start to hate me depending on their taste in obscure blues artists. Only time will tell. But, then again, I might just stay acoustic. Right now I’m working on John Mayer’s version of “Free Falling”.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zFOCvuii96w

But then again, maybe I will go with an electric version from my front porch and get arrested.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BkIyYH7IVvo

I feel the fate of the BAO is sealed for whatever reason evolutionary biology has in mind. I don’t think SE not appointing a Living Guardian like he was both commanded and required to do can ever be overcome. I have tried and tried to find a way for it to work. The only thing that could save his bacon is if the voices of 7 billion people on the Internet itself becomes the Living Guardian of the Faith over the next 850 years. The technology could make this possible. Absolutely no one on Earth would ever “officially” join the Baha’i Faith, but everyone would live out the highest ideals of the World Age channeled into this plane of consciousness by Baha’u'llah. So I think I will just try to find simple common ground with people.

P’s point about your son has also crossed my mind about your support for Glenford Mitchell’s attitude toward the sacrifice of American soldiers slain in battle and the monstrous psychological indifference of the Administrative Order of the Baha’i Faith to the entire history of the 20th Century. The only time this very strange disconnected attitude seemed to have been broken was in the great passion in the streets in the 1960′s and 1970′s which seemed to have even affected for a very, very brief time the very BAO! But, alas, control was eventually gained again by the forces of self identity for some people through lifetime incumbency in the system.

I work with a guy who I have known since he was a single young man of 21 back in 1995. I love this guy very much as a fellow software engineer/programmer who is a professional joy to work with even though he is as rabid right wing as anyone could ever get! He is all for the use of American military power at the drop of a hat even though he, himself, has never served in the Armed Forces of the United States. It is now 13 years later and he is 34 years old and is married with 5 beautiful little boys! They are all about a year apart in age. So it crosses my mind when he is strident in his views. Silent tears well up in my eyes on the inside. Because he does now know. He does not know the terrible, terrible price of war. Yes, as EP said, I know that sometimes was is necessary. But it is never to be taken lightly. And people do take it lightly now
because there is no draft and they, themselves, do not have to serve. But the price of war is eventually one’s own sons. People should be very careful for what they wish for. Divine Judgment is always at the doors. What goes around, comes around. People these days do not seem to have this level of Cosmic insight. Didn’t someone once say “The Universe is perfect justice did ye but know?”

I think Jesus said it best when He said “Judge not lest ye be judged, by the same measure ye judge others, so shall ye be judged.”

Walking in someone else’s shoes may be what the next world is all about 24/7.

Just a thought.

Everyone have a nice weekend! Life is good! The Pittsburgh Pirates beat the NEW YORK YANKEES last night in a cross league game in a 7th inning 2 run homer here in my beloved city where Martha Root started out. Many people from where I work were at the game and had a great time with their families!

[quote comment=""]I agree Anon. SO it’s unfortunate that religious conservatives are so adamant about their black/white understanding of sexuality and not in the least bit open to the possibility of changes in the future. Sexuality really should not be something to dwell on, but unfortunately when I hear of Bahais who suffer in bad marriages until they finally wake up and leave, or that lonely youth that kills him/herself and everyone is hush hush about why, etc. etc.- those are the things that make dwell on it. Btw, I know you aren’t trying to sound condescending, BUT your line “Baha’u’llah will always love you, but how eager are you to please him?” is full of it. How many times have you heard a Christian look at you with pitiful eyes and say “Jesus loves, but…” because you are a Bahai. How does that make you feel? That’s how you made me feel.[/quote]

religious conservatism is something that applies maybe to all other religions…except the Baha’i faith. It strikes a perfect balance. global and ideal in its principles, strict and rigorous in its laws. This ensures moderation, guidance and obedience to the laws of God which are clear as day in the Aqdas. If you think about it, the authority of the Faith has always been in step with its application…From Baha’u'llah to the UHJ.

There is no precedent where a law has been superseded or ignored for convenience sake or to accommodate a certain segment of the community. Some laws have not been applied due to cultural or timing factors. For example, for a time in Iran there were distinct communities of Muslim Baha’is, Jewish Baha’is, Christian Baha’is, Zoroastrian Baha’is, who, due to their previous customs, met separately. This was eventually phased out and the Baha’is were integrated.

All the guidance and text is clear. its up to the individual and their conscious to accept them or not. if you don’t, that is your decision–but if you try to change them, and say to everyone that they should be changed, not only are you advocating God bend to your will as opposed you bend to His, but you are also creating disunity–opposed to the central principle of the Baha’i Faith, unity. This is where one begins to run in circles. Taking away your administrative rights is it. Its between you and God. The difference is, these laws are spiritual in nature and there is no way to enforce it, nor anyway to change it. Of course you can say that it should be this way or that way, but then you have taken it to say you speak on behalf of God. That is also in the Aqdas–”lying impostor” is the words I believe.

[quote comment=""]I agree Anon. SO it’s unfortunate that religious conservatives are so adamant about their black/white understanding of sexuality and not in the least bit open to the possibility of changes in the future. Sexuality really should not be something to dwell on, but unfortunately when I hear of Bahais who suffer in bad marriages until they finally wake up and leave, or that lonely youth that kills him/herself and everyone is hush hush about why, etc. etc.- those are the things that make dwell on it. Btw, I know you aren’t trying to sound condescending, BUT your line “Baha’u’llah will always love you, but how eager are you to please him?” is full of it. How many times have you heard a Christian look at you with pitiful eyes and say “Jesus loves, but…” because you are a Bahai. How does that make you feel? That’s how you made me feel.[/quote]

religious conservatism is something that applies maybe to all other religions…except the Baha’i faith. It strikes a perfect balance. global and ideal in its principles, strict and rigorous in its laws. This ensures moderation, guidance and obedience to the laws of God which are clear as day in the Aqdas. If you think about it, the authority of the Faith has always been in step with its application…From Baha’u'llah to the UHJ.

There is no precedent where a law has been superseded or ignored for convenience sake or to accommodate a certain segment of the community. Some laws have not been applied due to cultural or timing factors. For example, for a time in Iran there were distinct communities of Muslim Baha’is, Jewish Baha’is, Christian Baha’is, Zoroastrian Baha’is, who, due to their previous customs, met separately. This was eventually phased out and the Baha’is were integrated.

All the guidance and text is clear. its up to the individual and their conscious to accept them or not. if you don’t, that is your decision–but if you try to change them, and say to everyone that they should be changed, not only are you advocating God bend to your will as opposed you bend to His, but you are also creating disunity–opposed to the central principle of the Baha’i Faith, unity. This is where one begins to run in circles. Taking away your administrative rights is it. Its between you and God. The difference is, these laws are spiritual in nature and there is no way to enforce it, nor anyway to change it. Of course you can say that it should be this way or that way, but then you have taken it to say you speak on behalf of God. That is also in the Aqdas–”lying impostor” is the words I believe.

Craig,

War is terrible. Make peace indeed.

All this talking has gotten me stressed out…I am going to go to the dentist then camping.

See you all later.

Get out and enjoy life P. Forget about me and my views…that is all they are…

Allah’u'Abha!

Craig,

War is terrible. Make peace indeed.

All this talking has gotten me stressed out…I am going to go to the dentist then camping.

See you all later.

Get out and enjoy life P. Forget about me and my views…that is all they are…

Allah’u'Abha!

[religious conservatism is something that applies maybe to all other religions…except the Baha’i faith.
------------
Not the Bahai Faith. I was speaking about Bahais; I wzs speaking about YOU. The rest of your post only confirms that. No more need to comment.

[religious conservatism is something that applies maybe to all other religions…except the Baha’i faith.
------------
Not the Bahai Faith. I was speaking about Bahais; I wzs speaking about YOU. The rest of your post only confirms that. No more need to comment.

make awkward adances towards women, not war

make awkward adances towards women, not war

A lesson to the Baha’is of the world:

THIS is what bottom up individual initiative can do, NOT top down micro managed paralyzing group think.

Get out of the endless Admin-O-Centric meetings, and start actually DOING something. Having taken all the Ruhi Coloring Books won’t help you on Judgment Day for your soul.

This man would have been hampered by all the time wasted in Baha’i Admin-O-Centric energy drains.

Deeds not words. Thinks like this is what the Baha’is were SUPPOSED to have been doing for over a hundred years now! Duh!

This is where my money is going now after 36 years.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/07/14/untouchable.models/index.html

http://www.sulabhinternational.org/

http://www.sulabhtoiletmuseum.org/profile.htm

Can someone build a time machine and go back and get Shoghi Effendi to initiate some kind of “sister city” program among the Baha’i communities of the world? Maybe this would really help in World War II? It would be really great to have that in place now. Again, duh!

Discuss amongst yourselves.

Thank you.

A lesson to the Baha’is of the world:

THIS is what bottom up individual initiative can do, NOT top down micro managed paralyzing group think.

Get out of the endless Admin-O-Centric meetings, and start actually DOING something. Having taken all the Ruhi Coloring Books won’t help you on Judgment Day for your soul.

This man would have been hampered by all the time wasted in Baha’i Admin-O-Centric energy drains.

Deeds not words. Thinks like this is what the Baha’is were SUPPOSED to have been doing for over a hundred years now! Duh!

This is where my money is going now after 36 years.

http://www.cnn.com/2008/WORLD/asiapcf/07/14/untouchable.models/index.html

http://www.sulabhinternational.org/

http://www.sulabhtoiletmuseum.org/profile.htm

Can someone build a time machine and go back and get Shoghi Effendi to initiate some kind of “sister city” program among the Baha’i communities of the world? Maybe this would really help in World War II? It would be really great to have that in place now. Again, duh!

Discuss amongst yourselves.

Thank you.

Hey, anyone see this on Baha’is Online:

http://bahaisonline.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1869&Itemid=1

by Juan Cole way back in 1979 about Baha’u'llah getting the history wrong regarding Pythagorus etc in the Tablet of Wisdom. Apparently Baha’u'llah copied writings of several Muslim scholars in certain places (without citing them) and they had their dates wrong compared to accepted history. Juan then goes into apologetic mode (which he probably doesn’t do anymore with regards to the Baha’i Faith) and explains the mistake away as being symbolically infallible.

The questions are:

1) was Baha’u'llah truly infallible?
2) if Baha’u'llah knew it all, what on earth was he doing copying writings from Muslim scholars, almost word for word?
3) what does it mean for the Baha’i Faith?

Hey, anyone see this on Baha’is Online:

http://bahaisonline.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1869&Itemid=1

by Juan Cole way back in 1979 about Baha’u'llah getting the history wrong regarding Pythagorus etc in the Tablet of Wisdom. Apparently Baha’u'llah copied writings of several Muslim scholars in certain places (without citing them) and they had their dates wrong compared to accepted history. Juan then goes into apologetic mode (which he probably doesn’t do anymore with regards to the Baha’i Faith) and explains the mistake away as being symbolically infallible.

The questions are:

1) was Baha’u'llah truly infallible?
2) if Baha’u'llah knew it all, what on earth was he doing copying writings from Muslim scholars, almost word for word?
3) what does it mean for the Baha’i Faith?

This is the kind of nit picking that prevents people from understanding anything, just more tail chasing questions. I really could care less about this, or for example the Bab’s Arabic grammar or Abdul’Baha getting lost while on a solo walk in the States. What about Shoghi Effendi’s minor citation inconsistencies? If you want to find faults you will no doubt.

I think that this type of stuff only entertains skeptics who define infallibility as some type of behavior or direction that is air-tight and accepted by all as correct or true in every angle or facet. I don’t think so. Infallibility is in my opinion more about faith and obeying.

But, some people do think this stuff is a big deal and they need some kind of reason. Question these things are helpful but only if they are done in a good spirit. I don’t know grover, why do you think there are these issues?

Craig, check out these projects in India…run by Baha’is.

http://monafoundation.org/barli/barli.htm
http://monafoundation.org/dsh/dsh.htm

This is the kind of nit picking that prevents people from understanding anything, just more tail chasing questions. I really could care less about this, or for example the Bab’s Arabic grammar or Abdul’Baha getting lost while on a solo walk in the States. What about Shoghi Effendi’s minor citation inconsistencies? If you want to find faults you will no doubt.

I think that this type of stuff only entertains skeptics who define infallibility as some type of behavior or direction that is air-tight and accepted by all as correct or true in every angle or facet. I don’t think so. Infallibility is in my opinion more about faith and obeying.

But, some people do think this stuff is a big deal and they need some kind of reason. Question these things are helpful but only if they are done in a good spirit. I don’t know grover, why do you think there are these issues?

Craig, check out these projects in India…run by Baha’is.

http://monafoundation.org/barli/barli.htm
http://monafoundation.org/dsh/dsh.htm

Well, if you think about it logically, it points to several problems with our understanding of who or what Baha’u'llah is. Questions like these can’t avoided by just calling it nit picking.

Well, if you think about it logically, it points to several problems with our understanding of who or what Baha’u'llah is. Questions like these can’t avoided by just calling it nit picking.

I suggest that if you see Baha’u'llah as a mere human person to be worshiped as an idol (the same old, same old) you will get just another barren top down stilted depth psychology “parental projection” religion. Just people trying to work out some deep seated issues from childhood with the new Super Mommy or Super Daddy psychology projected onto a person.

The real arch sign of this mentality in the Baha’i Faith, however, is when people can’t even handle that much more elegant idolatry, but instead, make Shoghi Effendi the Supreme Manifestation of God for this World Age. That is a much easier psychological path for the creation of Super Mommy or Super Daddy and seems to have been the core psychological pattern for most of the 20th Century just past.

And the people that cannot even handle that, have the new 21st Century one-stop-shopping psychology of making the AO ITSELF the projection of Uber Mommy or Uber Daddy.

If they can’t get that going, then THE PLAN itself is to be made into the instrument of worship and idolatry.

Fill out all the blanks in all the Ruhi Books and get a pat on the head and get those serotonin levels up without a prescription. It’s the same old, same old in human history, but it sells. Go door-to-door for the Faith with no real thought as to if you are really helping someone or just using them for the advancement of your own soul, and get a Golden Eagle Party Badge. Maybe someday, even a nice little uniform to match your nice little psychological uniform.

But if you see Baha’u'llah as a STATE OF CONSCIOUSNESS to encounter and study – a state of consciousness that is to merely open doors in your OWN state of consciousness in the Universe/Multiverse – then you get a completely DIFFERENT religion. You get liberation into the Archetypal Powers of the Universe. You get Cosmic understanding and insight and how to read the book of what comes to you each day in life.

But that takes developing individual spiritual insight that cannot be controlled by any external organization. It is when you see that the Kingdom of heaven is WITHIN YOU!

But if you can find spiritual liberation, THIS is how each day becomes:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=zlfKdbWwruY

You are FREE to find the dance of your own soul, and anyone who tries to control the dance of your own soul can just go to hell!

I suggest that if you see Baha’u'llah as a mere human person to be worshiped as an idol (the same old, same old) you will get just another barren top down stilted depth psychology “parental projection” religion. Just people trying to work out some deep seated issues from childhood with the new Super Mommy or Super Daddy psychology projected onto a person.

The real arch sign of this mentality in the Baha’i Faith, however, is when people can’t even handle that much more elegant idolatry, but instead, make Shoghi Effendi the Supreme Manifestation of God for this World Age. That is a much easier psychological path for the creation of Super Mommy or Super Daddy and seems to have been the core psychological pattern for most of the 20th Century just past.

And the people that cannot even handle that, have the new 21st Century one-stop-shopping psychology of making the AO ITSELF the projection of Uber Mommy or Uber Daddy.

If they can’t get that going, then THE PLAN itself is to be made into the instrument of worship and idolatry.

Fill out all the blanks in all the Ruhi Books and get a pat on the head and get those serotonin levels up without a prescription. It’s the same old, same old in human history, but it sells. Go door-to-door for the Faith with no real thought as to if you are really helping someone or just using them for the advancement of your own soul, and get a Golden Eagle Party Badge. Maybe someday, even a nice little uniform to match your nice little psychological uniform.

But if you see Baha’u'llah as a STATE OF CONSCIOUSNESS to encounter and study – a state of consciousness that is to merely open doors in your OWN state of consciousness in the Universe/Multiverse – then you get a completely DIFFERENT religion. You get liberation into the Archetypal Powers of the Universe. You get Cosmic understanding and insight and how to read the book of what comes to you each day in life.

But that takes developing individual spiritual insight that cannot be controlled by any external organization. It is when you see that the Kingdom of heaven is WITHIN YOU!

But if you can find spiritual liberation, THIS is how each day becomes:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=zlfKdbWwruY

You are FREE to find the dance of your own soul, and anyone who tries to control the dance of your own soul can just go to hell!

Call me old fashion but it doesn’t present any problem for me. Now, that is an interesting statement isn’t it? Two people whose opinions and perceptions are different on a given subject. Don’t get me wrong, I am not discounting Cole’s observations or findings. It could be factually accurate. But, what I think about when I read this is this: Does it change the content or overall message Baha’u'llah is sending?

These are passages from the same Tablet of Wisdom…

That which hath been in existence had existed before, but not in the form thou seest today. The world of existence came into being through the heat generated from the interaction between the active force and that which is its recipient. These two are the same, yet they are different. Thus doth the Great Announcement inform thee about this glorious structure.

See atomic physics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_physics

Pretty interesting for the time, wouldn’t you say and also rather unique in the writings.

Know thou, moreover, that the Word of God—exalted be His glory—is higher and far superior to that which the senses can perceive, for it is sanctified from any property or substance. It transcendeth the limitations of known elements and is exalted above all the essential and recognized substances. It became manifest without any syllable or sound and is none but the Command of God which pervadeth all created things. It hath never been withheld from the world of being. It is God’s all-pervasive grace, from which all grace doth emanate. It is an entity far removed above all that hath been and shall be.

This is also very interesting but not unique in the Writings. We are advised and encouraged to search for truth with our intellect and our minds. We are promised that a seeker (see Seven Valleys) will ultimately find his beloved if his search is taken under the right conditions. We are given an ocean of spiritual guidance and sustainance, volumes of weighty wisdom and moreover the freedom of soul and mind to use in the process. But what does it mean when he says that ultimately the Word of God is above any perception or any senses? What’s the point then? If you run with this–which I will not here–you will ultimately come full circle back to Faith.

Getting hung up on dates, dates which are not concrete in the first place, is pretty hindering if you ask me. This approach is counterproductive and only serves a tainted pursuit of “truth”.

I have a theory about truth. Ultimately, without writing 60 pages, I will say this: its relative and subjective, changes from person to person and is ultimately a poor tool to use when trying to convince someone of something. of course, before you gasp in horror, facts and scientific observation fall under a different but also related category. But truth, what the mind and perceptions and senses concludes on, is never the same with two people–it gets pretty close when you bring the soul into it, but if its the mind only–you have points of debate, contention, discord and disunity.

Anyway..I just got back from the gym and I am going to bed. Read you in the AM.

Call me old fashion but it doesn’t present any problem for me. Now, that is an interesting statement isn’t it? Two people whose opinions and perceptions are different on a given subject. Don’t get me wrong, I am not discounting Cole’s observations or findings. It could be factually accurate. But, what I think about when I read this is this: Does it change the content or overall message Baha’u'llah is sending?

These are passages from the same Tablet of Wisdom…

That which hath been in existence had existed before, but not in the form thou seest today. The world of existence came into being through the heat generated from the interaction between the active force and that which is its recipient. These two are the same, yet they are different. Thus doth the Great Announcement inform thee about this glorious structure.

See atomic physics
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atomic_physics

Pretty interesting for the time, wouldn’t you say and also rather unique in the writings.

Know thou, moreover, that the Word of God—exalted be His glory—is higher and far superior to that which the senses can perceive, for it is sanctified from any property or substance. It transcendeth the limitations of known elements and is exalted above all the essential and recognized substances. It became manifest without any syllable or sound and is none but the Command of God which pervadeth all created things. It hath never been withheld from the world of being. It is God’s all-pervasive grace, from which all grace doth emanate. It is an entity far removed above all that hath been and shall be.

This is also very interesting but not unique in the Writings. We are advised and encouraged to search for truth with our intellect and our minds. We are promised that a seeker (see Seven Valleys) will ultimately find his beloved if his search is taken under the right conditions. We are given an ocean of spiritual guidance and sustainance, volumes of weighty wisdom and moreover the freedom of soul and mind to use in the process. But what does it mean when he says that ultimately the Word of God is above any perception or any senses? What’s the point then? If you run with this–which I will not here–you will ultimately come full circle back to Faith.

Getting hung up on dates, dates which are not concrete in the first place, is pretty hindering if you ask me. This approach is counterproductive and only serves a tainted pursuit of “truth”.

I have a theory about truth. Ultimately, without writing 60 pages, I will say this: its relative and subjective, changes from person to person and is ultimately a poor tool to use when trying to convince someone of something. of course, before you gasp in horror, facts and scientific observation fall under a different but also related category. But truth, what the mind and perceptions and senses concludes on, is never the same with two people–it gets pretty close when you bring the soul into it, but if its the mind only–you have points of debate, contention, discord and disunity.

Anyway..I just got back from the gym and I am going to bed. Read you in the AM.

Craig wrote:

[quote post="193"]But if you see Baha’u’llah as a STATE OF CONSCIOUSNESS to encounter and study – a state of consciousness that is to merely open doors in your OWN state of consciousness in the Universe/Multiverse – then you get a completely DIFFERENT religion. You get liberation into the Archetypal Powers of the Universe. You get Cosmic understanding and insight and how to read the book of what comes to you each day in life.[/quote]

Thats pretty much how I approach things now, but I see Baha’u'llah as one of many “states of consciousness” that can be studied, although Buddhism is looking more attractive these days. Maybe its the grass is greener on the other side of the fence approach born of ignorance, but Buddhism does appear to have some interesting ideas that I’m keen to explore.

Anon wrote:

[quote post="193"]I have a theory about truth. Ultimately, without writing 60 pages, I will say this: its relative and subjective, changes from person to person and is ultimately a poor tool to use when trying to convince someone of something. of course, before you gasp in horror, facts and scientific observation fall under a different but also related category. But truth, what the mind and perceptions and senses concludes on, is never the same with two people[/quote]

Absolutely! But provided everyone realises that their understanding isn’t the be-all and end-all you can still have a juicy and amicable debate.

I would argue that there is “one truth”, but to have that truth requires infinite knowledge, so seeing as we only have a small amount of knowledge each, coloured by our upbringing, education, etc, each of us only sees a small facit of that “one truth”, hence as you say, it is relative and subjective. We can expand our understanding of that truth by incorporating as many world views and perspectives from other people, religions, etc, as possible, provided we’re ready to expand our perception from our own comfortable world view. This is probably why so much debate and contention occurs, because we so comfortable with our own world view that we’re not prepared to accept other possibilities until something occurs that shakes or shatters our original world view.

Craig wrote:

[quote post="193"]But if you see Baha’u’llah as a STATE OF CONSCIOUSNESS to encounter and study – a state of consciousness that is to merely open doors in your OWN state of consciousness in the Universe/Multiverse – then you get a completely DIFFERENT religion. You get liberation into the Archetypal Powers of the Universe. You get Cosmic understanding and insight and how to read the book of what comes to you each day in life.[/quote]

Thats pretty much how I approach things now, but I see Baha’u'llah as one of many “states of consciousness” that can be studied, although Buddhism is looking more attractive these days. Maybe its the grass is greener on the other side of the fence approach born of ignorance, but Buddhism does appear to have some interesting ideas that I’m keen to explore.

Anon wrote:

[quote post="193"]I have a theory about truth. Ultimately, without writing 60 pages, I will say this: its relative and subjective, changes from person to person and is ultimately a poor tool to use when trying to convince someone of something. of course, before you gasp in horror, facts and scientific observation fall under a different but also related category. But truth, what the mind and perceptions and senses concludes on, is never the same with two people[/quote]

Absolutely! But provided everyone realises that their understanding isn’t the be-all and end-all you can still have a juicy and amicable debate.

I would argue that there is “one truth”, but to have that truth requires infinite knowledge, so seeing as we only have a small amount of knowledge each, coloured by our upbringing, education, etc, each of us only sees a small facit of that “one truth”, hence as you say, it is relative and subjective. We can expand our understanding of that truth by incorporating as many world views and perspectives from other people, religions, etc, as possible, provided we’re ready to expand our perception from our own comfortable world view. This is probably why so much debate and contention occurs, because we so comfortable with our own world view that we’re not prepared to accept other possibilities until something occurs that shakes or shatters our original world view.

Grover,

The grass is always green on the otherside. I approach Buddhism with profound respect and there is much to learn from it. It can be used to help bridge the gap between some of the very profound inner realities that the Baha’i Faith talks about, but is hard for some to grasp. There are some interesting “how to” books with Buddhist methods. But, Buddhism is very personal and its teachings are meant to work on this insides–not the outside–meaning its not a complete belief system. Therefore, what never ceases to amaze me is the scope of the Baha’i teachings. Our interpretations of it vary and some of us like to push one aspect or another, but the reality is we can only wait and see, and in the mean time work on ourselves.

The one truth statement is true indeed…although some may not agree…HA! I have had a few transcendental experiences during prayer and I can’t really describe with it words. But here goes…My body felt hot and I started it cry a little, I was alone physically but surrounded by souls and angels. I felt singing and as I looked around my room it appeared to me that all the physical things were not actually there in a true sense. What was true was beyond this plane and above what I perceived with my sense. Very similar to what Baha’u'llah was explaining…

Anyway…I have always used this experience and a few others to measure how close I feel to God when praying or otherwise. Most of the time I am not there due to my own mind and its distractions. Only when completely detached and removed from everything I know or have experienced do I feel like I am getting at anything real or true. Nirvana? Maybe…Im not the only one and it would be interesting to get some more of these types of accounts from people.

Grover,

The grass is always green on the otherside. I approach Buddhism with profound respect and there is much to learn from it. It can be used to help bridge the gap between some of the very profound inner realities that the Baha’i Faith talks about, but is hard for some to grasp. There are some interesting “how to” books with Buddhist methods. But, Buddhism is very personal and its teachings are meant to work on this insides–not the outside–meaning its not a complete belief system. Therefore, what never ceases to amaze me is the scope of the Baha’i teachings. Our interpretations of it vary and some of us like to push one aspect or another, but the reality is we can only wait and see, and in the mean time work on ourselves.

The one truth statement is true indeed…although some may not agree…HA! I have had a few transcendental experiences during prayer and I can’t really describe with it words. But here goes…My body felt hot and I started it cry a little, I was alone physically but surrounded by souls and angels. I felt singing and as I looked around my room it appeared to me that all the physical things were not actually there in a true sense. What was true was beyond this plane and above what I perceived with my sense. Very similar to what Baha’u'llah was explaining…

Anyway…I have always used this experience and a few others to measure how close I feel to God when praying or otherwise. Most of the time I am not there due to my own mind and its distractions. Only when completely detached and removed from everything I know or have experienced do I feel like I am getting at anything real or true. Nirvana? Maybe…Im not the only one and it would be interesting to get some more of these types of accounts from people.

Mavaddat (if he still visits this site) may appreciate this (I certainly do):

“It seems to me that the regulative idea that we heirs of the Enlightenment, we Socratists, most frequently use to criticize the conduct of various conversational partners is that of ‘needing education in order to outgrow their primitive fear, hatreds, and superstitions’ … It is a concept which I, like most Americans who teach humanities or social science in colleges and universities, invoke when we try to arrange things so that students who enter as bigoted, homophobic, religious fundamentalists will leave college with views more like our own … The fundamentalist parents of our fundamentalist students think that the entire ‘American liberal establishment’ is engaged in a conspiracy. The parents have a point. Their point is that we liberal teachers no more feel in a symmetrical communication situation when we talk with bigots than do kindergarten teachers talking with their students … When we American college teachers encounter religious fundamentalists, we do not consider the possibility of reformulating our own practices of justification so as to give more weight to the authority of the Christian scriptures. Instead, we do our best to convince these students of the benefits of secularization. We assign first-person accounts of growing up homosexual to our homophobic students for the same reasons that German schoolteachers in the postwar period assigned The Diary of Anne Frank… You have to be educated in order to be … a participant in our conversation … So we are going to go right on trying to discredit you in the eyes of your children, trying to strip your fundamentalist religious community of dignity, trying to make your views seem silly rather than discussable. We are not so inclusivist as to tolerate intolerance such as yours … I don’t see anything herrschaftsfrei [domination free] about my handling of my fundamentalist students. Rather, I think those students are lucky to find themselves under the benevolent Herrschaft [domination] of people like me, and to have escaped the grip of their frightening, vicious, dangerous parents … I am just as provincial and contextualist as the Nazi teachers who made their students read Der Stürmer; the only difference is that I serve a better cause.”

– ‘Universality and Truth,’ in Robert B. Brandom (ed.), Rorty and his Critics (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), pp. 21-2.

Mavaddat (if he still visits this site) may appreciate this (I certainly do):

“It seems to me that the regulative idea that we heirs of the Enlightenment, we Socratists, most frequently use to criticize the conduct of various conversational partners is that of ‘needing education in order to outgrow their primitive fear, hatreds, and superstitions’ … It is a concept which I, like most Americans who teach humanities or social science in colleges and universities, invoke when we try to arrange things so that students who enter as bigoted, homophobic, religious fundamentalists will leave college with views more like our own … The fundamentalist parents of our fundamentalist students think that the entire ‘American liberal establishment’ is engaged in a conspiracy. The parents have a point. Their point is that we liberal teachers no more feel in a symmetrical communication situation when we talk with bigots than do kindergarten teachers talking with their students … When we American college teachers encounter religious fundamentalists, we do not consider the possibility of reformulating our own practices of justification so as to give more weight to the authority of the Christian scriptures. Instead, we do our best to convince these students of the benefits of secularization. We assign first-person accounts of growing up homosexual to our homophobic students for the same reasons that German schoolteachers in the postwar period assigned The Diary of Anne Frank… You have to be educated in order to be … a participant in our conversation … So we are going to go right on trying to discredit you in the eyes of your children, trying to strip your fundamentalist religious community of dignity, trying to make your views seem silly rather than discussable. We are not so inclusivist as to tolerate intolerance such as yours … I don’t see anything herrschaftsfrei [domination free] about my handling of my fundamentalist students. Rather, I think those students are lucky to find themselves under the benevolent Herrschaft [domination] of people like me, and to have escaped the grip of their frightening, vicious, dangerous parents … I am just as provincial and contextualist as the Nazi teachers who made their students read Der Stürmer; the only difference is that I serve a better cause.”

– ‘Universality and Truth,’ in Robert B. Brandom (ed.), Rorty and his Critics (Oxford: Blackwell, 2000), pp. 21-2.

OMG, that is so true! Even I think like that, lol.

OMG, that is so true! Even I think like that, lol.

I was just inspired by an episode of South Park. It made me start thinking again about the gay issue and Bahai law. According to the Writings- alcohol is forbidden. But the Writings also state that if sick, we should consult competent physicians. So if a competent physician perscribes a medicine with alcohol in it, then the Bahai should take it. Right? Ok so work with me. Homosexuality is a disease. I go to a competent physician that tells me that the best recourse for me is to accept who I am, fall in love with someone and have a fulfilling relationship with that person in ALL it’s aspects- which includes having sex. Do I take the advise? Would I be breaking Bahai law? AND what if I follow the doctor’s advise and my depression and suicidal thoughts go away. I find happiness and feel fulfilled. So my question- why is the consumption of alcohol ok when it is prescribed by a doctor, but acceptance of one’s homosexuality is not? Cultural bias maybe?

I was just inspired by an episode of South Park. It made me start thinking again about the gay issue and Bahai law. According to the Writings- alcohol is forbidden. But the Writings also state that if sick, we should consult competent physicians. So if a competent physician perscribes a medicine with alcohol in it, then the Bahai should take it. Right? Ok so work with me. Homosexuality is a disease. I go to a competent physician that tells me that the best recourse for me is to accept who I am, fall in love with someone and have a fulfilling relationship with that person in ALL it’s aspects- which includes having sex. Do I take the advise? Would I be breaking Bahai law? AND what if I follow the doctor’s advise and my depression and suicidal thoughts go away. I find happiness and feel fulfilled. So my question- why is the consumption of alcohol ok when it is prescribed by a doctor, but acceptance of one’s homosexuality is not? Cultural bias maybe?

P,

that is a very interesting question and I will pray for you. Please don’t ever, ever think of ending it all. Rise above it all, do what makes you happy and your reasoning is entirely within, well, reason.
If I was gay and I had talked to a doctor and that is what he said, I would go on living my life. This is essentially only one aspect of your life. If it becomes a cause of pain and spiritual sadness, focus on something else. Be who you are…

I must seem like a total jackass, but I do sincerely sympathize with you.

–Your brother

P,

that is a very interesting question and I will pray for you. Please don’t ever, ever think of ending it all. Rise above it all, do what makes you happy and your reasoning is entirely within, well, reason.
If I was gay and I had talked to a doctor and that is what he said, I would go on living my life. This is essentially only one aspect of your life. If it becomes a cause of pain and spiritual sadness, focus on something else. Be who you are…

I must seem like a total jackass, but I do sincerely sympathize with you.

–Your brother

Thanks Anon. But don’t worry about me. Those thoughts all went away when I stopped being active in the Bahai community. And hey I did it without an expensive shrink! Worry about that quiet 17 year old Iranian kid in your community that maybe is never dating or showing interest in the opposite sex and is expected to one day marry and be a good hetero in the community. For as long as the Bahai community continues the same old same old that I saw growing up, then the chance is there. I haven’t been active for years in the community that I live in, but I heard about this one teenage girl who committed suicide a couple of years ago. She was seen as a model Bahai teenager, artistic, sweet and then gone. Why? No one asks to protect the privacy of the family. I guess we’ll never know. But knowing the statistics that it is LGBT youth that have higher risk of committing suicide…I have to wonder.

Thanks Anon. But don’t worry about me. Those thoughts all went away when I stopped being active in the Bahai community. And hey I did it without an expensive shrink! Worry about that quiet 17 year old Iranian kid in your community that maybe is never dating or showing interest in the opposite sex and is expected to one day marry and be a good hetero in the community. For as long as the Bahai community continues the same old same old that I saw growing up, then the chance is there. I haven’t been active for years in the community that I live in, but I heard about this one teenage girl who committed suicide a couple of years ago. She was seen as a model Bahai teenager, artistic, sweet and then gone. Why? No one asks to protect the privacy of the family. I guess we’ll never know. But knowing the statistics that it is LGBT youth that have higher risk of committing suicide…I have to wonder.

P wrote:

[quote post="193"]I was just inspired by an episode of South Park. It made me start thinking again about the gay issue and Bahai law. According to the Writings- alcohol is forbidden. But the Writings also state that if sick, we should consult competent physicians. So if a competent physician perscribes a medicine with alcohol in it, then the Bahai should take it. Right? Ok so work with me. Homosexuality is a disease. I go to a competent physician that tells me that the best recourse for me is to accept who I am, fall in love with someone and have a fulfilling relationship with that person in ALL it’s aspects- which includes having sex. Do I take the advise? Would I be breaking Bahai law? AND what if I follow the doctor’s advise and my depression and suicidal thoughts go away. I find happiness and feel fulfilled.[/quote]

Brilliant, P! That is the solution to all the wrangling about homosexuality, send them to a doctor or qualified counsellor to get reassurance they’re perfectly normal. So simple!

Would the UHJ argue with the opinion of a qualified expert? Only if they regarded the quotes from SE about homosexuality as more important than the quotes about going to see a qualified doctor for diseases etc… Then it just boils down to what peoples biases are as to whether or not the doctor’s opinion is accepted.

But the quiet 17 year old Iranian kid has to be brave enough to visit the doctor and be open about stuff he or she has kept inside for so long.

In honesty, the Baha’i community is such a mess of predjudices and biases and smart and stupid people ranging from liberal to fundamental persuasion that the community as a whole could never cope well with someone coming out (with or without a doctor’s cert) without the gossip, backbiting, etc. Eventually any gay person would leave the community to find friendlier pastures.

But its got to start somewhere and there has to be someone brave and tough enough to stand up against the masses and suffer the ridicule, backbiting and gossip so eventually (if ever) homosexuals are accepted in the community.

P wrote:

[quote post="193"]I was just inspired by an episode of South Park. It made me start thinking again about the gay issue and Bahai law. According to the Writings- alcohol is forbidden. But the Writings also state that if sick, we should consult competent physicians. So if a competent physician perscribes a medicine with alcohol in it, then the Bahai should take it. Right? Ok so work with me. Homosexuality is a disease. I go to a competent physician that tells me that the best recourse for me is to accept who I am, fall in love with someone and have a fulfilling relationship with that person in ALL it’s aspects- which includes having sex. Do I take the advise? Would I be breaking Bahai law? AND what if I follow the doctor’s advise and my depression and suicidal thoughts go away. I find happiness and feel fulfilled.[/quote]

Brilliant, P! That is the solution to all the wrangling about homosexuality, send them to a doctor or qualified counsellor to get reassurance they’re perfectly normal. So simple!

Would the UHJ argue with the opinion of a qualified expert? Only if they regarded the quotes from SE about homosexuality as more important than the quotes about going to see a qualified doctor for diseases etc… Then it just boils down to what peoples biases are as to whether or not the doctor’s opinion is accepted.

But the quiet 17 year old Iranian kid has to be brave enough to visit the doctor and be open about stuff he or she has kept inside for so long.

In honesty, the Baha’i community is such a mess of predjudices and biases and smart and stupid people ranging from liberal to fundamental persuasion that the community as a whole could never cope well with someone coming out (with or without a doctor’s cert) without the gossip, backbiting, etc. Eventually any gay person would leave the community to find friendlier pastures.

But its got to start somewhere and there has to be someone brave and tough enough to stand up against the masses and suffer the ridicule, backbiting and gossip so eventually (if ever) homosexuals are accepted in the community.

[quote comment=""]Anonnymouz wrote:

[quote post="193"]The way I see it, from an evolutionary standpoint and a reproductive standpoint, purely biological, it is something that would eventually be stamped out by nature as a part the darwinian model. Im sure you know, the theory is only the genes or traits that are useful or advantageous are inherited and passed on. This process takes thousands of years, if not millions.[/quote]

hmm, as a hetero male i still think this way of thinking is flawed. what about hetero women who suffer from conditions such as ovarian dropsy, which is hereditary, leaving the afflicated barren? what about the numerous other conditions which are passed down genetically or not that leaves hetero women unable to have children? these conditions are, in fact, naturally occuring. so, are barren hetero women who participate in intercourse still displeasing God?

[quote comment=""]Anonnymouz wrote:

[quote post="193"]The way I see it, from an evolutionary standpoint and a reproductive standpoint, purely biological, it is something that would eventually be stamped out by nature as a part the darwinian model. Im sure you know, the theory is only the genes or traits that are useful or advantageous are inherited and passed on. This process takes thousands of years, if not millions.[/quote]

hmm, as a hetero male i still think this way of thinking is flawed. what about hetero women who suffer from conditions such as ovarian dropsy, which is hereditary, leaving the afflicated barren? what about the numerous other conditions which are passed down genetically or not that leaves hetero women unable to have children? these conditions are, in fact, naturally occuring. so, are barren hetero women who participate in intercourse still displeasing God?

Grant wrote:
hmm, as a hetero male i still think this way of thinking is flawed. what about hetero women who suffer from conditions such as ovarian dropsy, which is hereditary, leaving the afflicated barren?

Grant, I get your point, but still retain that of Anon: medicine intervenes in natural selection: we keep diabetes patients alive and help them pass on the gene to their descendants, where as naturally, they would have disappeared. Introducing Mc Donald’s and sweet drinks to developing countries, where they have not been selected for such food introduces high rates of obesity and diabetes…

We can also admit that those with genes for diabetes or mental disease have other talents and gifts to impart to humanity, one of them being in helping us acquire the capacity for loving and caring which is essential for our collective survival.

Besides all this, I believe that genetics is only a small part of the causes of homosexuality.

Grant wrote:
hmm, as a hetero male i still think this way of thinking is flawed. what about hetero women who suffer from conditions such as ovarian dropsy, which is hereditary, leaving the afflicated barren?

Grant, I get your point, but still retain that of Anon: medicine intervenes in natural selection: we keep diabetes patients alive and help them pass on the gene to their descendants, where as naturally, they would have disappeared. Introducing Mc Donald’s and sweet drinks to developing countries, where they have not been selected for such food introduces high rates of obesity and diabetes…

We can also admit that those with genes for diabetes or mental disease have other talents and gifts to impart to humanity, one of them being in helping us acquire the capacity for loving and caring which is essential for our collective survival.

Besides all this, I believe that genetics is only a small part of the causes of homosexuality.

Besides all this, I believe that genetics is only a small part of the causes of homosexuality.
—————–
Do tell Farhan. I’m curious to know what you think may be the other causes. I come from a Persian family, raised by both mother and father that taught me the Faith from the time of conception. They both took active roles in my upbringing. I NEVER saw or heard, or let alone understood what homosexuality was until like around the age of 11. My role models were as straight as you can get (Persian culture as you know has very set norms for what women do and what men do). So how could it have happened to me? But regardless, one thing I know is that it has caused me to be a way better person. It took a long time, but I thank God now that he made me the way he did. I guess I’ll always be a sore thumb in the side of conservative Bahaidom, but oh well….

Besides all this, I believe that genetics is only a small part of the causes of homosexuality.
—————–
Do tell Farhan. I’m curious to know what you think may be the other causes. I come from a Persian family, raised by both mother and father that taught me the Faith from the time of conception. They both took active roles in my upbringing. I NEVER saw or heard, or let alone understood what homosexuality was until like around the age of 11. My role models were as straight as you can get (Persian culture as you know has very set norms for what women do and what men do). So how could it have happened to me? But regardless, one thing I know is that it has caused me to be a way better person. It took a long time, but I thank God now that he made me the way he did. I guess I’ll always be a sore thumb in the side of conservative Bahaidom, but oh well….

I posted this comment elsewhere, but since I am interested in a discussion, I am reporting it with some modifications. And because the Problem With Homosexuality is among what I find troubling in the Faith, I think my commenting here is not out of place.

One thing I have noticed from reading this blog is that commentators are either totally within the faith, usually too close to the trees to critically observe the forest (our Baquia and some others are luminous exceptions), or hostile to the faith based on their own unique experiences. I am neither, which is why I think my input may be valuable.

I am attracted to so many things about the Baha’i faith… but I am not a seeker, and being ‘labeled’ as such is among the things that I’ve discovered to be personally repellent. In fact, the zealous mission for converts (I know that’s the ‘wrong’ word, since semantics are _everything_) has thoroughly repulsed me from the faith because I have come to view this Truly Beautiful ideology as impatient with religious pluralism and even aspiring to spiritual totalitarianism. I can now hear those of you in the forest sighing and murmuring – I must have a bone to pick or an Agenda… if I do have an Agenda here, it is to enlighten members of this enlightened faith… All the faiths have suffered at times from ‘infallible leadership.’ All Humanity has suffered from chauvinism. These are terrible elements of the Faith today.

When I hear a Baha’i say another believer is not really a Baha’i if not card carrying, or occasionally having a beer, or doesn’t recognize the infallibility of the mortals to who so many millions have abdicated their own critical thinking… I feel sick to my stomach. When I hear that the conflict in the Middle East requires a spiritual solution, and understand that to mean everyone there needs to be Baha’i, I feel so sad… Or for that matter, that a Baha’i homosexual can’t actually be a Baha’i… come on people… you became Baha’is (or your predecessors became Baha’is) because you _were_ progressive. The attitudes towards homosexuals belong with the notions of infallible, mortal leadership: _Antiquity_.

Baha’is, more than any group of people, should recognize the need for pluralism and diversity, and focus only on being a light unto humanity. You are failing, and it is not because of your prophet or writings.

I posted this comment elsewhere, but since I am interested in a discussion, I am reporting it with some modifications. And because the Problem With Homosexuality is among what I find troubling in the Faith, I think my commenting here is not out of place.

One thing I have noticed from reading this blog is that commentators are either totally within the faith, usually too close to the trees to critically observe the forest (our Baquia and some others are luminous exceptions), or hostile to the faith based on their own unique experiences. I am neither, which is why I think my input may be valuable.

I am attracted to so many things about the Baha’i faith… but I am not a seeker, and being ‘labeled’ as such is among the things that I’ve discovered to be personally repellent. In fact, the zealous mission for converts (I know that’s the ‘wrong’ word, since semantics are _everything_) has thoroughly repulsed me from the faith because I have come to view this Truly Beautiful ideology as impatient with religious pluralism and even aspiring to spiritual totalitarianism. I can now hear those of you in the forest sighing and murmuring – I must have a bone to pick or an Agenda… if I do have an Agenda here, it is to enlighten members of this enlightened faith… All the faiths have suffered at times from ‘infallible leadership.’ All Humanity has suffered from chauvinism. These are terrible elements of the Faith today.

When I hear a Baha’i say another believer is not really a Baha’i if not card carrying, or occasionally having a beer, or doesn’t recognize the infallibility of the mortals to who so many millions have abdicated their own critical thinking… I feel sick to my stomach. When I hear that the conflict in the Middle East requires a spiritual solution, and understand that to mean everyone there needs to be Baha’i, I feel so sad… Or for that matter, that a Baha’i homosexual can’t actually be a Baha’i… come on people… you became Baha’is (or your predecessors became Baha’is) because you _were_ progressive. The attitudes towards homosexuals belong with the notions of infallible, mortal leadership: _Antiquity_.

Baha’is, more than any group of people, should recognize the need for pluralism and diversity, and focus only on being a light unto humanity. You are failing, and it is not because of your prophet or writings.

Greetings All,

I’m just back from travels in the UK and am very busy working on my paper for my graduation due in the next few days. Thanks to all who did the questionnaire, I had 347 who did it. So that’s wonderful for my thesis.

A friend (a married gay Bahai) sent me this link and was wondering if there is any truth in the allegation that Bahais in Uganda were as the Guardian article states, part of an anti-homo campaign.
If any of you have Ugandan Bahai acquaintances, please ask them, as just because a newspaper runs such a story, that doesn’t mean that it is true.
And more importantly have a look at this petition and sign it if you wish.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-bahai-anti-gay-discrimination

Greetings All,

I’m just back from travels in the UK and am very busy working on my paper for my graduation due in the next few days. Thanks to all who did the questionnaire, I had 347 who did it. So that’s wonderful for my thesis.

A friend (a married gay Bahai) sent me this link and was wondering if there is any truth in the allegation that Bahais in Uganda were as the Guardian article states, part of an anti-homo campaign.
If any of you have Ugandan Bahai acquaintances, please ask them, as just because a newspaper runs such a story, that doesn’t mean that it is true.
And more importantly have a look at this petition and sign it if you wish.
http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-bahai-anti-gay-discrimination

I asked friends who were in Uganda at the time. One had grown up there, so was familiar with the culture. Here’s what she said;

“Re the Uganda gay rights controversy. While we were on safari we got no news. When we were back in NZ people asked how we had fared in the Uganda floods but as we had heard nothing about these either I looked up Google and while reading about the deluge I think I saw a piece on gay rights but I’m sorry to not be more informative.”

But I don’t doubt that the incident happened. The stories seemed to be coming from a variety of Ugandan sources, and consistently mentioned the involvement of the Baha’is:

Red Pepper, Uganda.

Associated Press Uganda
LifeSiteNews.com

It was deeply ironic that the Christian, Baha’i and Islamic (and I use those terms loosely) interfaith coalition that banded together in mutual homophobia was named the “Interfaith Rainbow Coalition”!

I asked friends who were in Uganda at the time. One had grown up there, so was familiar with the culture. Here’s what she said;

“Re the Uganda gay rights controversy. While we were on safari we got no news. When we were back in NZ people asked how we had fared in the Uganda floods but as we had heard nothing about these either I looked up Google and while reading about the deluge I think I saw a piece on gay rights but I’m sorry to not be more informative.”

But I don’t doubt that the incident happened. The stories seemed to be coming from a variety of Ugandan sources, and consistently mentioned the involvement of the Baha’is:

Red Pepper, Uganda.

Associated Press Uganda

LifeSiteNews.com

It was deeply ironic that the Christian, Baha’i and Islamic (and I use those terms loosely) interfaith coalition that banded together in mutual homophobia was named the “Interfaith Rainbow Coalition”!

Why should this come as a surprise? When it comes to controversial issues, the Bahai community mimicks the majority or stays inside its cocoon. Look at the civil rights movement in the 60′s. The Bahahis were not in the forefront for fear of seeming political. In regards to the gay issue, there was a piece by the UK NSA in the 90′s deploring the teaching of homosexuality in schools. http://bahai-library.com/nsa/homosexuality.uk.html
Basically the UK NSA (similar I’m sure to conservative christian groups in the country) wanted schools to continue to teach children that homosexuality was a disease. Did they stop to think of the psychological damage on a gay teenager being taught this? Of course not, because this type of brain washing happens every day to gay Bahai teens inside the community.

Why should this come as a surprise? When it comes to controversial issues, the Bahai community mimicks the majority or stays inside its cocoon. Look at the civil rights movement in the 60′s. The Bahahis were not in the forefront for fear of seeming political. In regards to the gay issue, there was a piece by the UK NSA in the 90′s deploring the teaching of homosexuality in schools. http://bahai-library.com/nsa/homosexuality.uk.html
Basically the UK NSA (similar I’m sure to conservative christian groups in the country) wanted schools to continue to teach children that homosexuality was a disease. Did they stop to think of the psychological damage on a gay teenager being taught this? Of course not, because this type of brain washing happens every day to gay Bahai teens inside the community.

I missed one: The Kampala Daily Monitor.

It seems pretty clear to me that gay-bashing is an interfaith activity in those parts, with the UK NSA not far behind.

I missed one: The Kampala Daily Monitor.

It seems pretty clear to me that gay-bashing is an interfaith activity in those parts, with the UK NSA not far behind.

Steve Marshall wrote:

“I missed one.”

Try this instead:

http://ubnotorious.blogspot.com/2008/08/more-from-summer-of-love.html

Unleash the hounds of hell (i.e., the tedious blowhard windbags of the BF).

Steve Marshall wrote:

“I missed one.”

Try this instead:

http://ubnotorious.blogspot.com/2008/08/more-from-summer-of-love.html

Unleash the hounds of hell (i.e., the tedious blowhard windbags of the BF).

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/09/24/2996

From Professor Michael King (University College London):

“Evidence from around the world identifies the main stressors leading to mental distress in gay and lesbian people as discrimination, prejudice, bullying in schools and colleges, and the consequent need for many LGB people to keep their homosexual identity secret, even from their families.

“Our review did not examine links between mental disorder and homosexual “behaviour” or “lifestyle”. Our work reviewed studies of the mental health of lesbian, gay and bisexual people, and sadly, those studies showed that it is people (not behaviour) that are discriminated against, and not least by religious groups and organisations.

“Discrimination on the grounds of sexuality is even more devastating than other forms of discrimination such as racism, as it reaches right into families and leaves no refuge for its victims.

“There is now abundant evidence that homosexuality is not itself a mental disorder and that it is compatible with a healthy lifestyle. We shall only begin to see a reduction in mental distress and deliberate self harm in LGB people when all sectors of society welcome them as equal and valuable citizens.”

Obscure cult-like fundamentalist religious cultures notwithstanding.

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/09/24/2996

From Professor Michael King (University College London):

“Evidence from around the world identifies the main stressors leading to mental distress in gay and lesbian people as discrimination, prejudice, bullying in schools and colleges, and the consequent need for many LGB people to keep their homosexual identity secret, even from their families.

“Our review did not examine links between mental disorder and homosexual “behaviour” or “lifestyle”. Our work reviewed studies of the mental health of lesbian, gay and bisexual people, and sadly, those studies showed that it is people (not behaviour) that are discriminated against, and not least by religious groups and organisations.

“Discrimination on the grounds of sexuality is even more devastating than other forms of discrimination such as racism, as it reaches right into families and leaves no refuge for its victims.

“There is now abundant evidence that homosexuality is not itself a mental disorder and that it is compatible with a healthy lifestyle. We shall only begin to see a reduction in mental distress and deliberate self harm in LGB people when all sectors of society welcome them as equal and valuable citizens.”

Obscure cult-like fundamentalist religious cultures notwithstanding.

“London to host Muslim LGBT conference”

http://bahaisonline.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1954&Itemid=1

“Former Beauty Queen Fights for Human Rights”

http://bahaisonline.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1954&Itemid=1

The irony is so thick it’s palpable.

And probably completely lost on most Baha’is.

“London to host Muslim LGBT conference”

http://bahaisonline.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1954&Itemid=1

“Former Beauty Queen Fights for Human Rights”

http://bahaisonline.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1954&Itemid=1

The irony is so thick it’s palpable.

And probably completely lost on most Baha’is.

Oops. Wrong link. Too much irony, even for me. Try this:

http://bahaisonline.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1951&Itemid=1

Oops. Wrong link. Too much irony, even for me. Try this:

http://bahaisonline.net/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=1951&Itemid=1

[quote comment="56806"]
The irony is so thick it’s palpable.

And probably completely lost on most Baha’is.[/quote]

That’s so unfair! Bahais Online is a popular (over one million visitors per year) Baha’i website, and is run by a Baha’i in good standing. But wait, that’s an argument in support of your position. I’ll get back to you.

[quote comment="56806"]
The irony is so thick it’s palpable.

And probably completely lost on most Baha’is.[/quote]

That’s so unfair! Bahais Online is a popular (over one million visitors per year) Baha’i website, and is run by a Baha’i in good standing. But wait, that’s an argument in support of your position. I’ll get back to you.

Andrew and Steve,

It is *sooooo* good to see your posts. Keep up the good work.

RegAnon,

may you be blessed with peace, prosperity and wisdom.

As an XL-ex-bahai (30+ years), I agree with most of your excellent statement.

However, the problem *is* with bahai scripture and theology (not “just” the way it is interpreted, bogus infallability doctrine, frothing at the mouth about coconut breakers, hatred of gays, etc.).

As Sen pointed out several months ago (on another thread?), the current version of bahai culture has not evolved into a fully postmodern paradigm.

And the leading edge of thought in the world has moved beyond postmodernism!

Even if bahai scripture wasn’t medieval enough, the mindset in which it has been “interpreted” in the mainstream of the community is medieval. Even the modernist tendencies within the bahai community have tended to result in fundamentalism.

I would encourage you to run away from bahai as fast as you can.
(Unless perhaps you have the opportunity to support the few reformers that have not been hounded out or marginalized.)

A better alternative is integral philosophy (which is “beyond postmodernism”).

Examples: Jean Gebser, Sri Aurobindo, Clare Graves, Ken Wilber, and many others.

Virtually all the deep questions I have about the pragmatics aspects of social change as they relate to systems theory and consciousness studies (including mysticism and meditation) are far better answered by integral philosophy than bahai.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Gebser#The_structures_of_consciousness
-
http://www.gebser.org/
-
http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/kosmos/excerptA/intro.cfm
-
http://www.esalenctr.org/display/confpage.cfm?confid=1&pageid=33&pgtype=1
-
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/453699.html

The fact is that bahai scripture, while containing some interesting examples of attempts to fuse premodern mysticism with modernity, is pathetically weak on the most important issue in human history: evolution.

Unless a spiritual movement has a proper relationship to (and understanding of) “scientific” evolution, everything else is cr*p, or will eventually turn to cr*p.

regards,
ep

[quote comment="54722"]I posted this comment elsewhere, but since I am interested in a discussion, I am reporting it with some modifications. And because the Problem With Homosexuality is among what I find troubling in the Faith, I think my commenting here is not out of place.

One thing I have noticed from reading this blog is that commentators are either totally within the faith, usually too close to the trees to critically observe the forest (our Baquia and some others are luminous exceptions), or hostile to the faith based on their own unique experiences. I am neither, which is why I think my input may be valuable.
…
… come on people… you became Baha’is (or your predecessors became Baha’is) because you _were_ progressive. The attitudes towards homosexuals belong with the notions of infallible, mortal leadership: _Antiquity_.

Baha’is, more than any group of people, should recognize the need for pluralism and diversity, and focus only on being a light unto humanity. You are failing, and it is not because of your prophet or writings.[/quote]
[quote comment=""][quote comment="56806"]
The irony is so thick it’s palpable.

And probably completely lost on most Baha’is.[/quote]

That’s so unfair! Bahais Online is a popular (over one million visitors per year) Baha’i website, and is run by a Baha’i in good standing. But wait, that’s an argument in support of your position. I’ll get back to you. [/quote]

Andrew and Steve,

It is *sooooo* good to see your posts. Keep up the good work.

RegAnon,

may you be blessed with peace, prosperity and wisdom.

As an XL-ex-bahai (30+ years), I agree with most of your excellent statement.

However, the problem *is* with bahai scripture and theology (not “just” the way it is interpreted, bogus infallability doctrine, frothing at the mouth about coconut breakers, hatred of gays, etc.).

As Sen pointed out several months ago (on another thread?), the current version of bahai culture has not evolved into a fully postmodern paradigm.

And the leading edge of thought in the world has moved beyond postmodernism!

Even if bahai scripture wasn’t medieval enough, the mindset in which it has been “interpreted” in the mainstream of the community is medieval. Even the modernist tendencies within the bahai community have tended to result in fundamentalism.

I would encourage you to run away from bahai as fast as you can.
(Unless perhaps you have the opportunity to support the few reformers that have not been hounded out or marginalized.)

A better alternative is integral philosophy (which is “beyond postmodernism”).

Examples: Jean Gebser, Sri Aurobindo, Clare Graves, Ken Wilber, and many others.

Virtually all the deep questions I have about the pragmatics aspects of social change as they relate to systems theory and consciousness studies (including mysticism and meditation) are far better answered by integral philosophy than bahai.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jean_Gebser#The_structures_of_consciousness
-
http://www.gebser.org/
-
http://wilber.shambhala.com/html/books/kosmos/excerptA/intro.cfm
-
http://www.esalenctr.org/display/confpage.cfm?confid=1&pageid=33&pgtype=1
-
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/453699.html

The fact is that bahai scripture, while containing some interesting examples of attempts to fuse premodern mysticism with modernity, is pathetically weak on the most important issue in human history: evolution.

Unless a spiritual movement has a proper relationship to (and understanding of) “scientific” evolution, everything else is cr*p, or will eventually turn to cr*p.

regards,
ep

[quote comment="54722"]I posted this comment elsewhere, but since I am interested in a discussion, I am reporting it with some modifications. And because the Problem With Homosexuality is among what I find troubling in the Faith, I think my commenting here is not out of place.

One thing I have noticed from reading this blog is that commentators are either totally within the faith, usually too close to the trees to critically observe the forest (our Baquia and some others are luminous exceptions), or hostile to the faith based on their own unique experiences. I am neither, which is why I think my input may be valuable.
…
… come on people… you became Baha’is (or your predecessors became Baha’is) because you _were_ progressive. The attitudes towards homosexuals belong with the notions of infallible, mortal leadership: _Antiquity_.

Baha’is, more than any group of people, should recognize the need for pluralism and diversity, and focus only on being a light unto humanity. You are failing, and it is not because of your prophet or writings.[/quote]
[quote comment=""][quote comment="56806"]
The irony is so thick it’s palpable.

And probably completely lost on most Baha’is.[/quote]

That’s so unfair! Bahais Online is a popular (over one million visitors per year) Baha’i website, and is run by a Baha’i in good standing. But wait, that’s an argument in support of your position. I’ll get back to you. [/quote]

Oh Steve … it wasn’t a criticism of your site, it was a wry jibe at the juxtaposition of these articles. Don’t you know that civil rights for “practicing homosexuals” don’t qualify as legitimate human rights in the Baha’i Bundestag? So people like Nazanin the Beauty Queen can “fight for human rights” while remaining blithely unmindful of the complete and utter hypocrisy of the “official” Baha’i policy toward gays and lesbians (not to mention the treatment of gays and lesbians in, oh, say, Iran). Because, of course, the Baha’i Faith doesn’t really discriminate toward homosexuals; and although every non-Baha’i in the world might think it does, well, they’re just wrong. Because Baha’is don’t discriminate. Unless they do. Which they don’t, because it’s not really discrimination. Unless it is. Which it isn’t, because it can’t be. Because the UHJ says it isn’t. So it isn’t. Unless it is, which it isn’t. And a crack pipe isn’t really a crack pipe, either, especially if you’re the one sucking on it.

Oh Steve … it wasn’t a criticism of your site, it was a wry jibe at the juxtaposition of these articles. Don’t you know that civil rights for “practicing homosexuals” don’t qualify as legitimate human rights in the Baha’i Bundestag? So people like Nazanin the Beauty Queen can “fight for human rights” while remaining blithely unmindful of the complete and utter hypocrisy of the “official” Baha’i policy toward gays and lesbians (not to mention the treatment of gays and lesbians in, oh, say, Iran). Because, of course, the Baha’i Faith doesn’t really discriminate toward homosexuals; and although every non-Baha’i in the world might think it does, well, they’re just wrong. Because Baha’is don’t discriminate. Unless they do. Which they don’t, because it’s not really discrimination. Unless it is. Which it isn’t, because it can’t be. Because the UHJ says it isn’t. So it isn’t. Unless it is, which it isn’t. And a crack pipe isn’t really a crack pipe, either, especially if you’re the one sucking on it.

“Because, of course, the Baha’i Faith doesn’t really discriminate toward homosexuals; and although every non-Baha’i in the world might think it does, well, they’re just wrong. Because Baha’is don’t discriminate. Unless they do. Which they don’t, because it’s not really discrimination. Unless it is. Which it isn’t, because it can’t be. Because the UHJ says it isn’t. So it isn’t. Unless it is, which it isn’t. And a crack pipe isn’t really a crack pipe, either, especially if you’re the one sucking on it.”

Andrew, truer words have never been spoken.

“Because, of course, the Baha’i Faith doesn’t really discriminate toward homosexuals; and although every non-Baha’i in the world might think it does, well, they’re just wrong. Because Baha’is don’t discriminate. Unless they do. Which they don’t, because it’s not really discrimination. Unless it is. Which it isn’t, because it can’t be. Because the UHJ says it isn’t. So it isn’t. Unless it is, which it isn’t. And a crack pipe isn’t really a crack pipe, either, especially if you’re the one sucking on it.”

Andrew, truer words have never been spoken.

[quote]Andrew, truer words have never been spoken.[/quote]

Or written!

Religious identity is not synonymous with human integrity … unless one is an automaton who constructs an illusion of integrity to serve as a surrogate for religious identity. Such individuals invariably follow the dictates of their religion rather than the promptings of their conscience (provided they have ever developed a conscience in the first place).

You might find this interesting:

Gay couples as committed as straight couples: study
Reuters

NEW YORK (Reuters Life!) – Gay and lesbian couples are just as committed in their relationships as heterosexuals and the legal status of their union doesn’t impact their happiness, according to new research.

In two new studies that compared same-sex and heterosexual couples using different factors and methods to assess their happiness, scientists found few differences.

“Among the committed couples, there were very few differences that we were able to identify either in terms of how satisfied these couples were, how effectively they interacted with one another or how their bodies responded physiologically while they were interacting with one another,” Glenn I. Roisman, of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champagne, said in an interview.

He and his colleagues compared 30 gay male and 30 lesbian couples with 50 engaged heterosexual couples, 40 older, married heterosexual couples and dating heterosexual couples.

They found that regardless of sexual orientation, as the level of commitment increased, so did the ability to resolve conflict — debunking the myth that same-sex relationships are not built on the same level of commitment as heterosexual ones.

In the second study researchers, who focused on how legal status affected relationship quality, followed 65 male and 138 female same-sex couples in civil unions, 23 male and 61 female same-sex couples not in civil unions and 55 heterosexual married couples over a three-year period.

The researchers from the University of Washington, San Diego State University and the University of Vermont found that same-sex couples, regardless of their legal status, were more satisfied with their relationships and reported more positive feelings toward their partners and less conflict than heterosexual married couples.

But gay and lesbian couples not in civil unions were more likely than same-sex couples in civil unions or heterosexuals who were married to end their relationships, according to the study.

Both studies were published in the journal Developmental Psychology.

“My personal view is that I think it’s very hard to make the case as has been made that these same-sex relationships are fundamentally different from opposite-sex relationships in the presence of data like these and other data in the developmental literature,” said Roisman.

(Reporting by Stefanie Kranjec; Editing by Patricia Reaney)

[quote]Andrew, truer words have never been spoken.[/quote]

Or written!

Religious identity is not synonymous with human integrity … unless one is an automaton who constructs an illusion of integrity to serve as a surrogate for religious identity. Such individuals invariably follow the dictates of their religion rather than the promptings of their conscience (provided they have ever developed a conscience in the first place).

You might find this interesting:

Gay couples as committed as straight couples: study
Reuters

NEW YORK (Reuters Life!) – Gay and lesbian couples are just as committed in their relationships as heterosexuals and the legal status of their union doesn’t impact their happiness, according to new research.

In two new studies that compared same-sex and heterosexual couples using different factors and methods to assess their happiness, scientists found few differences.

“Among the committed couples, there were very few differences that we were able to identify either in terms of how satisfied these couples were, how effectively they interacted with one another or how their bodies responded physiologically while they were interacting with one another,” Glenn I. Roisman, of the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champagne, said in an interview.

He and his colleagues compared 30 gay male and 30 lesbian couples with 50 engaged heterosexual couples, 40 older, married heterosexual couples and dating heterosexual couples.

They found that regardless of sexual orientation, as the level of commitment increased, so did the ability to resolve conflict — debunking the myth that same-sex relationships are not built on the same level of commitment as heterosexual ones.

In the second study researchers, who focused on how legal status affected relationship quality, followed 65 male and 138 female same-sex couples in civil unions, 23 male and 61 female same-sex couples not in civil unions and 55 heterosexual married couples over a three-year period.

The researchers from the University of Washington, San Diego State University and the University of Vermont found that same-sex couples, regardless of their legal status, were more satisfied with their relationships and reported more positive feelings toward their partners and less conflict than heterosexual married couples.

But gay and lesbian couples not in civil unions were more likely than same-sex couples in civil unions or heterosexuals who were married to end their relationships, according to the study.

Both studies were published in the journal Developmental Psychology.

“My personal view is that I think it’s very hard to make the case as has been made that these same-sex relationships are fundamentally different from opposite-sex relationships in the presence of data like these and other data in the developmental literature,” said Roisman.

(Reporting by Stefanie Kranjec; Editing by Patricia Reaney)

Here is the President of Iran on Larry King live regarding homosexuality:
“The law is the law and it’s law. And it must be enforced. Of course, we do pay attention that in Iran nobody interferes in the private lives of individuals. We have nothing to do with the private realm of people. This is at the (level of) not-private, public morality. In their own house, nobody ever interferes with people.”
———————–
hmmmm… where have I heard this stance before? Oh yeah, from conservative Bahais!

Here is the President of Iran on Larry King live regarding homosexuality:
“The law is the law and it’s law. And it must be enforced. Of course, we do pay attention that in Iran nobody interferes in the private lives of individuals. We have nothing to do with the private realm of people. This is at the (level of) not-private, public morality. In their own house, nobody ever interferes with people.”
———————–
hmmmm… where have I heard this stance before? Oh yeah, from conservative Bahais!

Shocking! Are you saying that the Baha’i position in contrast to the Shi’i position is a distinction without a difference? Heaven forfend it should be true! Absolutely shocking!

Shocking! Are you saying that the Baha’i position in contrast to the Shi’i position is a distinction without a difference? Heaven forfend it should be true! Absolutely shocking!

Yep. Unfortunately it’s the truth for any fundamentalist religion. Stay in the closet and we’ll accept you fully. Just don’t dare peak out of that closet or else!

Yep. Unfortunately it’s the truth for any fundamentalist religion. Stay in the closet and we’ll accept you fully. Just don’t dare peak out of that closet or else!

This presentation (video stream) gives an interesting answer for most of the “hot button” issues that come up when people talk about what is “wrong” with bahai, such as: intolerance of gays (and dissent, nonconformism in general), women-not-on-uhj, why abdul-baha said some really dumb stuff about evolution, non-involvement in politics, a bewilderingly incoherent set of ideas about the role of religion in economics and social organization and government, etc.

!!!!!
!enjoy!
!!!!!

[quote comment=""]Yep. Unfortunately it’s the truth for any fundamentalist religion. Stay in the closet and we’ll accept you fully. Just don’t dare peak out of that closet or else![/quote]

This presentation (video stream) gives an interesting answer for most of the “hot button” issues that come up when people talk about what is “wrong” with bahai, such as: intolerance of gays (and dissent, nonconformism in general), women-not-on-uhj, why abdul-baha said some really dumb stuff about evolution, non-involvement in politics, a bewilderingly incoherent set of ideas about the role of religion in economics and social organization and government, etc.

!!!!!
!enjoy!
!!!!!

[quote comment=""]Yep. Unfortunately it’s the truth for any fundamentalist religion. Stay in the closet and we’ll accept you fully. Just don’t dare peak out of that closet or else![/quote]

I recommend the book “WITH OR WITHOUT GOD: Why The Way We Live Is More Important Than What We Believe” by GRETTA VOSPER (Foreword by John Shelby Spong).

See:

http://www.progressivechristianity.ca/ccpc/index.php

“Many have used passages within the Bible [Kitab-i-Aqdas] to warn members that to venture beyond its teachings is a treacherous thing. Often, in the more conservative corners of Christianity [the Baha'i Faith], the young are taught to disparage higher education lest it lead one straight into the arms of the devil [spiritual isolation]. Those who venture from the faith [Baha'i Faith], in some instances, experience what is called disfellowshipping, a practice used by Jehovah’s Witnesses [Baha'is] to shun individuals who have rejected some or all of the doctrinal beliefs of their communities.

“If you are going to move forward though, you need to have an open mind, a mind that might end up in the evening with different stuff in it than was there when it awoke in the morning … It will allow that our perspective can’t have, nor provide, all the answers. An open mind will be eager to be understood to the point of being challenged. It is non-defensive and able to suspend judgment, holding ideas tentatively as they are assessed. It will be comfortable with complexity and ambiguity, not needing to have all the answers all at once. Ideas that have been offered to you are just that, ideas. They are malleable. They can be shifted around, stewed over, seen from different angles. They are mere food for thought. Your own thought. The church [UHJ] has worked very hard to hold on to their responsibility to do that for you. Take it back.

“We believe that the Bible [Kitab-i-Aqdas] is a human construction, and it is, therefore, full of both human promise and human error. We believe that no humanly constructed book can be the authoritative word of God and that we, who recognize this, are responsible to challenge such claims and behaviour that suggests such claims, particularly where we find it in our own tradition … We believe that much of what is described in the Bible as the activity of God is destructive of relationship and equality, that it is tribal and divisive, that, despite the best attempts that the authors were making to describe their experience of the divine, they have created a legacy of judgment, horror, and despair, and we no longer choose to burden ourselves with that legacy. We believe it is wrong to call such words holy or sacred.

“Believing as I do that all religious, philosophical, and ideological understandings must be challenged by their adherents so that we might all move into a place where foundational beliefs are shared and held in common, reviewed and revised as necessary, challenged and changed when appropriate, I extend the confrontation that is this book. May it irritate us all into the growth we so disturbingly need.”

I love this book and humbly seek its guidance because every word, letter and silence from it is impregnated with God’s own love for humanity.

I recommend the book “WITH OR WITHOUT GOD: Why The Way We Live Is More Important Than What We Believe” by GRETTA VOSPER (Foreword by John Shelby Spong).

See:

http://www.progressivechristianity.ca/ccpc/index.php

“Many have used passages within the Bible [Kitab-i-Aqdas] to warn members that to venture beyond its teachings is a treacherous thing. Often, in the more conservative corners of Christianity [the Baha'i Faith], the young are taught to disparage higher education lest it lead one straight into the arms of the devil [spiritual isolation]. Those who venture from the faith [Baha'i Faith], in some instances, experience what is called disfellowshipping, a practice used by Jehovah’s Witnesses [Baha'is] to shun individuals who have rejected some or all of the doctrinal beliefs of their communities.

“If you are going to move forward though, you need to have an open mind, a mind that might end up in the evening with different stuff in it than was there when it awoke in the morning … It will allow that our perspective can’t have, nor provide, all the answers. An open mind will be eager to be understood to the point of being challenged. It is non-defensive and able to suspend judgment, holding ideas tentatively as they are assessed. It will be comfortable with complexity and ambiguity, not needing to have all the answers all at once. Ideas that have been offered to you are just that, ideas. They are malleable. They can be shifted around, stewed over, seen from different angles. They are mere food for thought. Your own thought. The church [UHJ] has worked very hard to hold on to their responsibility to do that for you. Take it back.

“We believe that the Bible [Kitab-i-Aqdas] is a human construction, and it is, therefore, full of both human promise and human error. We believe that no humanly constructed book can be the authoritative word of God and that we, who recognize this, are responsible to challenge such claims and behaviour that suggests such claims, particularly where we find it in our own tradition … We believe that much of what is described in the Bible as the activity of God is destructive of relationship and equality, that it is tribal and divisive, that, despite the best attempts that the authors were making to describe their experience of the divine, they have created a legacy of judgment, horror, and despair, and we no longer choose to burden ourselves with that legacy. We believe it is wrong to call such words holy or sacred.

“Believing as I do that all religious, philosophical, and ideological understandings must be challenged by their adherents so that we might all move into a place where foundational beliefs are shared and held in common, reviewed and revised as necessary, challenged and changed when appropriate, I extend the confrontation that is this book. May it irritate us all into the growth we so disturbingly need.”

I love this book and humbly seek its guidance because every word, letter and silence from it is impregnated with God’s own love for humanity.

Sounds great Andrew

Sounds great Andrew

I think this video is an eloquent response by people of faith to the common (and incorrect) argument that “all religions” condemn homosexuality:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PxAER3cBMs

I’m an atheist, myself, but…
“Yes, Virginia, gay-friendly religions DO exist.” The Baha’i Faith just isn’t one of them.

I think this video is an eloquent response by people of faith to the common (and incorrect) argument that “all religions” condemn homosexuality:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8PxAER3cBMs

I’m an atheist, myself, but…
“Yes, Virginia, gay-friendly religions DO exist.” The Baha’i Faith just isn’t one of them.

A beautiful video! Thank you Amanda!

I know of at least two (structurally and theologically) different Baha’i communities (Covenant-Breaker Alert! Not In Communion With Rome! Er, I mean Haifa!) that welcome homosexual singles and couples as members. If one believes that “the Baha’i Faith” is synonymous with “acceptance of the authority of the UHJ in Haifa” then no, the Baha’i Faith isn’t gay-friendly. Quite the contrary, as many gay Baha’is can attest to.

Fortunately, since I’m darkly swimming in such spiritual darkness (swimmingly, I might add) that I think such a notion is nothing less than ludicrous — “unity” used as a spiritual shibboleth, so to speak — I can assure gay Baha’is that there are, indeed, Baha’i-identified communities where they will be welcomed, and where they will not be repeatedly lectured, regaled, insulted, ridiculed, admonished or harangued. Neither of these “denominations” can boast of having “millions” of members, or that one day there will be more of them than there are Christians or Muslims (they’re small communities, but they’re not completely delusional). But they do exist, and they seem to reflect many of the demographic, socio-economic and cultural characteristics of “emerging” faith communities. If you read Gretta Vosper’s book (“With or Without God”), this will give you some idea of what I’m referring to.

It goes without saying that the Haifan UHJ will no more “recognize” the Baha’i religious identification of these emergent neo-Baha’i communities than the Magisterium of the Catholic Church will ever “recognize” the Catholicity of non-Roman communions. But that’s irrelevant. We live in a very fertile time for new and emerging religious movements, and the horse left the barn long ago. I suspect such communities will continue to grow (albeit slowly) and evolve, the usual tired and predictable tirades to the contrary.

So Amanda — keep up the good work! I’m an atheist, too! God bless!

A beautiful video! Thank you Amanda!

I know of at least two (structurally and theologically) different Baha’i communities (Covenant-Breaker Alert! Not In Communion With Rome! Er, I mean Haifa!) that welcome homosexual singles and couples as members. If one believes that “the Baha’i Faith” is synonymous with “acceptance of the authority of the UHJ in Haifa” then no, the Baha’i Faith isn’t gay-friendly. Quite the contrary, as many gay Baha’is can attest to.

Fortunately, since I’m darkly swimming in such spiritual darkness (swimmingly, I might add) that I think such a notion is nothing less than ludicrous — “unity” used as a spiritual shibboleth, so to speak — I can assure gay Baha’is that there are, indeed, Baha’i-identified communities where they will be welcomed, and where they will not be repeatedly lectured, regaled, insulted, ridiculed, admonished or harangued. Neither of these “denominations” can boast of having “millions” of members, or that one day there will be more of them than there are Christians or Muslims (they’re small communities, but they’re not completely delusional). But they do exist, and they seem to reflect many of the demographic, socio-economic and cultural characteristics of “emerging” faith communities. If you read Gretta Vosper’s book (“With or Without God”), this will give you some idea of what I’m referring to.

It goes without saying that the Haifan UHJ will no more “recognize” the Baha’i religious identification of these emergent neo-Baha’i communities than the Magisterium of the Catholic Church will ever “recognize” the Catholicity of non-Roman communions. But that’s irrelevant. We live in a very fertile time for new and emerging religious movements, and the horse left the barn long ago. I suspect such communities will continue to grow (albeit slowly) and evolve, the usual tired and predictable tirades to the contrary.

So Amanda — keep up the good work! I’m an atheist, too! God bless!

oops- I managed to embed my reply right in the middle of the quoted text…..I’ll try again:

Hi, Andrew.

You are SO right about other Baha’i traditions having a different stance on homosexuality. I fall into the habit of using the term “Baha’i Faith” to refer to the Haifan bunch, and that is really not accurate or fair of me. Thanks for pointing that out- it’s an important point.

Are you still working on your blog for Naw Ruz? I’m looking forward to it.

godlessly, Amanda

oops- I managed to embed my reply right in the middle of the quoted text…..I’ll try again:

Hi, Andrew.

You are SO right about other Baha’i traditions having a different stance on homosexuality. I fall into the habit of using the term “Baha’i Faith” to refer to the Haifan bunch, and that is really not accurate or fair of me. Thanks for pointing that out- it’s an important point.

Are you still working on your blog for Naw Ruz? I’m looking forward to it.

godlessly, Amanda

A fascinating interview with author Richard Rodriguez that puts all the pieces together:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/11/25/proposition_8_religion/

[quote]I’m working right now in the Middle East on monotheistic religions because I’m very worried about the direction of religion. Ever since Sept. 11, when I heard that prayer being spoken at the moment the planes hit the World Trade Centers, I realized how much darkness there is in religion compared to how much light there is. I am very much concerned with whether or not these religions can be feminized.

The desert religions — Judaism, Christianity and Islam — are male religions. Their perception is that God is a male god and Allah is a male god. If the male is allowed to hold onto the power of God, then I think we are in terrible shape. I think what’s coming out of Colorado Springs right now, with people like Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, is either the last or continuing gasp of a male hierarchy in religion. That’s what’s at stake. And women have a determining role to play. Are they going to go along with this, or are they going to challenge the order?[/quote]

“Love is … the spirit of life … the establisher of true civilization … ” — ‘Abdu’l-Baha

A happy Day of the Covenant to everyone.

A fascinating interview with author Richard Rodriguez that puts all the pieces together:

http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2008/11/25/proposition_8_religion/

[quote]I’m working right now in the Middle East on monotheistic religions because I’m very worried about the direction of religion. Ever since Sept. 11, when I heard that prayer being spoken at the moment the planes hit the World Trade Centers, I realized how much darkness there is in religion compared to how much light there is. I am very much concerned with whether or not these religions can be feminized.

The desert religions — Judaism, Christianity and Islam — are male religions. Their perception is that God is a male god and Allah is a male god. If the male is allowed to hold onto the power of God, then I think we are in terrible shape. I think what’s coming out of Colorado Springs right now, with people like Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, is either the last or continuing gasp of a male hierarchy in religion. That’s what’s at stake. And women have a determining role to play. Are they going to go along with this, or are they going to challenge the order?[/quote]

“Love is … the spirit of life … the establisher of true civilization … ” — ‘Abdu’l-Baha

A happy Day of the Covenant to everyone.

I think it’s important for gays (and allies) to support gay-positive businesses and even more important to support such businesses when they are owned and operated by gay-positive members of homophobic religions.

http://www.sahan.ca/

The owner of the above-linked business left a refreshingly positive comment (a true rarity amid the usual sea of mindless blather) on one of Mavaddat’s YouTube videos. He is a young Baha’i artist who lives in Canada. If you like his clothing, consider making a purchase. Sanity should always be rewarded.

I think it’s important for gays (and allies) to support gay-positive businesses and even more important to support such businesses when they are owned and operated by gay-positive members of homophobic religions.

http://www.sahan.ca/

The owner of the above-linked business left a refreshingly positive comment (a true rarity amid the usual sea of mindless blather) on one of Mavaddat’s YouTube videos. He is a young Baha’i artist who lives in Canada. If you like his clothing, consider making a purchase. Sanity should always be rewarded.

Andrew, thanks, I agree. But can’t find an online store at Sahan’s site.

Andrew, thanks, I agree. But can’t find an online store at Sahan’s site.

[quote]But can’t find an online store at Sahan’s site.[/quote]

You’re right. But if you look under “Contacting Sahan Clothing” and click on “Send Message,” you can send him an e-mail inquiring about prices, availability, etc.

[quote]But can’t find an online store at Sahan’s site.[/quote]

You’re right. But if you look under “Contacting Sahan Clothing” and click on “Send Message,” you can send him an e-mail inquiring about prices, availability, etc.

This day marks the passing of ‘Abdu’l-Baha. I’ll be on hiatus from the internet for awhile so will miss the opportunity to contribute a rant to this disheveled collection of them. But I would like to once more draw attention to this site:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-bahai-anti-gay-discrimination

Some of the comments are truly heartbreaking and an indication of the stigma that exists. Comments 72 and 73 are particularly disheartening (I hope Amanda doesn’t mind my posting them here):

“My brother is a Bahaí convert and my nieces and nephews are being taught that their aunts (I and my partner) are sexual perverts who just need to ‘have babies/meet the right men’ to get ‘cured.’ This is insulting, divisive, and thoroughly false. There is nothing proper or ethical in promoting such bigoted misinformation as divine law.

No (I am not a Baha’i), and I never will be. I was raised to defend human rights, not to trample them in the name of God.”

And this:

“My son, his wife and children are Baha’is. They are decent, honorable people. My daughter and her spouse are gay. They also are decent, honorable people. They all treat each other with kindness but this doctrine is a permanent barrier between them; it does harm to them all.

I am not religious in any way. I believe that my children are caught up in the ideas of persons who lived in the ignorant past. Those who follow these teachings today are unable to escape this darkness because they believe these teachings are divinely inspired. I hope that the Baha’i faith, which has many noble precepts, can find its way to a better justice than it now asserts, but I am not optimistic. The division it has created in my family beaks my heart.”

What a sorry testament to religious intolerance. As one of my friends put it: “A thinly-veiled excuse for the religious nuts to hate gays.” Discrimination excused under the guise of religion.

“It is incumbent upon Bahá’í children to surpass other children in the acquisition of sciences and arts, for they have been cradled in the grace of God … The heart of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá longeth, in its love, to find that Bahá’í young people, each and all, are known throughout the world for their intellectual attainments.”

Thank you again, Amanda! I think ‘Abdu’l-Baha would be well pleased with your attainments, intellectual or otherwise!

This day marks the passing of ‘Abdu’l-Baha. I’ll be on hiatus from the internet for awhile so will miss the opportunity to contribute a rant to this disheveled collection of them. But I would like to once more draw attention to this site:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/stop-bahai-anti-gay-discrimination

Some of the comments are truly heartbreaking and an indication of the stigma that exists. Comments 72 and 73 are particularly disheartening (I hope Amanda doesn’t mind my posting them here):

“My brother is a Bahaí convert and my nieces and nephews are being taught that their aunts (I and my partner) are sexual perverts who just need to ‘have babies/meet the right men’ to get ‘cured.’ This is insulting, divisive, and thoroughly false. There is nothing proper or ethical in promoting such bigoted misinformation as divine law.

No (I am not a Baha’i), and I never will be. I was raised to defend human rights, not to trample them in the name of God.”

And this:

“My son, his wife and children are Baha’is. They are decent, honorable people. My daughter and her spouse are gay. They also are decent, honorable people. They all treat each other with kindness but this doctrine is a permanent barrier between them; it does harm to them all.

I am not religious in any way. I believe that my children are caught up in the ideas of persons who lived in the ignorant past. Those who follow these teachings today are unable to escape this darkness because they believe these teachings are divinely inspired. I hope that the Baha’i faith, which has many noble precepts, can find its way to a better justice than it now asserts, but I am not optimistic. The division it has created in my family beaks my heart.”

What a sorry testament to religious intolerance. As one of my friends put it: “A thinly-veiled excuse for the religious nuts to hate gays.” Discrimination excused under the guise of religion.

“It is incumbent upon Bahá’í children to surpass other children in the acquisition of sciences and arts, for they have been cradled in the grace of God … The heart of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá longeth, in its love, to find that Bahá’í young people, each and all, are known throughout the world for their intellectual attainments.”

Thank you again, Amanda! I think ‘Abdu’l-Baha would be well pleased with your attainments, intellectual or otherwise!

Thank you Andrew. I thought I was the only one who saw those posts on the petition site. It truly is heart breaking.
Also, I wrote the following to the office of the secretariat for the UHJ. I have yet to hear back. I really didn’t expect to get much of a response, but I was hoping for at least an acknowledgement of my email!
“Dear Sirs,
I would like a clear and final decision on how openly gay couples and individuals would be treated in the Bahai community. Would we have our voting rights removed for openly stating that we are gay and living with a partner? Or would we be fully accepted with voting rights and all?

I understand the difficult decision that you must face. On the one hand you feel that you must follow the admonitions written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, on the other there is tremendous damage being done to gays inside the Bahai community. I am just one of those individuals who suffered as a gay youth in the Bahai community.

I have a solution that may be worth investigating. Baha’u'llah extols his followers to seek professional medical help when they have an illness. For this reason, no Bahai would ever lose his voting rights for drinking a medicine with alcohol that is prescribed by a doctor, correct? Letters written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi also state that homosexuality is a disorder- one that may need the help of competent physicians. Then in the exact same way, if a homosexual has consulted a competent physician (all of whom do NOT recommend that a homosexual try to overcome his sexuality) and is now living a happy spiritual life- he should be FULLY accepted by the Bahai community. To remove this individual’s voting rights or make him hide his sexuality in order to function in the community would be an incredible injustice and the height of hypocrisy.

I hope to hear an unambigious reply from your office. For now, I have decided to remain inactive, but with the hopes that your leadership will bring the Bahai community to not only greater acceptance of gay families, but encourage the Bahai community to evolve into a haven for such families and individuals. I will leave you with an incredible link to a book that I hope you will read. I just pray that the religion of my forefathers will act differently from those in this book: http://www.crisisbook.org“

Thank you Andrew. I thought I was the only one who saw those posts on the petition site. It truly is heart breaking.
Also, I wrote the following to the office of the secretariat for the UHJ. I have yet to hear back. I really didn’t expect to get much of a response, but I was hoping for at least an acknowledgement of my email!
“Dear Sirs,
I would like a clear and final decision on how openly gay couples and individuals would be treated in the Bahai community. Would we have our voting rights removed for openly stating that we are gay and living with a partner? Or would we be fully accepted with voting rights and all?

I understand the difficult decision that you must face. On the one hand you feel that you must follow the admonitions written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, on the other there is tremendous damage being done to gays inside the Bahai community. I am just one of those individuals who suffered as a gay youth in the Bahai community.

I have a solution that may be worth investigating. Baha’u'llah extols his followers to seek professional medical help when they have an illness. For this reason, no Bahai would ever lose his voting rights for drinking a medicine with alcohol that is prescribed by a doctor, correct? Letters written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi also state that homosexuality is a disorder- one that may need the help of competent physicians. Then in the exact same way, if a homosexual has consulted a competent physician (all of whom do NOT recommend that a homosexual try to overcome his sexuality) and is now living a happy spiritual life- he should be FULLY accepted by the Bahai community. To remove this individual’s voting rights or make him hide his sexuality in order to function in the community would be an incredible injustice and the height of hypocrisy.

I hope to hear an unambigious reply from your office. For now, I have decided to remain inactive, but with the hopes that your leadership will bring the Bahai community to not only greater acceptance of gay families, but encourage the Bahai community to evolve into a haven for such families and individuals. I will leave you with an incredible link to a book that I hope you will read. I just pray that the religion of my forefathers will act differently from those in this book: http://www.crisisbook.org“

Good luck, P!

I have great hopes for the political and social progress of the United States under an Obama administration.

Michelle Obama has been described as someone who “speaks TRUTH TO POWER without apology.” She is neither a hypocrite nor an attention whore: she is completely authentic.

May you be inspired by her example (and that of her husband) to work for *authentic* social justice, without apology. No cheap grace, no free passes. Remember:

“Apology is only egotism, wrong side out.” (Oliver Wendell Holmes)

Again, good luck! I hope to learn more of your efforts over the course of the next few months … and now I must fly (literally).

“What people in power need is to have their own power undermined by exposure of their wrongly held secrets and their pretensions to legitimacy and their concealment of what their real politics are.” (Daniel Ellsberg Ulrich)

Good luck, P!

I have great hopes for the political and social progress of the United States under an Obama administration.

Michelle Obama has been described as someone who “speaks TRUTH TO POWER without apology.” She is neither a hypocrite nor an attention whore: she is completely authentic.

May you be inspired by her example (and that of her husband) to work for *authentic* social justice, without apology. No cheap grace, no free passes. Remember:

“Apology is only egotism, wrong side out.” (Oliver Wendell Holmes)

Again, good luck! I hope to learn more of your efforts over the course of the next few months … and now I must fly (literally).

“What people in power need is to have their own power undermined by exposure of their wrongly held secrets and their pretensions to legitimacy and their concealment of what their real politics are.” (Daniel Ellsberg Ulrich)

Thank you for your kind words, Andrew. And thank you for posting those comments from the petition site.

And thanks, P, for sharing your letter to the UHJ.

Thank you for your kind words, Andrew. And thank you for posting those comments from the petition site.

And thanks, P, for sharing your letter to the UHJ.

A couple of years ago I had a discussion on another site with a woman who claimed she was married to a gay man and they were living according to Bahai law. She believed her husband had “overcome” homosexuality. But I had to press her on her relationship and what exactly overcome meant. I just found what she said below interesting:
“As for attraction, there are lots of elements that go into that, including spiritual attraction which is more stable in my experience than physical attraction which can come and go or change over one’s lifetime. I don’t believe attraction is static or purely physical. I realize that not everyone may believe that; no problem.”
So in a nutshell, THAT is the best that a gay person can hope for in a Bahai marriage- a spiritual bond where the physical is minimized. She also went further to tell me that overcoming doesn’t mean that her husband has got rid of his feelings, just that he doesn’t act on them. So I had to press her then what exactly is the difference between control and overcome? I have to wonder, if he slips one day and cheats on her, then is he back to square one “controlling” or if he is committed 99% of the time has he still “overcome” his sexuality?
I think such couples are naive. Bahai marriage includes the physical as well as the spiritual. To live together as good/intimate friends or room mates DOES NOT constitute a Bahai marriage. But I don’t believe the level of intimacy (spiritual and physical) that is required in a Bahai marriage is available to those who are gay. Any thoughts on this?

A couple of years ago I had a discussion on another site with a woman who claimed she was married to a gay man and they were living according to Bahai law. She believed her husband had “overcome” homosexuality. But I had to press her on her relationship and what exactly overcome meant. I just found what she said below interesting:
“As for attraction, there are lots of elements that go into that, including spiritual attraction which is more stable in my experience than physical attraction which can come and go or change over one’s lifetime. I don’t believe attraction is static or purely physical. I realize that not everyone may believe that; no problem.”
So in a nutshell, THAT is the best that a gay person can hope for in a Bahai marriage- a spiritual bond where the physical is minimized. She also went further to tell me that overcoming doesn’t mean that her husband has got rid of his feelings, just that he doesn’t act on them. So I had to press her then what exactly is the difference between control and overcome? I have to wonder, if he slips one day and cheats on her, then is he back to square one “controlling” or if he is committed 99% of the time has he still “overcome” his sexuality?
I think such couples are naive. Bahai marriage includes the physical as well as the spiritual. To live together as good/intimate friends or room mates DOES NOT constitute a Bahai marriage. But I don’t believe the level of intimacy (spiritual and physical) that is required in a Bahai marriage is available to those who are gay. Any thoughts on this?

[quote]I have to wonder, if he slips one day and cheats on her, then is he back to square one “controlling” or if he is committed 99% of the time has he still “overcome” his sexuality?[/quote]

Saints are just sinners who keep repenting. It’s a make-work project for the professionally holy.

“God wants faithfulness, not success” – Mother Teresa of Calcutta

She’s married to a saint, “guillotined and still walking for miles through the city, carrying its head.” What could be more spiritual than that?

“God is a sock stuffed into the shoe of a prophet.” – Mother Jones

[quote]I don’t believe the level of intimacy (spiritual and physical) that is required in a Bahai marriage is available to those who are gay.[/quote]

Or to anyone who isn’t fashion forward. Remember: A hot pink clutch, not a hot pink scarf.

[quote]I have to wonder, if he slips one day and cheats on her, then is he back to square one “controlling” or if he is committed 99% of the time has he still “overcome” his sexuality?[/quote]

Saints are just sinners who keep repenting. It’s a make-work project for the professionally holy.

“God wants faithfulness, not success” – Mother Teresa of Calcutta

She’s married to a saint, “guillotined and still walking for miles through the city, carrying its head.” What could be more spiritual than that?

“God is a sock stuffed into the shoe of a prophet.” – Mother Jones

[quote]I don’t believe the level of intimacy (spiritual and physical) that is required in a Bahai marriage is available to those who are gay.[/quote]

Or to anyone who isn’t fashion forward. Remember: A hot pink clutch, not a hot pink scarf.

P, you might enjoy this (from Pam’s House Blend):

Opposite Sex Sodomites:
By Dr. Sylvia Rhue

Let me start by saying that if you don’t want to hear Godly truth in all it’s “gory” detail, you might want to read some other material. I’m about to take the gloves off to reveal the truth behind the heterosexual. A word of caution though: the material presented here is not for the weak-kneed or fainthearted. You are about to go “undercover,” embarking upon an behind-the-scenes foray into the sinful, sordid world of the heterosexual lifestyle.

Again, enter at your own risk!

God specifically targeted the heterosexual and destroyed almost the entire lot of them because of their violence and debauchery.

Gen:5-6,12: “And God saw that the wickedness of (heterosexual) man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made (the heterosexual) man on earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt, and all (heterosexual) flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.”

God used purging waters to eradicate heterosexuals and their corruption (Gen.7:21-23). What corruption you ask?

There is a laundry list of diseases and debauchery that are a daily part of the heterosexual lifestyle.

For your reading pleasure, here are a few: hepatitis, anorectal candidiasis, rectal and oral gonorrhea, lymphogranuloma venereum, trichomoniasis, syphilis, parasitic infections, Kaposi’s sarcoma, liver infections, Bowen’s disease, thrash (and thrush), toxoplasmosis, cryptococcal meningitis, swollen lymph nodes, night sweats, shingles, seborrheic dermatitis, prostatitis, urethritis, scabies, veneral warts and an unfortunate tendency to fake orgasms in the heterosexual female.

While the heterosexual couples I have known have usually struggled to maintain a loving and enduring relationship, most are doomed with an over 50% divorce rate. Heterosexuals are notoriously promiscuous and the sordid sexual activities they engage in are too morally degenerate to divulge here. Not for the faint of heart!

Heterosexuals play at marriage: Janice met Joe, who needed to get married so he wouldn’t be deported. They pretended to love each other, had a “wedding” ceremony and he got his green card. Nine months later they had a baby and Joe left, never to be seen again. True story.

Another heterosexual couple went to Las Vegas, got drunk, got married and divorced 48 hours later. True again.

While there are 6 biblical texts that have been interpreted as being against homosexuality, there are 362 admonitions against heterosexuality and the heterosexual lifestyle. Lynn Lavner stated what any thinking person can see: “That doesn’t mean that God doesn’t love heterosexuals. It’s just that they need more supervision.”

Dr. Sylvia Rhue is the Director of Religious Affairs with the National Black Justice Coalition headquartered in Washington, DC.

P, you might enjoy this (from Pam’s House Blend):

Opposite Sex Sodomites:
By Dr. Sylvia Rhue

Let me start by saying that if you don’t want to hear Godly truth in all it’s “gory” detail, you might want to read some other material. I’m about to take the gloves off to reveal the truth behind the heterosexual. A word of caution though: the material presented here is not for the weak-kneed or fainthearted. You are about to go “undercover,” embarking upon an behind-the-scenes foray into the sinful, sordid world of the heterosexual lifestyle.

Again, enter at your own risk!

God specifically targeted the heterosexual and destroyed almost the entire lot of them because of their violence and debauchery.

Gen:5-6,12: “And God saw that the wickedness of (heterosexual) man was great in the earth, and that every imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And it repented the Lord that he had made (the heterosexual) man on earth, and it grieved him at his heart. And God looked upon the earth, and, behold, it was corrupt, and all (heterosexual) flesh had corrupted his way upon the earth.”

God used purging waters to eradicate heterosexuals and their corruption (Gen.7:21-23). What corruption you ask?

There is a laundry list of diseases and debauchery that are a daily part of the heterosexual lifestyle.

For your reading pleasure, here are a few: hepatitis, anorectal candidiasis, rectal and oral gonorrhea, lymphogranuloma venereum, trichomoniasis, syphilis, parasitic infections, Kaposi’s sarcoma, liver infections, Bowen’s disease, thrash (and thrush), toxoplasmosis, cryptococcal meningitis, swollen lymph nodes, night sweats, shingles, seborrheic dermatitis, prostatitis, urethritis, scabies, veneral warts and an unfortunate tendency to fake orgasms in the heterosexual female.

While the heterosexual couples I have known have usually struggled to maintain a loving and enduring relationship, most are doomed with an over 50% divorce rate. Heterosexuals are notoriously promiscuous and the sordid sexual activities they engage in are too morally degenerate to divulge here. Not for the faint of heart!

Heterosexuals play at marriage: Janice met Joe, who needed to get married so he wouldn’t be deported. They pretended to love each other, had a “wedding” ceremony and he got his green card. Nine months later they had a baby and Joe left, never to be seen again. True story.

Another heterosexual couple went to Las Vegas, got drunk, got married and divorced 48 hours later. True again.

While there are 6 biblical texts that have been interpreted as being against homosexuality, there are 362 admonitions against heterosexuality and the heterosexual lifestyle. Lynn Lavner stated what any thinking person can see: “That doesn’t mean that God doesn’t love heterosexuals. It’s just that they need more supervision.”

Dr. Sylvia Rhue is the Director of Religious Affairs with the National Black Justice Coalition headquartered in Washington, DC.

Two sites of interest:

http://www.iranian.com/BTW/2004/July/Najm/index.html

[quote] The focus on anus as an erotic zone that we now collapse onto male homosexuality is indeed even more recent. In one Qajar source, Resalah-‘i fojuriyah (An Essay on Debauchery), written in 1872 by Vali Khan, a Qajar courtier, Vali Khan records his sexual adventures with twenty-eight Qajar princesses, fifteen female prostitutes, sixty-five amrads, twenty-seven male and ten female servants (gholam and kaniz), and eight virgins (these are reported in a separate category, since the concern for their virginity is invoked in relation to his practice of anal intercourse with them).

But it would be misleading, though tempting, to conclude from these relative numbers that Vali Khan had a preference for male objects of desire. There is nothing in his descriptions that would indicate superiority of the pleasure he took in male liaisons compared to female ones. What he does emphasize, however, is his preference for anal intercourse with men and women alike, a point upon which he further elaborates by concluding his essay with an elaboration of superiority of anus over vagina as an object of penile penetration.

Contrary to our current tendency to assume that a preference for anal intercourse meant a preference for males that we would now name kuni, Vali Khan articulates nothing related to “an object of desire”, male or female, but something that reads more like a desire for a particular body part, as if this body part was dissected from the entirety of the person’s body. It reads more as a hierarchicalization of pleasurable body parts.[/quote]

“We shrink, for very shame, from treating of the subject of boys.” I would surmise that here Baha’u'llah prohibits not only pederasty but also “a desire for a particular body part.” He does not prohibit all acts of (homo)sexual pleasure. Just a guess.

http://www.antigayliesandliars.blogspot.com/

[quote]In their zeal to prove the worst about the gay community, the anti-gay industry . . . have created a house of pseudo-scientific studies based on distortions, lies, headless monsters, and legitimate studies taken out of context which are then pushed by fake experts, Ph.D.s, conservative columnists and bloggers, and ignorant people of faith all willing to sacrifice their integrity on the altar of an alleged higher calling.

The purpose of this webpage is to record how the anti-gay industry (i.e. religious right) uses lies and deceptions to demonize the lgbt community and keep us from our God-given right of self-determination as well as our rights as Americans to be protected under the law.

By all means, use this page to educate yourselves and others.[/quote]

His webpage includes this:

[quote]Top lies told about the lgbt community

1. Homosexuality is a lifestyle more harmful than cigarette smoking.

2. Gay men have a short life span.

3. The gay and lesbian community have a high rate of domestic violence.

4. Unhealthy behaviors (i.e. substance abuse, promiscuous sexual behavior) is indicative of the gay or lesbian orientation.

5. Gay men molest children at a high rate.

6. Gays and lesbians want to silence Christians.

7. Gays and lesbians recruit people, particularly children, to their “lifestyle.”

8. Gays and lesbians are following a six-point plan to take over America.

9. Any judge who rules in favor of the gay and lesbian community in a case is an “activist judge.”

10. Anal sex is “homosexual behavior.”

11. Robert Spitzer’s study confirms that gays and lesbians can change their orientation.

12. Gays and lesbians want to force acceptance.

13. Gay bowel syndrome is a legitimate medical term.

14. A man who molests a boy or a woman who molests a girl is automatically homosexual.

15. A convenience sample or out-of-date study can be used to generalize about an entire community.

16. The average gay man has many sexual partners.

17. Laws created to protect transgenders from discrimination will make it easier for sexual predators to come into womens’ bathrooms and locker rooms.

Information taken from Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Exposing the Lies of the Anti-Gay Industry. [/quote]

Two sites of interest:

http://www.iranian.com/BTW/2004/July/Najm/index.html

[quote] The focus on anus as an erotic zone that we now collapse onto male homosexuality is indeed even more recent. In one Qajar source, Resalah-‘i fojuriyah (An Essay on Debauchery), written in 1872 by Vali Khan, a Qajar courtier, Vali Khan records his sexual adventures with twenty-eight Qajar princesses, fifteen female prostitutes, sixty-five amrads, twenty-seven male and ten female servants (gholam and kaniz), and eight virgins (these are reported in a separate category, since the concern for their virginity is invoked in relation to his practice of anal intercourse with them).

But it would be misleading, though tempting, to conclude from these relative numbers that Vali Khan had a preference for male objects of desire. There is nothing in his descriptions that would indicate superiority of the pleasure he took in male liaisons compared to female ones. What he does emphasize, however, is his preference for anal intercourse with men and women alike, a point upon which he further elaborates by concluding his essay with an elaboration of superiority of anus over vagina as an object of penile penetration.

Contrary to our current tendency to assume that a preference for anal intercourse meant a preference for males that we would now name kuni, Vali Khan articulates nothing related to “an object of desire”, male or female, but something that reads more like a desire for a particular body part, as if this body part was dissected from the entirety of the person’s body. It reads more as a hierarchicalization of pleasurable body parts.[/quote]

“We shrink, for very shame, from treating of the subject of boys.” I would surmise that here Baha’u'llah prohibits not only pederasty but also “a desire for a particular body part.” He does not prohibit all acts of (homo)sexual pleasure. Just a guess.

http://www.antigayliesandliars.blogspot.com/

[quote]In their zeal to prove the worst about the gay community, the anti-gay industry . . . have created a house of pseudo-scientific studies based on distortions, lies, headless monsters, and legitimate studies taken out of context which are then pushed by fake experts, Ph.D.s, conservative columnists and bloggers, and ignorant people of faith all willing to sacrifice their integrity on the altar of an alleged higher calling.

The purpose of this webpage is to record how the anti-gay industry (i.e. religious right) uses lies and deceptions to demonize the lgbt community and keep us from our God-given right of self-determination as well as our rights as Americans to be protected under the law.

By all means, use this page to educate yourselves and others.[/quote]

His webpage includes this:

[quote]Top lies told about the lgbt community

1. Homosexuality is a lifestyle more harmful than cigarette smoking.

2. Gay men have a short life span.

3. The gay and lesbian community have a high rate of domestic violence.

4. Unhealthy behaviors (i.e. substance abuse, promiscuous sexual behavior) is indicative of the gay or lesbian orientation.

5. Gay men molest children at a high rate.

6. Gays and lesbians want to silence Christians.

7. Gays and lesbians recruit people, particularly children, to their “lifestyle.”

8. Gays and lesbians are following a six-point plan to take over America.

9. Any judge who rules in favor of the gay and lesbian community in a case is an “activist judge.”

10. Anal sex is “homosexual behavior.”

11. Robert Spitzer’s study confirms that gays and lesbians can change their orientation.

12. Gays and lesbians want to force acceptance.

13. Gay bowel syndrome is a legitimate medical term.

14. A man who molests a boy or a woman who molests a girl is automatically homosexual.

15. A convenience sample or out-of-date study can be used to generalize about an entire community.

16. The average gay man has many sexual partners.

17. Laws created to protect transgenders from discrimination will make it easier for sexual predators to come into womens’ bathrooms and locker rooms.

Information taken from Holy Bullies and Headless Monsters: Exposing the Lies of the Anti-Gay Industry. [/quote]

http://playingagirl.wordpress.com/2007/05/30/the-differences-between-bahia-and-my-judiasm/

[quote]This religion sounds like a liberal’s dream come true – at first.

Baha’u’llah centers his prophecy on all the right stuff – We are one, just as God is one – thus we must eliminate poverty, inequality and oppression of all kind, in order to reflect the truth of God’s Unity.

One thing they forgot to eliminate is homophobia. “Bahá’í law limits permissible sexual relations to those between a man and a woman in marriage” This is an answer to a question inquiring about the Baha’i perspective on homosexuality (http://www.bahai.org/faq/practices/sexuality).

Thus, it seams that the prophet was just as revolutionary as the best progressive thinking of his time. A visionary can only see so far – this after all is at the heart of the faith that forgets to apply the same principle to itself.[/quote]

http://playingagirl.wordpress.com/2007/05/30/the-differences-between-bahia-and-my-judiasm/

[quote]This religion sounds like a liberal’s dream come true – at first.

Baha’u’llah centers his prophecy on all the right stuff – We are one, just as God is one – thus we must eliminate poverty, inequality and oppression of all kind, in order to reflect the truth of God’s Unity.

One thing they forgot to eliminate is homophobia. “Bahá’í law limits permissible sexual relations to those between a man and a woman in marriage” This is an answer to a question inquiring about the Baha’i perspective on homosexuality (http://www.bahai.org/faq/practices/sexuality).

Thus, it seams that the prophet was just as revolutionary as the best progressive thinking of his time. A visionary can only see so far – this after all is at the heart of the faith that forgets to apply the same principle to itself.[/quote]

Andrew,

This is starting to sound extremist, shrill. etc.

I have no problem with bahais that complain about the problems gays have in the bahai community (which are significant from what I’ve seen for 20 years), but what is becoming apparent is that the pro-gay political agenda is increasingly difficult to differentiate from a far-left/pc inquisition of anyone that even dares to be “neutral” on the subject, much less “conservative” or “traditional”.

Being a california voter, I was told I’m a “bigot” for not voting “No” on Prop 8. This was after I told gay bahais/supporters that I don’t like either “side”, and didn’t intend to vote for either side.

People are being attacked by pro-gay radical/extremists for supporting Prop 8.

Looks like another exmaple of extremists on the left shooting themselves in the foot. They are creating the impression amongst the public that they are unstable and are theateneing to violate other people’s rights to get their own. What middle-of-the-road people are liable to conclude is that once a crazy group gets one thing “where will they stop?”.

I think the only possible compromise that is “fair to everyone” (or perhaps “equally unfair”) is to remove all government/legal preferences to marriage of any kind. However, this will force people to first get “civil unions” (at the court house), then go to church/temple/mosque for a separate “unoffical” religious cermony.

The whole point of having a separation of church/state is to prevent agents of state power from coercing people’s thought, beliefs and actions.

I think the pro-gay political agenda has really started to go wrong, they want to put their internal “mommy/daddy” conflicts and similar issues into the public sphere, which always gets ugly.

Regards,
Eric P.
ex-bahai

Andrew,

This is starting to sound extremist, shrill. etc.

I have no problem with bahais that complain about the problems gays have in the bahai community (which are significant from what I’ve seen for 20 years), but what is becoming apparent is that the pro-gay political agenda is increasingly difficult to differentiate from a far-left/pc inquisition of anyone that even dares to be “neutral” on the subject, much less “conservative” or “traditional”.

Being a california voter, I was told I’m a “bigot” for not voting “No” on Prop 8. This was after I told gay bahais/supporters that I don’t like either “side”, and didn’t intend to vote for either side.

People are being attacked by pro-gay radical/extremists for supporting Prop 8.

Looks like another exmaple of extremists on the left shooting themselves in the foot. They are creating the impression amongst the public that they are unstable and are theateneing to violate other people’s rights to get their own. What middle-of-the-road people are liable to conclude is that once a crazy group gets one thing “where will they stop?”.

I think the only possible compromise that is “fair to everyone” (or perhaps “equally unfair”) is to remove all government/legal preferences to marriage of any kind. However, this will force people to first get “civil unions” (at the court house), then go to church/temple/mosque for a separate “unoffical” religious cermony.

The whole point of having a separation of church/state is to prevent agents of state power from coercing people’s thought, beliefs and actions.

I think the pro-gay political agenda has really started to go wrong, they want to put their internal “mommy/daddy” conflicts and similar issues into the public sphere, which always gets ugly.

Regards,
Eric P.
ex-bahai

To be 100% clear: I have no interest in being bullied by either pro-gay or anti-gay extremists.

(Both “sides” have a known history of extremism.)

Regards,
Eric P.
ex-bahai

To be 100% clear: I have no interest in being bullied by either pro-gay or anti-gay extremists.

(Both “sides” have a known history of extremism.)

Regards,
Eric P.
ex-bahai

Uh, excuse me? Extremism? What is extreme about wanting to be guaranteed the exact same rights/benefits automatically given to heterosexual taxpayers? Maybe I’m missing why you didn’t make a difference and vote against Prop 8. The Proposition wouldn’t do anything to hurt society, it wouldn’t cost tax payers any more money (in fact, you all lost out big time on the tourism dollars California could have gained). So why the fence sitting on this issue? It was a very clear choice and unfortunately the decision was left to the organized rigth wing churches/religions that fought it. Unfortunately, we are a minority and need our straight allies to help us- or else these right wing nutcases will take away any rights we already enjoy. Please go see the movie Milk if you haven’t. Histroy seems to keep repeating itself.

Uh, excuse me? Extremism? What is extreme about wanting to be guaranteed the exact same rights/benefits automatically given to heterosexual taxpayers? Maybe I’m missing why you didn’t make a difference and vote against Prop 8. The Proposition wouldn’t do anything to hurt society, it wouldn’t cost tax payers any more money (in fact, you all lost out big time on the tourism dollars California could have gained). So why the fence sitting on this issue? It was a very clear choice and unfortunately the decision was left to the organized rigth wing churches/religions that fought it. Unfortunately, we are a minority and need our straight allies to help us- or else these right wing nutcases will take away any rights we already enjoy. Please go see the movie Milk if you haven’t. Histroy seems to keep repeating itself.

It may be true that the no-on-8 campaign made political miscalculations. It is certainly true that pro-8 activists and voters have been called bigots. I have called many of them bigots. I have done worse: I have called them Mormons. I have thus “attacked” them and been an “extremist”, though I admit I never got off my straight ass for the gays before. I am an extremist for my state’s constitution, and yes, as far as bigots go, I have no problem with calling a spade a spade.

How many people, pray tell, have been lynched or bombed by gay activists? Look at the world, and tell me that murderous gay henchmen are what’s wrong with it.

It may be true that the no-on-8 campaign made political miscalculations. It is certainly true that pro-8 activists and voters have been called bigots. I have called many of them bigots. I have done worse: I have called them Mormons. I have thus “attacked” them and been an “extremist”, though I admit I never got off my straight ass for the gays before. I am an extremist for my state’s constitution, and yes, as far as bigots go, I have no problem with calling a spade a spade.

How many people, pray tell, have been lynched or bombed by gay activists? Look at the world, and tell me that murderous gay henchmen are what’s wrong with it.

Dear Eric P.,

First, you say:
“To be 100% clear: I have no interest in being bullied by either pro-gay or anti-gay extremists.

(Both “sides” have a known history of extremism.”)

Just to be 100% clear myself, is someone disagreeing with you aloud “bullying?” Will anyone who responds to your last post be a “bully?” What are you after here?

How in the WORLD are you defining “extremism” if you find yourself able to accuse gay rights activists of it? “Activism” is not the same thing as “extremism.” Please inform us of this history of gay extremism you report.

And, I’m sorry- did you actually say you “dare to be neutral” on gay rights? How remarkably NOT daring of you. Seriously, DARE? It must be pretty brutal to wake up every morning neutral (or apathetic) to the suffering of people in your own state. I don’t know how you do it. You know what IS daring? Waking up GAY in your state and having the courage to go to school every day and risk getting beaten up, or in the case of 15 year old Lawrence King, shot and killed. Or fighting for 55 years to marry the person you’ve been in love with, partnered with in California, finally MARRYING them when you are 87 years old,and then having the law changed. (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/08/27/lesbian.activist.dies/) Daring to HOPE and to ACT for 55 years is worthy of mention. Not doing anything to stop Prop 8 is Not.

Congratulations on your dare to be neutral.

You also wrote: “People are being attacked by pro-gay radical/extremists for supporting Prop 8.”

Attacked? Attacked how? Do you just mean argued with? What are you talking about? Debate does NOT equal attack. Particularly if it is on a PUBLIC issue.

You also say you have been called a bigot for not voting against Prop 8. Voting FOR bigoted legislation IS an act of bigotry. If you commit a bigoted act, you are a bigot. That isn’t an attack, it is calling a spade a spade.

If you just didn’t vote on it at all, shame on you.

“You speak of our activity in Birmingham as extreme. At first I was rather disappointed that fellow clergymen would see my nonviolent efforts as those of an extremist…But though I was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label. Was not Jesus an extremist for love…was not Amos an extremist for justice…And John Bunyun: “I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience.” And Abraham Lincoln:”This nation cannot survive half slave and half free.” And Thomas Jefferson: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…” So the question is not whether we be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice?…

I had hoped that the white moderate would see this need. Perhaps I was too optimistic; perhaps I expected too much. I suppose I should have realized that few members of the oppressor race can understand the deep groans and passionate yearnings of the oppressed race, and still fewer have the vision to see that injustice must be rooted out by strong, persistent and determined action.”
-Martin Luther King, Jr, from “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”

MLK goes on AT LENGTH in that letter about the heartbreak, bitter disappointment and “shattered dreams” he felt in his heart at the neutrality- the inaction- of moderates in the South. I think, maybe, that if there is anyone whose dreams about the United States should be taken seriously, it is him.

Can you seriously name ONE instance of gay rights activists “threatening to violate other people’s rights to get their own?” That is an absurb claim. People do NOT have the RIGHT to a privileged legal position. Nor do they have a RIGHT to not be called on their bigotry.

If the issue for you is actually that the state should have no role in marriages of ANY kind, I assume you have a history of activism on that issue that predates the Prop 8 controversy?

Dear Eric P.,

First, you say:
“To be 100% clear: I have no interest in being bullied by either pro-gay or anti-gay extremists.

(Both “sides” have a known history of extremism.”)

Just to be 100% clear myself, is someone disagreeing with you aloud “bullying?” Will anyone who responds to your last post be a “bully?” What are you after here?

How in the WORLD are you defining “extremism” if you find yourself able to accuse gay rights activists of it? “Activism” is not the same thing as “extremism.” Please inform us of this history of gay extremism you report.

And, I’m sorry- did you actually say you “dare to be neutral” on gay rights? How remarkably NOT daring of you. Seriously, DARE? It must be pretty brutal to wake up every morning neutral (or apathetic) to the suffering of people in your own state. I don’t know how you do it. You know what IS daring? Waking up GAY in your state and having the courage to go to school every day and risk getting beaten up, or in the case of 15 year old Lawrence King, shot and killed. Or fighting for 55 years to marry the person you’ve been in love with, partnered with in California, finally MARRYING them when you are 87 years old,and then having the law changed. (http://www.cnn.com/2008/US/08/27/lesbian.activist.dies/) Daring to HOPE and to ACT for 55 years is worthy of mention. Not doing anything to stop Prop 8 is Not.

Congratulations on your dare to be neutral.

You also wrote: “People are being attacked by pro-gay radical/extremists for supporting Prop 8.”

Attacked? Attacked how? Do you just mean argued with? What are you talking about? Debate does NOT equal attack. Particularly if it is on a PUBLIC issue.

You also say you have been called a bigot for not voting against Prop 8. Voting FOR bigoted legislation IS an act of bigotry. If you commit a bigoted act, you are a bigot. That isn’t an attack, it is calling a spade a spade.

If you just didn’t vote on it at all, shame on you.

“You speak of our activity in Birmingham as extreme. At first I was rather disappointed that fellow clergymen would see my nonviolent efforts as those of an extremist…But though I was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label. Was not Jesus an extremist for love…was not Amos an extremist for justice…And John Bunyun: “I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience.” And Abraham Lincoln:”This nation cannot survive half slave and half free.” And Thomas Jefferson: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal…” So the question is not whether we be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice?…

I had hoped that the white moderate would see this need. Perhaps I was too optimistic; perhaps I expected too much. I suppose I should have realized that few members of the oppressor race can understand the deep groans and passionate yearnings of the oppressed race, and still fewer have the vision to see that injustice must be rooted out by strong, persistent and determined action.”
-Martin Luther King, Jr, from “Letter from a Birmingham Jail”

MLK goes on AT LENGTH in that letter about the heartbreak, bitter disappointment and “shattered dreams” he felt in his heart at the neutrality- the inaction- of moderates in the South. I think, maybe, that if there is anyone whose dreams about the United States should be taken seriously, it is him.

Can you seriously name ONE instance of gay rights activists “threatening to violate other people’s rights to get their own?” That is an absurb claim. People do NOT have the RIGHT to a privileged legal position. Nor do they have a RIGHT to not be called on their bigotry.

If the issue for you is actually that the state should have no role in marriages of ANY kind, I assume you have a history of activism on that issue that predates the Prop 8 controversy?

And also, “shrill?” So not okay.

And also, “shrill?” So not okay.

Nice try, ep!

I especially like your use of the word “shrill.” How touching. How tactical. How predictable.

But I’m afraid I can’t seriously entertain the prospect of adequately responding to someone who believes that the integral “philosophy” of Ken Wilber represents a valid “alternate approach to the exploration of truth and meaning.”

“And thus the West produced an extraordinary number of subtle-level (or sambhogakaya) mystics, who only claimed that the soul and God can share a union; but very few causal (dharmakaya) and very few nondual (svabhavikakaya) mystics, who went further and claimed not just a union but a supreme identity of soul and God in pure Godhead.”

Complete and utter nonsense. Wilber conflates a natural theology of monism with metaphysics, then colors his interpretations of reality with this idealist monist premise. He mixes apples with oranges and calls them potatoes. Ooooh, that’s soooo awesome, dooood.

http://www.kheper.net/topics/Wilber/Cult_of_Ken_Wilber.html

“Wilberism is a particular world perspective grown out of the humanistic and transpersonal psychology movements, which was an important moment of intellectual and human history, but it is time to move on.”

Indeed. Well past time.

Compared to “Culty Ken,” Baha’u'llah is a screaming liberal. Now does that seem too shrill and strident?

http://wilberwatch.blogspot.com/2006/12/integral-inflation.html

“I am convinced Wilber is just a neo-con conservative.”

I am convinced Wilber is just a giant bag of hot gas, stink and all.

Nice try, ep!

I especially like your use of the word “shrill.” How touching. How tactical. How predictable.

But I’m afraid I can’t seriously entertain the prospect of adequately responding to someone who believes that the integral “philosophy” of Ken Wilber represents a valid “alternate approach to the exploration of truth and meaning.”

“And thus the West produced an extraordinary number of subtle-level (or sambhogakaya) mystics, who only claimed that the soul and God can share a union; but very few causal (dharmakaya) and very few nondual (svabhavikakaya) mystics, who went further and claimed not just a union but a supreme identity of soul and God in pure Godhead.”

Complete and utter nonsense. Wilber conflates a natural theology of monism with metaphysics, then colors his interpretations of reality with this idealist monist premise. He mixes apples with oranges and calls them potatoes. Ooooh, that’s soooo awesome, dooood.

http://www.kheper.net/topics/Wilber/Cult_of_Ken_Wilber.html

“Wilberism is a particular world perspective grown out of the humanistic and transpersonal psychology movements, which was an important moment of intellectual and human history, but it is time to move on.”

Indeed. Well past time.

Compared to “Culty Ken,” Baha’u'llah is a screaming liberal. Now does that seem too shrill and strident?

http://wilberwatch.blogspot.com/2006/12/integral-inflation.html

“I am convinced Wilber is just a neo-con conservative.”

I am convinced Wilber is just a giant bag of hot gas, stink and all.

I would like to point out that women’s rights activists back in the early 1900s went through similar difficulties as the gay community is currently going through. How many husbands and males wanted to remain neutral or got sick of the campaigning?

Women having the vote? Having jobs? Taking positions of leadership? Getting equal pay? Not being stuck in the kitchen? The horror!

Now because of the efforts of those activists we (at least in the Western nations) pretty much take women’s rights for granted (Granted that there are various flat earth backward groups that haven’t woken up to this).

Gay marriage? Gay families with healthy well adjusted kids? No more closet homosexuals? Gay people happily living out their lives without fear of persecution? A world where it doesn’t matter if people explore gay, bi or hetero relationships, whether by choice or by nature? The horror!

I bet in 50-100 years time the gay community will have the same rights as everyone else, and it will be thanks to the past, current and future gay-rights activists. There is and will be the usual kicking and screaming from the traditional conservative groups reluctant to change but eventually we’ll get there.

I would like to point out that women’s rights activists back in the early 1900s went through similar difficulties as the gay community is currently going through. How many husbands and males wanted to remain neutral or got sick of the campaigning?

Women having the vote? Having jobs? Taking positions of leadership? Getting equal pay? Not being stuck in the kitchen? The horror!

Now because of the efforts of those activists we (at least in the Western nations) pretty much take women’s rights for granted (Granted that there are various flat earth backward groups that haven’t woken up to this).

Gay marriage? Gay families with healthy well adjusted kids? No more closet homosexuals? Gay people happily living out their lives without fear of persecution? A world where it doesn’t matter if people explore gay, bi or hetero relationships, whether by choice or by nature? The horror!

I bet in 50-100 years time the gay community will have the same rights as everyone else, and it will be thanks to the past, current and future gay-rights activists. There is and will be the usual kicking and screaming from the traditional conservative groups reluctant to change but eventually we’ll get there.

I agree, Grover, and that’s a really good point, but I think we will also look back (I hope, anyway)on the current status of women’s rights in 100 years and be appalled at where we are today. Where we are today with women’s rights is where we were with lynchings in the South during Reconstruction up to the first half of the last century- only the lynchings take place within intimate relationships. A woman is raped in the US every 2 minutes, usually by someone she knows and loves. One third of ALL American women will experience battering by a male partner at some point in their lives, and again in the US, violence against women is the second leading cause of death among 20-24 year olds, and the 3rd among 15-19 year olds. Luckily, for my age group it drops to the 5th leading cause of death. If I make it to 35 it drops to 9th.

You wrote:
“I would like to point out that women’s rights activists back in the early 1900s went through similar difficulties as the gay community is currently going through. How many husbands and males wanted to remain neutral or got sick of the campaigning?”

Women’s rights activists actually STILL go through similar difficulties to what the gay community is currently facing. When push comes to shove, a shocking number of husbands and males STILL want to remain “neutral” or get sick of the campaigning.

But you can’t be neutral on a moving train.

Just as an aside, did you know getting heterosexually married lands women with SEVEN more hours of housework a week and SAVES men an hour? SEVEN hours. SEVEN. SEVEN UNPAID hours. I think we have another word for unpaid labor, but it escapes me…

http://www.rainn.org
http://www.aardvarc.org/dv/statistics.shtml
http://www.cdc.gov/Women/lcod/04all.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_in_the_United_States
http://www.livescience.com/health/080404-husband-housework.html

I agree, Grover, and that’s a really good point, but I think we will also look back (I hope, anyway)on the current status of women’s rights in 100 years and be appalled at where we are today. Where we are today with women’s rights is where we were with lynchings in the South during Reconstruction up to the first half of the last century- only the lynchings take place within intimate relationships. A woman is raped in the US every 2 minutes, usually by someone she knows and loves. One third of ALL American women will experience battering by a male partner at some point in their lives, and again in the US, violence against women is the second leading cause of death among 20-24 year olds, and the 3rd among 15-19 year olds. Luckily, for my age group it drops to the 5th leading cause of death. If I make it to 35 it drops to 9th.

You wrote:
“I would like to point out that women’s rights activists back in the early 1900s went through similar difficulties as the gay community is currently going through. How many husbands and males wanted to remain neutral or got sick of the campaigning?”

Women’s rights activists actually STILL go through similar difficulties to what the gay community is currently facing. When push comes to shove, a shocking number of husbands and males STILL want to remain “neutral” or get sick of the campaigning.

But you can’t be neutral on a moving train.

Just as an aside, did you know getting heterosexually married lands women with SEVEN more hours of housework a week and SAVES men an hour? SEVEN hours. SEVEN. SEVEN UNPAID hours. I think we have another word for unpaid labor, but it escapes me…

http://www.rainn.org
http://www.aardvarc.org/dv/statistics.shtml
http://www.cdc.gov/Women/lcod/04all.pdf
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynching_in_the_United_States
http://www.livescience.com/health/080404-husband-housework.html

Grover wrote:
A world where it doesn’t matter if people explore gay, bi or hetero relationships, whether by choice or by nature?

Grover,
would such a world mean to you that kids would be encouraged to make diverse experiences before becoming settled in their favourite type of sexuality?

And how about changes in orientation coming about during a life-time? Should couples be allowed to follow these attractions? Would that mean divorce or multiple partners?

Grover wrote:
A world where it doesn’t matter if people explore gay, bi or hetero relationships, whether by choice or by nature?

Grover,
would such a world mean to you that kids would be encouraged to make diverse experiences before becoming settled in their favourite type of sexuality?

And how about changes in orientation coming about during a life-time? Should couples be allowed to follow these attractions? Would that mean divorce or multiple partners?

[quote comment=""][...]A world where it doesn’t matter if people explore gay, bi or hetero relationships, whether by choice or by nature?[...][/quote]

Absolutely, Farhan. Given the state of the science, I don’t think we’re in a position to start accusing particular individuals of being gay by choice. Are you suggesting a litmus test? Hah! But let’s be real! Shoghists don’t take scientific inquiry seriously when it contradicts Shoghism. You’ve already made up your mind.

[quote comment=""]would such a world mean to you that kids would be encouraged to make diverse experiences before becoming settled in their favourite type of sexuality?[/quote]

So openmindedness is tantamount to promiscuity? How perverse! This is the kind of nihilism that results when people are told by their scripture that they cannot be left alone to use their own judgment.

[quote comment=""]And how about changes in orientation coming about during a life-time? Should couples be allowed to follow these attractions? Would that mean divorce or multiple partners?[/quote]

A vow is a vow. It’s that simple. Think about it.

[quote comment=""][...]A world where it doesn’t matter if people explore gay, bi or hetero relationships, whether by choice or by nature?[...][/quote]

Absolutely, Farhan. Given the state of the science, I don’t think we’re in a position to start accusing particular individuals of being gay by choice. Are you suggesting a litmus test? Hah! But let’s be real! Shoghists don’t take scientific inquiry seriously when it contradicts Shoghism. You’ve already made up your mind.

[quote comment=""]would such a world mean to you that kids would be encouraged to make diverse experiences before becoming settled in their favourite type of sexuality?[/quote]

So openmindedness is tantamount to promiscuity? How perverse! This is the kind of nihilism that results when people are told by their scripture that they cannot be left alone to use their own judgment.

[quote comment=""]And how about changes in orientation coming about during a life-time? Should couples be allowed to follow these attractions? Would that mean divorce or multiple partners?[/quote]

A vow is a vow. It’s that simple. Think about it.

Dan wrote:
So openmindedness is tantamount to promiscuity? How perverse! This is the kind of nihilism that results when people are told by their scripture that they cannot be left alone to use their own judgment.

Thanks for this clear reply, Dan. We have two different options in education here:

The one I adhere to says that education should orient future citizens into ways that make their lives the most useful to society.

The one you seem to be promoting says kids are to be allowed to discover their choices by themselves, and once they have made a vow, they have to stick to it.

That would seem to be a sudden loss of liberty to me.

Maybe we can one day compare the outcomes of these two different attitudes in education.

Dan wrote:
So openmindedness is tantamount to promiscuity? How perverse! This is the kind of nihilism that results when people are told by their scripture that they cannot be left alone to use their own judgment.

Thanks for this clear reply, Dan. We have two different options in education here:

The one I adhere to says that education should orient future citizens into ways that make their lives the most useful to society.

The one you seem to be promoting says kids are to be allowed to discover their choices by themselves, and once they have made a vow, they have to stick to it.

That would seem to be a sudden loss of liberty to me.

Maybe we can one day compare the outcomes of these two different attitudes in education.

Farhan asked

[quote post="193"]would such a world mean to you that kids would be encouraged to make diverse experiences before becoming settled in their favourite type of sexuality?[/quote]

I was referring to people in general. Kids are a thorny issue. Most kids are sexually active or sexually aware by the time they are 8 years old or younger. They don’t understand it and being in a conservative family or environment forces them to hide it and/or conform for fear of being shamed. I wouldn’t advocate that they should be sexually active, but it is something that somehow has to be managed. Kids are going to be kids no matter what you do sometimes.

My ideal world would be where there is sufficient trust between the child/teenager and parents to be able to openly discuss such things without fear of being embarrassed, rejected or punished.

My ideal world would be where kids have an environment where they can safely explore their sexuality as they wish without having to do so in the back seats of cars, alley ways, or at home when the parents, siblings or friends aren’t around because they’re scared of their friends, relatives, or parents might say or do.

My ideal world would be where they can be whatever sexuality they want or happen to be without fear of reprisal.

[quote post="193"]And how about changes in orientation coming about during a life-time? Should couples be allowed to follow these attractions? Would that mean divorce or multiple partners?[/quote]

I know of several married men with children that have “changed” from being hetero to gay and have consequently got a divorce. Is it ideal? No, not for the kids and certainly not for the wives. In fact it was pretty traumatic for everyone concerned. But I would say these men were a victim of the environment forcing them to be “straight” when in reality they were gay. Are these people better off rather than living a lie? I would say yes.

Should they be allowed to have multiple partners? Dan says a vow is a vow, but how often do we make vows and have to retract them because we made the vows on insufficient information, social pressure, or just to be nice? If it has the consent of all involved and helps keep the family together rather than going through the trauma of a divorce then sure, why not? After all (cheeky grin), doesn’t the Kitab-Aqdas say regarding multiple wives and the law applying mutatis mutandis and Baha’u'llah only being concerned about pedophilic activities….(Waiting for the moral outrage and lectures about the Covenant and Shoghi Effendi to occur ;P) Many would probably prefer to have a divorce.

Farhan asked

[quote post="193"]would such a world mean to you that kids would be encouraged to make diverse experiences before becoming settled in their favourite type of sexuality?[/quote]

I was referring to people in general. Kids are a thorny issue. Most kids are sexually active or sexually aware by the time they are 8 years old or younger. They don’t understand it and being in a conservative family or environment forces them to hide it and/or conform for fear of being shamed. I wouldn’t advocate that they should be sexually active, but it is something that somehow has to be managed. Kids are going to be kids no matter what you do sometimes.

My ideal world would be where there is sufficient trust between the child/teenager and parents to be able to openly discuss such things without fear of being embarrassed, rejected or punished.

My ideal world would be where kids have an environment where they can safely explore their sexuality as they wish without having to do so in the back seats of cars, alley ways, or at home when the parents, siblings or friends aren’t around because they’re scared of their friends, relatives, or parents might say or do.

My ideal world would be where they can be whatever sexuality they want or happen to be without fear of reprisal.

[quote post="193"]And how about changes in orientation coming about during a life-time? Should couples be allowed to follow these attractions? Would that mean divorce or multiple partners?[/quote]

I know of several married men with children that have “changed” from being hetero to gay and have consequently got a divorce. Is it ideal? No, not for the kids and certainly not for the wives. In fact it was pretty traumatic for everyone concerned. But I would say these men were a victim of the environment forcing them to be “straight” when in reality they were gay. Are these people better off rather than living a lie? I would say yes.

Should they be allowed to have multiple partners? Dan says a vow is a vow, but how often do we make vows and have to retract them because we made the vows on insufficient information, social pressure, or just to be nice? If it has the consent of all involved and helps keep the family together rather than going through the trauma of a divorce then sure, why not? After all (cheeky grin), doesn’t the Kitab-Aqdas say regarding multiple wives and the law applying mutatis mutandis and Baha’u'llah only being concerned about pedophilic activities….(Waiting for the moral outrage and lectures about the Covenant and Shoghi Effendi to occur ;P) Many would probably prefer to have a divorce.

[quote comment=""][...] The one you seem to be promoting says kids are to be allowed to discover their choices by themselves, and once they have made a vow, they have to stick to it. [...][/quote]

The one I am promoting is to allow kids to be who they are.

If we should imagine a hypothetical person who ‘chooses’ some sexual orientation, and commits to it with a vow of matrimony along the lines of that orientation, yes, I would say he must remain steadfast to that vow. If he breaks the vow, he’s done a great disservice to his partner. That’s between them.

If, however, we discuss the general case wherein a person is simply who they are, I don’t think they would mind my insisting that they commit to their partner per their vows.

[quote comment=""][...] That would seem to be a sudden loss of liberty to me. [...][/quote]

Nope. They’re free to be as irresponsible and immoral as they like. Morality without liberty is a sham.

[quote comment=""][...] The one you seem to be promoting says kids are to be allowed to discover their choices by themselves, and once they have made a vow, they have to stick to it. [...][/quote]

The one I am promoting is to allow kids to be who they are.

If we should imagine a hypothetical person who ‘chooses’ some sexual orientation, and commits to it with a vow of matrimony along the lines of that orientation, yes, I would say he must remain steadfast to that vow. If he breaks the vow, he’s done a great disservice to his partner. That’s between them.

If, however, we discuss the general case wherein a person is simply who they are, I don’t think they would mind my insisting that they commit to their partner per their vows.

[quote comment=""][...] That would seem to be a sudden loss of liberty to me. [...][/quote]

Nope. They’re free to be as irresponsible and immoral as they like. Morality without liberty is a sham.

Today In History: APA Removes Homosexuality from List of Mental Disorders

[quote]Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, famously wrote to one American mother in 1935, “Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation, it cannot be classified as an illness.”[/quote]

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/12/15/7128

Today In History: APA Removes Homosexuality from List of Mental Disorders

[quote]Sigmund Freud, the father of psychoanalysis, famously wrote to one American mother in 1935, “Homosexuality is assuredly no advantage, but it is nothing to be ashamed of, no vice, no degradation, it cannot be classified as an illness.”[/quote]

http://www.boxturtlebulletin.com/2008/12/15/7128

My boss is Danish. She told me that back when she was taught sex ed in Denmark in the 70′s, they were taught that there was nothing wrong to experiment. That it would be best that they figured out what it is they wanted before they committed to someone. She did and now she is 100% heterosexual. Oh wait, she’s ALWAYS been 100% heter. It made no difference, because that is how she is wired. Just as I am wired for physical intimacy with men. Denmark is the happiest country on earth, and last I checked it doesn’t seem to have a higher percentage of gays than any other country. So what gives Farhan?
Wouldn’t this Danish way save a few people entering Bahai marriages that are doomed to failure? But you don’t care about that, now do you? As long as Bahai couples do what they want secretly/behind closed doors, then the facade remains. That’s all religious conservatives want from gays- lived our facade and we’ll leave you alone. AND what REALLY irks me is that conservatives have no problem telling a young gay person that they should try heterosexual sexs in order to convert. It’s ok to make gay kids experiment with straight acts in order to convert them, but God forbid anyone ever just tells a straight teen that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality!

My boss is Danish. She told me that back when she was taught sex ed in Denmark in the 70′s, they were taught that there was nothing wrong to experiment. That it would be best that they figured out what it is they wanted before they committed to someone. She did and now she is 100% heterosexual. Oh wait, she’s ALWAYS been 100% heter. It made no difference, because that is how she is wired. Just as I am wired for physical intimacy with men. Denmark is the happiest country on earth, and last I checked it doesn’t seem to have a higher percentage of gays than any other country. So what gives Farhan?
Wouldn’t this Danish way save a few people entering Bahai marriages that are doomed to failure? But you don’t care about that, now do you? As long as Bahai couples do what they want secretly/behind closed doors, then the facade remains. That’s all religious conservatives want from gays- lived our facade and we’ll leave you alone. AND what REALLY irks me is that conservatives have no problem telling a young gay person that they should try heterosexual sexs in order to convert. It’s ok to make gay kids experiment with straight acts in order to convert them, but God forbid anyone ever just tells a straight teen that there is nothing wrong with homosexuality!

You know, I’m so glad Farhan made the comment that he made. Because it clearly demonstrates the tactic of social/religious conservatives. You can’t argue against the older lesbian couple that have been together for 55 years and want equal treatment before the law. No Farhan, how can you look straight in that couples’ eyes and tell them you don’t support what they fight for. You have no moral ground.
So what to do? Oh, let’s instead bring up kids being taught to experiment sexually by those gays with their ‘agenda’. That’s really all it is to you people- SEX. Nothing more. This type of knee-jerk reaction to homosexuality says a lot about social conservatives and the repression they harbor within themselves.

You know, I’m so glad Farhan made the comment that he made. Because it clearly demonstrates the tactic of social/religious conservatives. You can’t argue against the older lesbian couple that have been together for 55 years and want equal treatment before the law. No Farhan, how can you look straight in that couples’ eyes and tell them you don’t support what they fight for. You have no moral ground.
So what to do? Oh, let’s instead bring up kids being taught to experiment sexually by those gays with their ‘agenda’. That’s really all it is to you people- SEX. Nothing more. This type of knee-jerk reaction to homosexuality says a lot about social conservatives and the repression they harbor within themselves.

Farhan says:

[quote comment=""][...] The one I adhere to says that education should orient future citizens into ways that make their lives the most useful to society. [...][/quote]

I’d like to respond to this remark on its own, because it deserves our attention.

What does one mean when one suggests that individuals are to be educated to be “useful to society”? This has long struck me as a rather Orwellian world view. Individuals are not moral agents so much as components of society that must be ‘educated’ to be made ‘useful’.

This really does fit into Baha’u'llah’s vision of men as sheep that must never be left shepherdless, who cannot so much as comprehend the meaning of their own scriptures without an Interpreter or Supreme Authority.

In this sense, Farhan’s view is a legitimate Baha’i view. Homosexuals are less ‘useful’, let us say, because they are less ‘productive’. We should recondition them to be heterosexual, so that they may become ‘productive’.

-Dan (Zoroastrian of sorts)

Farhan says:

[quote comment=""][...] The one I adhere to says that education should orient future citizens into ways that make their lives the most useful to society. [...][/quote]

I’d like to respond to this remark on its own, because it deserves our attention.

What does one mean when one suggests that individuals are to be educated to be “useful to society”? This has long struck me as a rather Orwellian world view. Individuals are not moral agents so much as components of society that must be ‘educated’ to be made ‘useful’.

This really does fit into Baha’u'llah’s vision of men as sheep that must never be left shepherdless, who cannot so much as comprehend the meaning of their own scriptures without an Interpreter or Supreme Authority.

In this sense, Farhan’s view is a legitimate Baha’i view. Homosexuals are less ‘useful’, let us say, because they are less ‘productive’. We should recondition them to be heterosexual, so that they may become ‘productive’.

-Dan (Zoroastrian of sorts)

P wrote:
You know, I’m so glad Farhan made the comment that he made. Because it clearly demonstrates the tactic of social/religious conservatives.

P, I am glad that my comment has made you happy, but I am not sure that I can be classified as “conservative”, nor have I any agenda or “tactic” other than trying to understand a complex issue where a lot of gruge and violence flies around, to a point where often prefer to listen and let others put the questions and get the insults.

Two questions I have not replied to yet include the part that is innate and the part that is acquired in homosexuality, and the question as to why education should direct and orient natural tendencies instead of only encouraging and complying by them. We have replies to these points in Baha’i writings, but I am looking for social and scientific arguments for or against.

Thanks to Dan and Grover for their replies.

warmest

Farhan

P wrote:
You know, I’m so glad Farhan made the comment that he made. Because it clearly demonstrates the tactic of social/religious conservatives.

P, I am glad that my comment has made you happy, but I am not sure that I can be classified as “conservative”, nor have I any agenda or “tactic” other than trying to understand a complex issue where a lot of gruge and violence flies around, to a point where often prefer to listen and let others put the questions and get the insults.

Two questions I have not replied to yet include the part that is innate and the part that is acquired in homosexuality, and the question as to why education should direct and orient natural tendencies instead of only encouraging and complying by them. We have replies to these points in Baha’i writings, but I am looking for social and scientific arguments for or against.

Thanks to Dan and Grover for their replies.

warmest

Farhan

Dan wrote:

What does one mean when one suggests that individuals are to be educated to be “useful to society”?

Dan, human societies are all based on a minimum of social consensus made of language, behaviour, social regulations, etc. These societies also have a common aim if the individuals are to become integrated. Most societies have some common aim and a sense of purpose in the lives of individuals. Baha’is believe that humans live a short span of life in this world and that the aim of this life is to serve an ever advancing civilisation.

Societies who have no common values and aims disintegrate. When we educate kids and when a religion educates humans, they convey a sense of common purpose that allows for a coherent society to build up. Those who have values that are too rigid stifle their members. Educational systems try to reconcile both.

Perhaps the concept of liberty promoted by Alexander Sutherland Neill in his book, “Summerhill School: A New View of Childhood” Albert Lamb (Editor) might be interesting in this exchange. He was popular in France in the 1960s (Libres enfants de Summerhill) and from what I know, he was opposed to sexual repression, but he differentiated between liberty and licentiousness.

Dan wrote:

What does one mean when one suggests that individuals are to be educated to be “useful to society”?

Dan, human societies are all based on a minimum of social consensus made of language, behaviour, social regulations, etc. These societies also have a common aim if the individuals are to become integrated. Most societies have some common aim and a sense of purpose in the lives of individuals. Baha’is believe that humans live a short span of life in this world and that the aim of this life is to serve an ever advancing civilisation.

Societies who have no common values and aims disintegrate. When we educate kids and when a religion educates humans, they convey a sense of common purpose that allows for a coherent society to build up. Those who have values that are too rigid stifle their members. Educational systems try to reconcile both.

Perhaps the concept of liberty promoted by Alexander Sutherland Neill in his book, “Summerhill School: A New View of Childhood” Albert Lamb (Editor) might be interesting in this exchange. He was popular in France in the 1960s (Libres enfants de Summerhill) and from what I know, he was opposed to sexual repression, but he differentiated between liberty and licentiousness.

[quote]This type of knee-jerk reaction to homosexuality says a lot about social conservatives and the repression they harbor within themselves.[/quote]

Yes, it does say a lot. It says they’re whack.

[quote]This type of knee-jerk reaction to homosexuality says a lot about social conservatives and the repression they harbor within themselves.[/quote]

Yes, it does say a lot. It says they’re whack.

The one thing i miss in all the discussion of above is: so what about kids of homosexual couples? All 5 I know of personally are straight, being wired that way I guess. And they seem to be so together, so mature.
It is of interest that the discussion moved from EP calling his decision not to vote for equality as
[quote comment=""][...] the only possible compromise that is “fair to everyone”[...][/quote] (even children would see the bad logic here to a discussion of morality as if gays can’t marry (and be merry!)

A compromise is to let people choose – to allow all people to choose to be able to marry. Pro8 was against this compromise.

The one thing i miss in all the discussion of above is: so what about kids of homosexual couples? All 5 I know of personally are straight, being wired that way I guess. And they seem to be so together, so mature.
It is of interest that the discussion moved from EP calling his decision not to vote for equality as
[quote comment=""][...] the only possible compromise that is “fair to everyone”[...][/quote] (even children would see the bad logic here to a discussion of morality as if gays can’t marry (and be merry!)

A compromise is to let people choose – to allow all people to choose to be able to marry. Pro8 was against this compromise.

Farhan says: [quote comment=""][...] Societies who have no common values and aims disintegrate [...][/quote]

Now all the Baha’is need to do is find a society without common values. I’m thinking … Any suggestions?

Farhan says: [quote comment=""][...] Societies who have no common values and aims disintegrate [...][/quote]

Now all the Baha’is need to do is find a society without common values. I’m thinking … Any suggestions?

Hi Farhan, let me make it very easy for you to understand since you are so grapling with this moral dilemma, since you are so open-minded and hardly conservative in your views, ok?
Scenario 1) closeted gay man forced to marry a woman because of Bahai pressure that this is the only way to ever advance civilization. Gay man marries woman and both live in misery because they lack complete physical intimacy. Woman is confused, wondering if it is something she did, is he interested in other women?, etc. The fortress of well-being falls apart. The few children they mustered to bring into this world are now from a broken home.
Scenario 2) Same gay man comes out of the closet. He seeks another person with whom he can share a life with. Society/government acccept and support his decision. Gay man and partner adopt a child with HIV that no one wants. They live happily ever after.

Seems like an easy decision to pick which creates the ever-advancing civilization, don’t you? Of course if you are being prejudiced by the secretaries of Shoghi Effendi that wrote on his behalf, then 1,000 of Scenario #2′s will never sway your opinion Farhan. Because any example, any research, anything will never trump the religious purist that their view is the only view from God.

Hi Farhan, let me make it very easy for you to understand since you are so grapling with this moral dilemma, since you are so open-minded and hardly conservative in your views, ok?
Scenario 1) closeted gay man forced to marry a woman because of Bahai pressure that this is the only way to ever advance civilization. Gay man marries woman and both live in misery because they lack complete physical intimacy. Woman is confused, wondering if it is something she did, is he interested in other women?, etc. The fortress of well-being falls apart. The few children they mustered to bring into this world are now from a broken home.
Scenario 2) Same gay man comes out of the closet. He seeks another person with whom he can share a life with. Society/government acccept and support his decision. Gay man and partner adopt a child with HIV that no one wants. They live happily ever after.

Seems like an easy decision to pick which creates the ever-advancing civilization, don’t you? Of course if you are being prejudiced by the secretaries of Shoghi Effendi that wrote on his behalf, then 1,000 of Scenario #2′s will never sway your opinion Farhan. Because any example, any research, anything will never trump the religious purist that their view is the only view from God.