Baha’i Rants

And I thought all good things must come to an end. Thanks for keeping the discussion going Baquia. It’s a discussion honestly that won’t have an end until other Bahais INSIDE the Bahai community speak up and share a different view from the supposedly “loving” view that the anonymou character above offers.
I wish Bahais would realize that in some cultures/societies (california, canada, most of Western Europe, etc.) it is people like the anonymouse character above who are discrediting the Faith and ruining the public image of the Faith by punishing gay couples as being unchaste. I wish the Bahais would learn from the evangelicals and the story of Ted Haggard because that is exactly the future they are giving sincere Bahai who happen to be gay inside the Bahai commuinty. I was one of the lucky ones that did not succumb to pressures of a false marriage and a ruined life in order to conform.

And I thought all good things must come to an end. Thanks for keeping the discussion going Baquia. It’s a discussion honestly that won’t have an end until other Bahais INSIDE the Bahai community speak up and share a different view from the supposedly “loving” view that the anonymou character above offers.
I wish Bahais would realize that in some cultures/societies (california, canada, most of Western Europe, etc.) it is people like the anonymouse character above who are discrediting the Faith and ruining the public image of the Faith by punishing gay couples as being unchaste. I wish the Bahais would learn from the evangelicals and the story of Ted Haggard because that is exactly the future they are giving sincere Bahai who happen to be gay inside the Bahai commuinty. I was one of the lucky ones that did not succumb to pressures of a false marriage and a ruined life in order to conform.

[quote comment=""]And I thought all good things must come to an end. Thanks for keeping the discussion going Baquia. It’s a discussion honestly that won’t have an end…[/quote]

You’re right. Like many other challenges that we face, there are no easy answers but the only way forward is to engage together in consultation and exchange ideas openly.

[quote comment=""]And I thought all good things must come to an end. Thanks for keeping the discussion going Baquia. It’s a discussion honestly that won’t have an end…[/quote]

You’re right. Like many other challenges that we face, there are no easy answers but the only way forward is to engage together in consultation and exchange ideas openly.

Dear Baquia,

I back up “P” in thanking you for keeping this discussion going. I don’t know how or when it will change for the better for GLBT Baha’is in the general Baha’i community, but at least here we can discuss and vent. Thank you so much.

In Peace,
Bill Garbett

Dear Baquia,

I back up “P” in thanking you for keeping this discussion going. I don’t know how or when it will change for the better for GLBT Baha’is in the general Baha’i community, but at least here we can discuss and vent. Thank you so much.

In Peace,
Bill Garbett

Baquia wrote: Dear Farhan, you continue to conflate opinion, guidance, suggestion, etc with command, law, legislation, arbitration, etc. This is as wrong as mistaking Baha’i law for mere suggestion.

Dear Baquia, I have no pretension of using these words correctly firstly, because I am not a lawyer, secondly because many words have different meanings in Anglo-Saxon and French vocabularies, and thirdly, as a forensic expert I have learnt to know what I do not master correctly. In addition, we cannot imagine how the fresh shoot of the Administrative Order will look like in some decades, and trying to analyse the fruit when the tree is just emerging out of the soil is an unwise move.

The intent behind this unwise move is to bring God’s laws to comply with our aims in life, instead of trying to comply with God’s laws; it is like a child arguing with me because he does not want his appendix taken out: he will say it doesn’t really hurt, hide the thermometer, even argue about my competence and diplomas, etc.

My point is that when the UHJ gives a view, law, injunction, loving suggestion etc; as a Baha’i I consider this as a loving guidance from God. Non Baha’is are free and are in no way submitted to this law which is only binding on those who wish to throw in their lot with the Faith.

If those who wish to call themselves Baha’is want to belittle and argue with those views/legislations/opinions/elucidations that are not to their taste, by considering what a secretary might have written or not written, I believe that they are ignoring a bounty with which God has blessed our world. You can call it what you like, to me it is God’s view that Baha’is thirst for and this view has the capacity of maintaining unity.

Here is another quote by Abdu’l-Baha which is in no way a contradiction to His W&T:

“…the deductions and conclusions of individual learned men have no authority, unless they are endorsed by the House of Justice. The difference is precisely this, that from the conclusions and endorsements of the body of the House of Justice whose members are elected by and known to the worldwide Bahá’í community, no differences will arise; whereas the conclusions of individual divines and scholars would definitely lead to differences, and result in schism, division, and dispersion. The oneness of the Word would be destroyed, the unity of the Faith would disappear, and the edifice of the Faith of God would be shaken.”

Baquia wrote: Dear Farhan, you continue to conflate opinion, guidance, suggestion, etc with command, law, legislation, arbitration, etc. This is as wrong as mistaking Baha’i law for mere suggestion.

Dear Baquia, I have no pretension of using these words correctly firstly, because I am not a lawyer, secondly because many words have different meanings in Anglo-Saxon and French vocabularies, and thirdly, as a forensic expert I have learnt to know what I do not master correctly. In addition, we cannot imagine how the fresh shoot of the Administrative Order will look like in some decades, and trying to analyse the fruit when the tree is just emerging out of the soil is an unwise move.

The intent behind this unwise move is to bring God’s laws to comply with our aims in life, instead of trying to comply with God’s laws; it is like a child arguing with me because he does not want his appendix taken out: he will say it doesn’t really hurt, hide the thermometer, even argue about my competence and diplomas, etc.

My point is that when the UHJ gives a view, law, injunction, loving suggestion etc; as a Baha’i I consider this as a loving guidance from God. Non Baha’is are free and are in no way submitted to this law which is only binding on those who wish to throw in their lot with the Faith.

If those who wish to call themselves Baha’is want to belittle and argue with those views/legislations/opinions/elucidations that are not to their taste, by considering what a secretary might have written or not written, I believe that they are ignoring a bounty with which God has blessed our world. You can call it what you like, to me it is God’s view that Baha’is thirst for and this view has the capacity of maintaining unity.

Here is another quote by Abdu’l-Baha which is in no way a contradiction to His W&T:

“…the deductions and conclusions of individual learned men have no authority, unless they are endorsed by the House of Justice. The difference is precisely this, that from the conclusions and endorsements of the body of the House of Justice whose members are elected by and known to the worldwide Bahá’í community, no differences will arise; whereas the conclusions of individual divines and scholars would definitely lead to differences, and result in schism, division, and dispersion. The oneness of the Word would be destroyed, the unity of the Faith would disappear, and the edifice of the Faith of God would be shaken.”

Steve wrote:
Let’s not put the cart before the horse with this example. Let’s wait until Farhan has done as I’ve requested and gives some examples of the…
“rulings of the UHJ” that “define at this time the standards for Baha’i families that are binding on those who wish to be fully active in the Baha’i community”
…so we know what he’s referring to.

Steve, within the scope of this discussion, I am obviously referring to the rulings of the UHJ concerning the Baha’i principles on marriage and sexuality.

To my understanding, when they say that sexuality is only licit within the institution of marriage, and that no provisions are available for gay marriages, their word is to be considered as comparable to the word of Baha’u’llah Himself in the Aqdas. To me this ruling is inseparable from God’s revelation, it binding on all Baha’is without having to discuss what a secretary might or might not have written; it is as binding as my diagnosis is binding on any patient who wishes to be treated by me. To me, this ruling refers to Bahá’u’lláh’s words in Gleanings LXXXVIII:

“Know verily that the essence of justice and the source thereof are both embodied in the ordinances prescribed by Him Who is the Manifestation of the Self of God amongst men, if ye be of them that recognize this truth. He doth verily incarnate the highest, the infallible standard of justice unto all creation. Were His law to be such as to strike terror into the hearts of all that are in heaven and on earth, that law is naught but manifest justice. The fears and agitation which the revelation of this law provokes in men’s hearts should indeed be likened to the cries of the suckling babe weaned from his mother’s milk, if ye be of them that perceive. Were men to discover the motivating purpose of God’s Revelation, they would assuredly cast away their fears, and, with hearts filled with gratitude, rejoice with exceeding gladness.”

In my view, someone who does not adhere to this ruling, is rejecting the Aqdas and this has spiritual consequence; if we openly reject this ruling and question the validity of the UHJ, we are saying that we no longer wish to be considered as Baha’is.

Steve wrote:
Let’s not put the cart before the horse with this example. Let’s wait until Farhan has done as I’ve requested and gives some examples of the…
“rulings of the UHJ” that “define at this time the standards for Baha’i families that are binding on those who wish to be fully active in the Baha’i community”
…so we know what he’s referring to.

Steve, within the scope of this discussion, I am obviously referring to the rulings of the UHJ concerning the Baha’i principles on marriage and sexuality.

To my understanding, when they say that sexuality is only licit within the institution of marriage, and that no provisions are available for gay marriages, their word is to be considered as comparable to the word of Baha’u’llah Himself in the Aqdas. To me this ruling is inseparable from God’s revelation, it binding on all Baha’is without having to discuss what a secretary might or might not have written; it is as binding as my diagnosis is binding on any patient who wishes to be treated by me. To me, this ruling refers to Bahá’u’lláh’s words in Gleanings LXXXVIII:

“Know verily that the essence of justice and the source thereof are both embodied in the ordinances prescribed by Him Who is the Manifestation of the Self of God amongst men, if ye be of them that recognize this truth. He doth verily incarnate the highest, the infallible standard of justice unto all creation. Were His law to be such as to strike terror into the hearts of all that are in heaven and on earth, that law is naught but manifest justice. The fears and agitation which the revelation of this law provokes in men’s hearts should indeed be likened to the cries of the suckling babe weaned from his mother’s milk, if ye be of them that perceive. Were men to discover the motivating purpose of God’s Revelation, they would assuredly cast away their fears, and, with hearts filled with gratitude, rejoice with exceeding gladness.”

In my view, someone who does not adhere to this ruling, is rejecting the Aqdas and this has spiritual consequence; if we openly reject this ruling and question the validity of the UHJ, we are saying that we no longer wish to be considered as Baha’is.

If those who wish to call themselves Baha’is want to belittle and argue with those views/legislations/opinions/elucidations that are not to their taste, by considering what a secretary might have written or not written, I believe that they are ignoring a bounty with which God has blessed our world. You can call it what you like, to me it is God’s view that Baha’is thirst for and this view has the capacity of maintaining unity.
————————-
And if those who wish to be Bahai want to ignore Bahaullah’s Hidden Word that the best beloved thing in God’s eyes is justice, then they may not be very sound Bahais themselves. There is no justice in discrimination no matter how rosy you try to paint it.

If those who wish to call themselves Baha’is want to belittle and argue with those views/legislations/opinions/elucidations that are not to their taste, by considering what a secretary might have written or not written, I believe that they are ignoring a bounty with which God has blessed our world. You can call it what you like, to me it is God’s view that Baha’is thirst for and this view has the capacity of maintaining unity.
————————-
And if those who wish to be Bahai want to ignore Bahaullah’s Hidden Word that the best beloved thing in God’s eyes is justice, then they may not be very sound Bahais themselves. There is no justice in discrimination no matter how rosy you try to paint it.

P wrote:
There is no justice in discrimination no matter how rosy you try to paint it.

P, would it not be discrimination against non-gays if the UHJ stated that gay relations would be free, but non-gay relations would be restricted to within marriage?

For moment, non blatant gay relations are tolerated and those unable to comply with this are required to withdraw from administrative functions, and Baha’is are required not to discriminate in any way on personal basis. Only those who openly claim they do not accept the authority of the UHJ have their voting rights removed.

Prudish behaviour and bigotry do exist amongst Baha’is and this has to be rectified.

Being said that the UHJ is not ready to instate gay-marriages, which other provision would you suggest to the UHJ to make the situation more just?

P wrote:
There is no justice in discrimination no matter how rosy you try to paint it.

P, would it not be discrimination against non-gays if the UHJ stated that gay relations would be free, but non-gay relations would be restricted to within marriage?

For moment, non blatant gay relations are tolerated and those unable to comply with this are required to withdraw from administrative functions, and Baha’is are required not to discriminate in any way on personal basis. Only those who openly claim they do not accept the authority of the UHJ have their voting rights removed.

Prudish behaviour and bigotry do exist amongst Baha’is and this has to be rectified.

Being said that the UHJ is not ready to instate gay-marriages, which other provision would you suggest to the UHJ to make the situation more just?

Again you bring up gay marriage Farhan. I never said that. What I said is if two men come into the community, say they are gay and living together, introduce their kids etc.- the community just accepts them. No votin rights removed. No pointing to letter from secretaries telling them they are unchaste. And God forbid, no asking them to break up and destroy their family for Bahaullah. In return, this couple promises they won’t expose themselves in front of everyone, perofrm homosexual acts on the internet for the world to see or do anything else that might give concrete evidence for removal of rights. Basically they will keep their sex lives to themselves in the privacy of their bedroom. What goes on in there is NO ONE’s business. Just like it is no one’s business what a heterosexual couple living in Bahaullah’s fortress of well-being are doing in their bedroom (you know Farhan they could be egaging in sodomy too; if by that we mean anal sex). So the answer is very simple, the local LSA doesn’t do anything but accept them lovingly and be proud to have them in the community. NOW, if the UHJ ever actually writes a law stating that this is not allowed and telling LSA’s they must strip these couples of their voting rights, then I will concede. You and Masud and Anon are all correct, the Bahai Faith does not welcome openly gay and lesbian people into the Fold.

Again you bring up gay marriage Farhan. I never said that. What I said is if two men come into the community, say they are gay and living together, introduce their kids etc.- the community just accepts them. No votin rights removed. No pointing to letter from secretaries telling them they are unchaste. And God forbid, no asking them to break up and destroy their family for Bahaullah. In return, this couple promises they won’t expose themselves in front of everyone, perofrm homosexual acts on the internet for the world to see or do anything else that might give concrete evidence for removal of rights. Basically they will keep their sex lives to themselves in the privacy of their bedroom. What goes on in there is NO ONE’s business. Just like it is no one’s business what a heterosexual couple living in Bahaullah’s fortress of well-being are doing in their bedroom (you know Farhan they could be egaging in sodomy too; if by that we mean anal sex). So the answer is very simple, the local LSA doesn’t do anything but accept them lovingly and be proud to have them in the community. NOW, if the UHJ ever actually writes a law stating that this is not allowed and telling LSA’s they must strip these couples of their voting rights, then I will concede. You and Masud and Anon are all correct, the Bahai Faith does not welcome openly gay and lesbian people into the Fold.

P wrote : Again you bring up gay marriage Farhan. I never said that. What I said is if two men come into the community, say they are gay and living together, introduce their kids etc.- the community just accepts them.

Dear P, I cannot be a substitute for an institution like an LSA or an NSA. I am merely giving a personal opinion, on how and why I would act in my community.

If two gentlemen came to our community with kids, they would be welcome to enrol and no one would have a word to say. If they gave obvious signs of a sexual life, like embracing publicly, calling each other darling or if kids called one of them Dad and the other Papa, or if they openly announced that they were living as a gay couple, then some people in the community might eventually feel embarrassed and report the matter to the LSA.

If I were on that LSA, I would suggest asking the couple to be more reserved; if complaints continued, the LSA might ask for advice from the NSA, MAB or Counsellor. The matter might even go to the UHJ for guidance on what to do.

I know that in the 1990s they case of a gay couple wishing to become Baha’is in the US or Canada was presented to the UHJ, but I am not aware of the reply.

What happens will be conditional on how the community lives the situation, the directives of the NSA and the accepted standards of the society where the LSA functioned. Things might be different in France, Holland, NY and SF from Iran or Russia.

You did not reply to my question on what would be in your opinion the just attitude for Baha’i institutions towards gay and non gay activities outside marriage. Would you believe that the rules should be the same, or would you believe that gay marriages not being instated, institutions should be more lenient towards gays, which in a way could perhaps be my personal attitude in an LSA consultation on this subject (positive discrimination???).

P wrote : Again you bring up gay marriage Farhan. I never said that. What I said is if two men come into the community, say they are gay and living together, introduce their kids etc.- the community just accepts them.

Dear P, I cannot be a substitute for an institution like an LSA or an NSA. I am merely giving a personal opinion, on how and why I would act in my community.

If two gentlemen came to our community with kids, they would be welcome to enrol and no one would have a word to say. If they gave obvious signs of a sexual life, like embracing publicly, calling each other darling or if kids called one of them Dad and the other Papa, or if they openly announced that they were living as a gay couple, then some people in the community might eventually feel embarrassed and report the matter to the LSA.

If I were on that LSA, I would suggest asking the couple to be more reserved; if complaints continued, the LSA might ask for advice from the NSA, MAB or Counsellor. The matter might even go to the UHJ for guidance on what to do.

I know that in the 1990s they case of a gay couple wishing to become Baha’is in the US or Canada was presented to the UHJ, but I am not aware of the reply.

What happens will be conditional on how the community lives the situation, the directives of the NSA and the accepted standards of the society where the LSA functioned. Things might be different in France, Holland, NY and SF from Iran or Russia.

You did not reply to my question on what would be in your opinion the just attitude for Baha’i institutions towards gay and non gay activities outside marriage. Would you believe that the rules should be the same, or would you believe that gay marriages not being instated, institutions should be more lenient towards gays, which in a way could perhaps be my personal attitude in an LSA consultation on this subject (positive discrimination???).

I think I did give you the answer- you’ve had it all along. Unless there are blatant acts performed in front of your eyes (depending on the culture you are in you can define blatant), then the assembly need not say anything. Acts Farhan. Children saying pappa is not sometihng that should warrant someone being labeled unchaste and threatened with removal of voting rights. Do you seriously believe that Farhan? You would ask that parent to tell their child “shh honey, you know we are at feast call me by my first name when we are among our gay friends then you can say pappa to me”. How weird!

I think I did give you the answer- you’ve had it all along. Unless there are blatant acts performed in front of your eyes (depending on the culture you are in you can define blatant), then the assembly need not say anything. Acts Farhan. Children saying pappa is not sometihng that should warrant someone being labeled unchaste and threatened with removal of voting rights. Do you seriously believe that Farhan? You would ask that parent to tell their child “shh honey, you know we are at feast call me by my first name when we are among our gay friends then you can say pappa to me”. How weird!

And let me ask you Farhan, since you are an adult, if you were with a group of Bahais and you overheard a married couple speaking about the fun in the bedroom and mention that they enjoy anal sex, would you report that to the local LSA? Or are all adult Bahais not allowed to ever speak about sex openly (not among kids, or at feast; but as friends over tea). So if you heard such a comment- are they blatantly breaking Bahai law? And as absurd as this may seem, it really isn’t. I HAVE heard straight married Bahais (some Persian women actually) make sexual inuendos and talk at Bahai functions. It never really bothered me- I actually thought it was funny. But my question is how can that be tolerated in the community, but you would ask a gay parent to make sure his own child doesn’t call him daddy; you know to not hurt the sensitivity of these poor prudish traditionalists in the community.

And let me ask you Farhan, since you are an adult, if you were with a group of Bahais and you overheard a married couple speaking about the fun in the bedroom and mention that they enjoy anal sex, would you report that to the local LSA? Or are all adult Bahais not allowed to ever speak about sex openly (not among kids, or at feast; but as friends over tea). So if you heard such a comment- are they blatantly breaking Bahai law? And as absurd as this may seem, it really isn’t. I HAVE heard straight married Bahais (some Persian women actually) make sexual inuendos and talk at Bahai functions. It never really bothered me- I actually thought it was funny. But my question is how can that be tolerated in the community, but you would ask a gay parent to make sure his own child doesn’t call him daddy; you know to not hurt the sensitivity of these poor prudish traditionalists in the community.

P wrote : …then the assembly need not say anything…

P, no one can dictate what an LSA can and will do. They will consult and follow the dictates of their conscience. Even Counsellors can only recommend to them…

P wrote : …then the assembly need not say anything…

P, no one can dictate what an LSA can and will do. They will consult and follow the dictates of their conscience. Even Counsellors can only recommend to them…

P wrote:
…would you report that to the local LSA?

P, why should I? Don’t you understand I have more interesting pastimes? Perhaps if I heard adults making sick jokes in front of youth, I would intervene, or again if I heard that a Baha’i teacher had regularly offended people in the community, I would wish to protect the youth, but otherwise why bother when we have enough on our plates?

BTW, looking up the link about this “cured” preacher who boasts of his physical performances without a total change in his fantasies, there is a concept that considers that gays are much more active physically than non gays. Is this a reality or yet another prejudice?

P wrote:
…would you report that to the local LSA?

P, why should I? Don’t you understand I have more interesting pastimes? Perhaps if I heard adults making sick jokes in front of youth, I would intervene, or again if I heard that a Baha’i teacher had regularly offended people in the community, I would wish to protect the youth, but otherwise why bother when we have enough on our plates?

BTW, looking up the link about this “cured” preacher who boasts of his physical performances without a total change in his fantasies, there is a concept that considers that gays are much more active physically than non gays. Is this a reality or yet another prejudice?

I would say men (straight or gay) are more active physically than women. But this could also be yet another prejudice inflicted on us by a male hetero-centered chauvinistic society/culture (hey I’m learning from my friend Amanda!) )

I would say men (straight or gay) are more active physically than women. But this could also be yet another prejudice inflicted on us by a male hetero-centered chauvinistic society/culture (hey I’m learning from my friend Amanda!) )

I made the choice in high school. After becoming a Bahai I struggled with a lie I had been telling myself for years, and the confidence and emergence from a multiple year depression that I gained when infimd the Faith gave me the strength to accept that I was bisexual. I am attracted equally to men and women, and more “sexually” attracted to men. I made a decision only to pursue relationships with women, based on my newfound Faith. I did not make this decisision based on what anyone else told me, but based on my own interpretation of the writings of Baha’u'llah and applying that in my current social context.

I struggle with the rationale behind this, it isn’t like choosing to avoid backbiting, where I clearly understand and sympathize with the spieitual principle. I don’t really get why Baha’u'llah disaproves of me someday expressing my love for another man through sex withing an civil and religious marriage- however, I do beleive He does. I accept that on Faith, not even in a religious sense but in a personal sense: I trust Bahá’u'lláh, and want to follow His advice for my life, and want to please Him. This sacrifice is a simple one, difficult and frustating at times, bu much simpler to extradite from my life than many of the subtle vices.

So I choose in High School, only about two year back, at a time when waiting till marriage for sex hadn’t crossed my mind and I likely would have soon hEy first homosexual encounter had I not made that decision. I am happy with it. I don’t know why Baha’u'llah asks it of me, but I am willing to do this out of love and a proven trust, He has asked harder things, all of which have proven beneficial, so it seems sad to bet that He has a good reason for this.

God Bless,
Gerald

I made the choice in high school. After becoming a Bahai I struggled with a lie I had been telling myself for years, and the confidence and emergence from a multiple year depression that I gained when infimd the Faith gave me the strength to accept that I was bisexual. I am attracted equally to men and women, and more “sexually” attracted to men. I made a decision only to pursue relationships with women, based on my newfound Faith. I did not make this decisision based on what anyone else told me, but based on my own interpretation of the writings of Baha’u'llah and applying that in my current social context.

I struggle with the rationale behind this, it isn’t like choosing to avoid backbiting, where I clearly understand and sympathize with the spieitual principle. I don’t really get why Baha’u'llah disaproves of me someday expressing my love for another man through sex withing an civil and religious marriage- however, I do beleive He does. I accept that on Faith, not even in a religious sense but in a personal sense: I trust Bahá’u'lláh, and want to follow His advice for my life, and want to please Him. This sacrifice is a simple one, difficult and frustating at times, bu much simpler to extradite from my life than many of the subtle vices.

So I choose in High School, only about two year back, at a time when waiting till marriage for sex hadn’t crossed my mind and I likely would have soon hEy first homosexual encounter had I not made that decision. I am happy with it. I don’t know why Baha’u'llah asks it of me, but I am willing to do this out of love and a proven trust, He has asked harder things, all of which have proven beneficial, so it seems sad to bet that He has a good reason for this.

God Bless,
Gerald

Thanks for keeping this going as well… we need to keep talking this out. Hopefully, the powers that be, who are no doubt following this, can learn that it is OK for us to work this through. Hopefully, they will see that there is so much pain and sadness related to the exclusion of GLBT folks in Baha’i affairs. In so doing I was fascinated by Rev. Gene Robinson’s interviews re-played on our local NPR station this morning, enjoy.

This morning I was entranced by the interview with Bishop Robinson re: homosexuality and the church. So many of his insights fit our Baha’i insights as well. Baha’is from a non-Christian background my find this challenging, as the references are biblical. But his insights re: what is modern homosexuality – monogamous, married, long-term relationships is a modern phenomenon. The a biblical (as well as our Aqdas) refer to something else, that is being confused with modern GLBT relationships.

I went to NPR.org and found these links, play it loud and proud:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89659417

and

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4210783

and

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4210781

and

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1356101

Thanks for keeping this going as well… we need to keep talking this out. Hopefully, the powers that be, who are no doubt following this, can learn that it is OK for us to work this through. Hopefully, they will see that there is so much pain and sadness related to the exclusion of GLBT folks in Baha’i affairs. In so doing I was fascinated by Rev. Gene Robinson’s interviews re-played on our local NPR station this morning, enjoy.

This morning I was entranced by the interview with Bishop Robinson re: homosexuality and the church. So many of his insights fit our Baha’i insights as well. Baha’is from a non-Christian background my find this challenging, as the references are biblical. But his insights re: what is modern homosexuality – monogamous, married, long-term relationships is a modern phenomenon. The a biblical (as well as our Aqdas) refer to something else, that is being confused with modern GLBT relationships.

I went to NPR.org and found these links, play it loud and proud:

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89659417

and

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4210783

and

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=4210781

and

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=1356101

And Gerald. I support you 100% in your decision. As long as you are not beating yourself over the head. As long as you don’t do anything that might harm yourself or another; and your pysche is good, then I am happy in your decision. BUT, for the majority of us, this is not the case. So if there is room in the Bahai community for you, then there should definitely be room for Daniel, Bill, Dan, me and tons of others like us that I’ve found online. For many of us it was the opposite of what you went through. Most of us had heterosexual encounters first before realizing the mess in our lives. Unfortunately some gave in to pressures of religion and family to live with someone of the opposite sex and make it work, but it didn’t. It all fell to ruin. So is the Bahai community for all? Some Bahais here say no. Others like me disagree.

And Gerald. I support you 100% in your decision. As long as you are not beating yourself over the head. As long as you don’t do anything that might harm yourself or another; and your pysche is good, then I am happy in your decision. BUT, for the majority of us, this is not the case. So if there is room in the Bahai community for you, then there should definitely be room for Daniel, Bill, Dan, me and tons of others like us that I’ve found online. For many of us it was the opposite of what you went through. Most of us had heterosexual encounters first before realizing the mess in our lives. Unfortunately some gave in to pressures of religion and family to live with someone of the opposite sex and make it work, but it didn’t. It all fell to ruin. So is the Bahai community for all? Some Bahais here say no. Others like me disagree.

What a relief! This isn’t about homosexuality at all. It was always about reputation. Of course! Now everything is falling into place. Homosexuality is really a peripheral issue. What really matters is public relations. Now we’re getting down to essential principles.

What a relief! This isn’t about homosexuality at all. It was always about reputation. Of course! Now everything is falling into place. Homosexuality is really a peripheral issue. What really matters is public relations. Now we’re getting down to essential principles.

“Steve, within the scope of this discussion, I am obviously referring to the rulings of the UHJ concerning the Baha’i principles on marriage and sexuality.”

It’s not obvious to me. Show me the rulings.

“Steve, within the scope of this discussion, I am obviously referring to the rulings of the UHJ concerning the Baha’i principles on marriage and sexuality.”

It’s not obvious to me. Show me the rulings.

You are right Dan. Just read Farhan's comment from a last post:
"If they gave obvious signs of a sexual life, like embracing publicly, calling each other darling or if kids called one of them Dad and the other Papa, or if they openly announced that they were living as a gay couple, then some people in the community might eventually feel embarrassed and report the matter to the LSA. "
So children calling their parents dad is now grounds for embarrasment and need reporting to the LSA. Yet, in the Bahai communities that I have lived in, I seriously have heard sexual jokes made at Bahai functions by straight people, jokes about gays made at Bahai youth activities, I have seen two gay youth make out in a car while we all went out one night and so and so forth….yet NONE of these things warrant the dreaded call to the LSA by some prudish upstanding Bahais in the community. Oh but God forbid, should my future adopted child dare call me daddy in front of anyone! Geeez!

You are right Dan. Just read Farhan's comment from a last post:
"If they gave obvious signs of a sexual life, like embracing publicly, calling each other darling or if kids called one of them Dad and the other Papa, or if they openly announced that they were living as a gay couple, then some people in the community might eventually feel embarrassed and report the matter to the LSA. "
So children calling their parents dad is now grounds for embarrasment and need reporting to the LSA. Yet, in the Bahai communities that I have lived in, I seriously have heard sexual jokes made at Bahai functions by straight people, jokes about gays made at Bahai youth activities, I have seen two gay youth make out in a car while we all went out one night and so and so forth….yet NONE of these things warrant the dreaded call to the LSA by some prudish upstanding Bahais in the community. Oh but God forbid, should my future adopted child dare call me daddy in front of anyone! Geeez!

Sorry I wrote two fast. I didn't mean two "gay" youth make out in the car. I meant to Bahai youth (straight of course) made out in a car. Hell two gay youth in the Bahai community wouldn't be able to so much sit too close to each other without getting sanctioned. )

Sorry I wrote two fast. I didn't mean two "gay" youth make out in the car. I meant to Bahai youth (straight of course) made out in a car. Hell two gay youth in the Bahai community wouldn't be able to so much sit too close to each other without getting sanctioned. )

Good point, Dan. It explains why, when I dobbed myself in to my local assembly for masturbating, nothing was said. Clearly my moral state was not the concern of the assembly.

"But if I were in that situation, and I was, God forbid, wanting to break the Baha’i law by indulging in dating and seeking to form a new relationship during a year of patience, I’d be smart enough to do it on the quiet, and you wouldn’t even know about it. In that case, it’s between me and God. I would still be violating the law of Baha’u’llah and Baha’u’llah can take care of me. You don’t need to peer into the kitchen window or whatever and see what’s happening. In other words, this is again this point, that we are here to protect the reputation of the Baha’i community, to protect the integrity of the Baha’i law, it does not involve witch hunts or snooping on people, but at the same time, it doesn’t involve shutting one’s eyes to violations of Baha’i law which affect the integrity and reputation of the community."
Talk given by Peter Khan at the National Teaching Conference Auckland, New Zealand, June 2000.

Good point, Dan. It explains why, when I dobbed myself in to my local assembly for masturbating, nothing was said. Clearly my moral state was not the concern of the assembly.

"But if I were in that situation, and I was, God forbid, wanting to break the Baha’i law by indulging in dating and seeking to form a new relationship during a year of patience, I’d be smart enough to do it on the quiet, and you wouldn’t even know about it. In that case, it’s between me and God. I would still be violating the law of Baha’u’llah and Baha’u’llah can take care of me. You don’t need to peer into the kitchen window or whatever and see what’s happening. In other words, this is again this point, that we are here to protect the reputation of the Baha’i community, to protect the integrity of the Baha’i law, it does not involve witch hunts or snooping on people, but at the same time, it doesn’t involve shutting one’s eyes to violations of Baha’i law which affect the integrity and reputation of the community."
Talk given by Peter Khan at the National Teaching Conference Auckland, New Zealand, June 2000.

Are you serious Steve? Is that an actual quote from Peter Khan, a member of the UHJ, one of the 9 men who's view I'm supposed to "thirst" for in order to show my true love for Bahaullah?

Are you serious Steve? Is that an actual quote from Peter Khan, a member of the UHJ, one of the 9 men who's view I'm supposed to "thirst" for in order to show my true love for Bahaullah?

Thanks Steve – gotta keep up with the Joneses!

Thanks Steve – gotta keep up with the Joneses!

"…he was introduced as speaking "in his capacity as a member of the Universal House of Justice".

That is a NEWTHINK innovation in the Faith. What these guys says INDEED goes in the Baha'i Faith no questions asked and no questions permitted. Forget the Institution of the UHJ acting together as a body, they AS INDIVIDUALS ARE "the Voice of God on Earth". What they say as individuals goes top down on everyone. The ITC Faith and it's small group of friends run it all. They exist on the Mt. Olympus of the World Age at the top of the world and no one is permitted to ask "why" or "wherefore".This has been said to me by several NEWTHINK Baha'is. Why else would they be permitted to travel the world on Baha'u'llah's money and give their personal opinions on everything under the sun to captive audiences? If that isn't for a reason, why would anyone bother to do it at such great expense?

"…he was introduced as speaking "in his capacity as a member of the Universal House of Justice".

That is a NEWTHINK innovation in the Faith. What these guys says INDEED goes in the Baha'i Faith no questions asked and no questions permitted. Forget the Institution of the UHJ acting together as a body, they AS INDIVIDUALS ARE "the Voice of God on Earth". What they say as individuals goes top down on everyone. The ITC Faith and it's small group of friends run it all. They exist on the Mt. Olympus of the World Age at the top of the world and no one is permitted to ask "why" or "wherefore".This has been said to me by several NEWTHINK Baha'is. Why else would they be permitted to travel the world on Baha'u'llah's money and give their personal opinions on everything under the sun to captive audiences? If that isn't for a reason, why would anyone bother to do it at such great expense?

Steve wrote :
It's not obvious to me. Show me the rulings.

Steve, you may have noticed that there is abundant references to the rules of family life in Baha’i resources. This constitutes a “praxis” on which NSAs and LSAs draw for harmonising community life. All this is a form of internal legislation. Very obviously, this legislation only applies to those who wish to call themselves Baha’is and serve on the Baha’i administration of their country. Since Baha’i communities are submitted to the civil laws of their country, these rulings by the institutions are adapted to the laws of their states. If you have further questions, you can refer them to your institutions and even to the UHJ.

Steve wrote :
It's not obvious to me. Show me the rulings.

Steve, you may have noticed that there is abundant references to the rules of family life in Baha’i resources. This constitutes a “praxis” on which NSAs and LSAs draw for harmonising community life. All this is a form of internal legislation. Very obviously, this legislation only applies to those who wish to call themselves Baha’is and serve on the Baha’i administration of their country. Since Baha’i communities are submitted to the civil laws of their country, these rulings by the institutions are adapted to the laws of their states. If you have further questions, you can refer them to your institutions and even to the UHJ.

The page that contains the whole talk is a transcript of Peter's talk, and I can vouch for its accuracy, to the extent that I've seen the official video — and those were the words spoken, give or take a typo. Peter is a member of the House, and he was introduced as speaking "in his capacity as a member of the Universal House of Justice". I was completely unaware there was any such capacity, and I don't think you are supposed to thirst for his view, or the view of any one of the other eight House members, in order to show your true love for Bahaullah.

That said, I don't have a huge problem with his statement. The community has laws and it has institutions that uphold those laws, but it shouldn't indulge in witch-hunts. And there is an element of reputation involved.

If the prime concern of the Baha'i administration is the reputation of the Baha'i faith in the wider community then, increasingly, the Baha'is are going to have to accept that gays have human rights and should be free to live as they wish, because that's what the wider community is trending towards. I think Peter's speech is an admission that witch-hunts are doing harm to the Baha'i faith's reputation and is a call for Baha'is to practice relative tolerance.

p.s. Great comment system, Baquia!

The page that contains the whole talk is a transcript of Peter's talk, and I can vouch for its accuracy, to the extent that I've seen the official video — and those were the words spoken, give or take a typo. Peter is a member of the House, and he was introduced as speaking "in his capacity as a member of the Universal House of Justice". I was completely unaware there was any such capacity, and I don't think you are supposed to thirst for his view, or the view of any one of the other eight House members, in order to show your true love for Bahaullah.

That said, I don't have a huge problem with his statement. The community has laws and it has institutions that uphold those laws, but it shouldn't indulge in witch-hunts. And there is an element of reputation involved.

If the prime concern of the Baha'i administration is the reputation of the Baha'i faith in the wider community then, increasingly, the Baha'is are going to have to accept that gays have human rights and should be free to live as they wish, because that's what the wider community is trending towards. I think Peter's speech is an admission that witch-hunts are doing harm to the Baha'i faith's reputation and is a call for Baha'is to practice relative tolerance.

p.s. Great comment system, Baquia!

Farhan, are you saying that anything the House has written about family life is Baha'i law? To me this sounds beyond bizarre, so perhaps I'm missing your point.

Farhan, are you saying that anything the House has written about family life is Baha'i law? To me this sounds beyond bizarre, so perhaps I'm missing your point.

Well, this is an about-face. Originally I said:

You'll need to give some examples of the… "rulings of the UHJ" that "define at this time the standards for Baha’i families that are binding on those who wish to be fully active in the Baha’i community" …so I know what you're referring to.

First you said the rulings were obvious, and now your answer appears to be that accepted practice is a form of internal legislation.

What happened to "la primauté du droit", or the rule of law?

"For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other." – Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)

Well, this is an about-face. Originally I said:

You'll need to give some examples of the… "rulings of the UHJ" that "define at this time the standards for Baha’i families that are binding on those who wish to be fully active in the Baha’i community" …so I know what you're referring to.

First you said the rulings were obvious, and now your answer appears to be that accepted practice is a form of internal legislation.

What happened to "la primauté du droit", or the rule of law?

"For as in absolute governments the king is law, so in free countries the law ought to be king; and there ought to be no other." – Thomas Paine, Common Sense (1776)

Dear Farhan,

Bless your heart. You can't seem to get it. I have a great fondness for your state of thinking regarding what to do with homosexuals. I was a fundementalist, letter of the law Baha'i for many years. I even remember debating a UHJ member in the Pilgrim House on Mt. Carmel. It had something to due with allowing non-Baha'is to have alcohol at Baha'i firesides. I was "unmoveable" that we Baha'is cannot allow such a thing. It went on and on until in frustration I got up and went out into the gardens to cool off. My point is that when you say, "If two gentleman came to our community with kids…If they gave obvious signs of a sexual life, like embracing publically, calling each other darling…I would suggest that the couple be more reserved…", it's like saying to the Black population, we accept you, love you, and want you to be with us, but when we are in public, could you all sit at the back of the bus please? Do you see the similarity?

In Peace,
Bill Garbett

Dear Farhan,

Bless your heart. You can't seem to get it. I have a great fondness for your state of thinking regarding what to do with homosexuals. I was a fundementalist, letter of the law Baha'i for many years. I even remember debating a UHJ member in the Pilgrim House on Mt. Carmel. It had something to due with allowing non-Baha'is to have alcohol at Baha'i firesides. I was "unmoveable" that we Baha'is cannot allow such a thing. It went on and on until in frustration I got up and went out into the gardens to cool off. My point is that when you say, "If two gentleman came to our community with kids…If they gave obvious signs of a sexual life, like embracing publically, calling each other darling…I would suggest that the couple be more reserved…", it's like saying to the Black population, we accept you, love you, and want you to be with us, but when we are in public, could you all sit at the back of the bus please? Do you see the similarity?

In Peace,
Bill Garbett

Spot on there Dan, thats what its all about, image.

Spot on there Dan, thats what its all about, image.

Its all about preserving the dignity of the Faith. Kind of ironic now door knocking has started, I couldn't imagine anything worse for preserving the Faith's reputation.

Its all about preserving the dignity of the Faith. Kind of ironic now door knocking has started, I couldn't imagine anything worse for preserving the Faith's reputation.

Just from the article:

"It is no one else’s business. However, if that violation brings disrespect or criticism upon the Faith and the Baha’i community, it becomes the business of the community. In the last analysis, it is between the individual and God. But the Baha’i community has the right to expect those who call themselves “Baha’i” to behave in such a way as to not bring discredit on the Baha’i Faith and its community of believers. We all have our burdens to bear in trying to adhere to Baha’i principles and we should not criticize or judge others for their problems or struggles so as not to invite judgment on ourselves for our own failures. As individuals we need to concern ourselves without our own struggles."

Its a classic case of "see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil". Yet many Baha'is are chronic gossips, we all love a good scandal, so if someone sees something going on, even if its trivial, sure as eggs are eggs, its going to get around the community and the LSA will have to step in. Some Baha'is are appallingly bad taddle-tales, thinking its their duty to report every kind of indiscretion to the LSA and their fellow Baha'is. I recall somewhere that one Baha'i got observed in a pub nursing a glass of beer (turned out to be ginger beer) with some mates. Well you can imagine the chaos that ensued, the morality speeches at Feast etc etc. Imagine what would happen if a gay Baha'i couple was observed meandering down the main street of town hand in hand or making out….

Just from the article:

"It is no one else’s business. However, if that violation brings disrespect or criticism upon the Faith and the Baha’i community, it becomes the business of the community. In the last analysis, it is between the individual and God. But the Baha’i community has the right to expect those who call themselves “Baha’i” to behave in such a way as to not bring discredit on the Baha’i Faith and its community of believers. We all have our burdens to bear in trying to adhere to Baha’i principles and we should not criticize or judge others for their problems or struggles so as not to invite judgment on ourselves for our own failures. As individuals we need to concern ourselves without our own struggles."

Its a classic case of "see no evil, hear no evil and speak no evil". Yet many Baha'is are chronic gossips, we all love a good scandal, so if someone sees something going on, even if its trivial, sure as eggs are eggs, its going to get around the community and the LSA will have to step in. Some Baha'is are appallingly bad taddle-tales, thinking its their duty to report every kind of indiscretion to the LSA and their fellow Baha'is. I recall somewhere that one Baha'i got observed in a pub nursing a glass of beer (turned out to be ginger beer) with some mates. Well you can imagine the chaos that ensued, the morality speeches at Feast etc etc. Imagine what would happen if a gay Baha'i couple was observed meandering down the main street of town hand in hand or making out….

Hey that's a thought Grover. Maybe the day when gossiping is completely eliminated from the Bahai community, then and only then should we worry about reparative therapy for gays to become straight. Actually, wouldn't the energy and money spent on reforming habitual gossipers in the community with some good psycho therapy, maybe even shock treatment be time better spent than worrying about kids calling their two daddies "papa"? Hmm, maybe I should suggest that to the UHJ. But their secretary is probably already tired of hearing from me.

Hey that's a thought Grover. Maybe the day when gossiping is completely eliminated from the Bahai community, then and only then should we worry about reparative therapy for gays to become straight. Actually, wouldn't the energy and money spent on reforming habitual gossipers in the community with some good psycho therapy, maybe even shock treatment be time better spent than worrying about kids calling their two daddies "papa"? Hmm, maybe I should suggest that to the UHJ. But their secretary is probably already tired of hearing from me.

And you're absolutely right. But we're dealing with a prejudice, like many others, that is well entrenched, traditional, and irrational within the community. With some Baha'is, I would call it homophobia, they even outrightly state they hate gays. With the rest, they're quite comfortable being around gays, but most of those have the mindset that homosexuality is something that can be cured.

And you're absolutely right. But we're dealing with a prejudice, like many others, that is well entrenched, traditional, and irrational within the community. With some Baha'is, I would call it homophobia, they even outrightly state they hate gays. With the rest, they're quite comfortable being around gays, but most of those have the mindset that homosexuality is something that can be cured.

Grover sites "It is no one else’s business. However, if that violation brings disrespect or criticism upon the Faith and the Baha’i community, it becomes the business of the community." This is fundamental to my concern, the actual homophobia of the community is bringing harm, criticism, disrespect to he good name of the Faith.

state of the movement

Grover sites "It is no one else’s business. However, if that violation brings disrespect or criticism upon the Faith and the Baha’i community, it becomes the business of the community." This is fundamental to my concern, the actual homophobia of the community is bringing harm, criticism, disrespect to he good name of the Faith.

state of the movement

I lost you guys for a few days, but I think I'm back now. Thanks to everyone for keeping this topic full of thought-provoking conversation!

I lost you guys for a few days, but I think I'm back now. Thanks to everyone for keeping this topic full of thought-provoking conversation!

Apparently, the Baha'i faith has an "open-arms policy regarding homosexuality"

"One day, I sent to a copy of the Baha’i Faith’s stance on homosexuality to my parents in Mindanao. My parents read it and later became supportive of my sexual orientation."

Fascinating.

ka kite
Steve

Apparently, the Baha'i faith has an "open-arms policy regarding homosexuality"

"One day, I sent to a copy of the Baha’i Faith’s stance on homosexuality to my parents in Mindanao. My parents read it and later became supportive of my sexual orientation."

Fascinating.

ka kite
Steve

Steve – this is interesting… thanks –

Daniel Orey

Steve – this is interesting… thanks –

Daniel Orey

Bill wrote :
it's like saying to the Black population, we accept you, love you, and want you to be with us, but when we are in public, could you all sit at the back of the bus please? Do you see the similarity?

Bill, bless your kind words. I assure you I do get it. The question put to me was what would happen if… and I replied how I imagined things might happen in my community. I am not saying it was perfect, but this is how I would imagine the reaction of my community and I would be dishonest not to reply with sincerity.

As to the similarity between skin colour and sexual behaviour, I am not at all convinced by your comparison. There is certainly some genetic and biological factors that determine our sexual orientation, as genetic and biological factors can predispose us to becoming athletes, violent, poets or alcoholics or developing breast cancer, but genetics is only part of it. I do not believe that it is all a matter of “being born that way”

If you look up left-handedness you will notice a very similar situation to that of homosexuality, where genetics, hormones, experiences in life, handicaps, psychological and physical consequences and discrimination determine whether we are left-handed or right-handed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-handed)and where adaptation, rather than “cure” can be the answer.

Having never been gay, I am afraid I cannot imagine what it would be like to feel attracted to a person of the same sex, but unable to achieve my goal, but I have lived trough painful times when I was unable to make my life with women I was in love with. I can imagine that it must be similar being attracted to a man and being obliged to making one’s life with a woman. At that time, you could not care less if thousands of “better” partners were available, and I would be offended to hear that I could be “cured” from loving that particular person.

An important part of my spiritual growth has certainly been the understanding submission to the loving will of God as described in this passage:

If ye meet the abased or the down-trodden, turn not away disdainfully from them, for the King of Glory ever watcheth over them and surroundeth them with such tenderness as none can fathom except them that have suffered their wishes and desires to be merged in the Will of your Lord, the Gracious, the All-Wise. (Baha’u’llah, Gleanings CXLV)

O My servants! Sorrow not if, in these days and on this earthly plane, things contrary to your wishes have been ordained and manifested by God, for days of blissful joy, of heavenly delight, are assuredly in store for you. Worlds, holy and spiritually glorious, will be unveiled to your eyes. You are destined by Him, in this world and hereafter, to partake of their benefits, to share in their joys, and to obtain a portion of their sustaining grace. To each and every one of them you will, no doubt, attain. (Baha’u’llah, Gleanings CLII)

Bill wrote :
it's like saying to the Black population, we accept you, love you, and want you to be with us, but when we are in public, could you all sit at the back of the bus please? Do you see the similarity?

Bill, bless your kind words. I assure you I do get it. The question put to me was what would happen if… and I replied how I imagined things might happen in my community. I am not saying it was perfect, but this is how I would imagine the reaction of my community and I would be dishonest not to reply with sincerity.

As to the similarity between skin colour and sexual behaviour, I am not at all convinced by your comparison. There is certainly some genetic and biological factors that determine our sexual orientation, as genetic and biological factors can predispose us to becoming athletes, violent, poets or alcoholics or developing breast cancer, but genetics is only part of it. I do not believe that it is all a matter of “being born that way”

If you look up left-handedness you will notice a very similar situation to that of homosexuality, where genetics, hormones, experiences in life, handicaps, psychological and physical consequences and discrimination determine whether we are left-handed or right-handed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-handed)and where adaptation, rather than “cure” can be the answer.

Having never been gay, I am afraid I cannot imagine what it would be like to feel attracted to a person of the same sex, but unable to achieve my goal, but I have lived trough painful times when I was unable to make my life with women I was in love with. I can imagine that it must be similar being attracted to a man and being obliged to making one’s life with a woman. At that time, you could not care less if thousands of “better” partners were available, and I would be offended to hear that I could be “cured” from loving that particular person.

An important part of my spiritual growth has certainly been the understanding submission to the loving will of God as described in this passage:

If ye meet the abased or the down-trodden, turn not away disdainfully from them, for the King of Glory ever watcheth over them and surroundeth them with such tenderness as none can fathom except them that have suffered their wishes and desires to be merged in the Will of your Lord, the Gracious, the All-Wise. (Baha’u’llah, Gleanings CXLV)

O My servants! Sorrow not if, in these days and on this earthly plane, things contrary to your wishes have been ordained and manifested by God, for days of blissful joy, of heavenly delight, are assuredly in store for you. Worlds, holy and spiritually glorious, will be unveiled to your eyes. You are destined by Him, in this world and hereafter, to partake of their benefits, to share in their joys, and to obtain a portion of their sustaining grace. To each and every one of them you will, no doubt, attain. (Baha’u’llah, Gleanings CLII)

Skin color is also not completely genetic. If you stay in the sun long enough (environment) skin color can change slightly. Yet you find that darker skinned black people sometimes feel more prejudice due to being darker, which may have a little to do with environment as well as genetics. So is it ok to discriminate against someone because environmental factors make them darker? Should they be asked to cover up so they can be lighter and not have to deal with the scorn of society? That is what you are asking Farhan. So no Farhan, you still don't get it. But I'll say, you are much nicer than another chap I'm dealing with on youtube. He really is making the Bahai Faith look like some fundamentalist freak show. I feel so sorry for how my Faith is being represented bythis homophobic individual.

Skin color is also not completely genetic. If you stay in the sun long enough (environment) skin color can change slightly. Yet you find that darker skinned black people sometimes feel more prejudice due to being darker, which may have a little to do with environment as well as genetics. So is it ok to discriminate against someone because environmental factors make them darker? Should they be asked to cover up so they can be lighter and not have to deal with the scorn of society? That is what you are asking Farhan. So no Farhan, you still don't get it. But I'll say, you are much nicer than another chap I'm dealing with on youtube. He really is making the Bahai Faith look like some fundamentalist freak show. I feel so sorry for how my Faith is being represented bythis homophobic individual.

Pey wrote:
Should they be asked to cover up so they can be lighter and not have to deal with the scorn of society?

No Pey, that is not what I am saying. I am saying that we should under no circumstance discriminate against gay orientation, no more than skin colour, which is an appearance. Baha’i teachings do not condemn gay orientation, but condemn misbehaviour towards gays. They also restrict some community activities people celibate or married with a standard non-gay behaviour.

I am saying that for practical reasons, a community has a right to define the behaviour of its members for some specific functions. If you cannot suppress your need for talking, you should not become a Carmelite, or else talk to yourself when you are alone, and if you cannot cope with celibacy, you should not go for priesthood or become a Buddhist monk. If at present you wish to live an open gay family life, you might have to forfeit priesthood, and your Baha’i administrative rights.

Giving a gay the possibility of having a family life outside wedlock would be discrimination against people with non-gay behaviour making the effort to comply by those rules.
I am also saying that we should not discriminate against left-handed people, but if they insist that they have a preference for driving on the other side of the road, and that they cannot resist this preference, and cannot adapt to driving on the right side of the road, they should abstain from driving.

Pey wrote:
Should they be asked to cover up so they can be lighter and not have to deal with the scorn of society?

No Pey, that is not what I am saying. I am saying that we should under no circumstance discriminate against gay orientation, no more than skin colour, which is an appearance. Baha’i teachings do not condemn gay orientation, but condemn misbehaviour towards gays. They also restrict some community activities people celibate or married with a standard non-gay behaviour.

I am saying that for practical reasons, a community has a right to define the behaviour of its members for some specific functions. If you cannot suppress your need for talking, you should not become a Carmelite, or else talk to yourself when you are alone, and if you cannot cope with celibacy, you should not go for priesthood or become a Buddhist monk. If at present you wish to live an open gay family life, you might have to forfeit priesthood, and your Baha’i administrative rights.

Giving a gay the possibility of having a family life outside wedlock would be discrimination against people with non-gay behaviour making the effort to comply by those rules.
I am also saying that we should not discriminate against left-handed people, but if they insist that they have a preference for driving on the other side of the road, and that they cannot resist this preference, and cannot adapt to driving on the right side of the road, they should abstain from driving.

Giving a gay the possibility of having a family life outside wedlock would discriminate agains who pray tell? Straight people who choose not to get married? Gays aren't even given a choice. That's discrimination.

Giving a gay the possibility of having a family life outside wedlock would discriminate agains who pray tell? Straight people who choose not to get married? Gays aren't even given a choice. That's discrimination.

Pey wrote:
Giving a gay the possibility of having a family life outside wedlock would discriminate agains who pray tell? Straight people who choose not to get married?

Pey, Baha’i community law says no sexuality outside marriage, whatever your orientation, if you want to maintain your voting rights. Non-gays who do not comply, lose their voting rights. If Baha’is accepted gay sexual behaviour outside marriage and only condemned non-gay behaviour outside marriage, that would be discrimination against non-gays.

Where I personally consider that gays could benefit from more flexibility is that non-gays have a choice to marry, whereas gay marriages are not available.

Pey wrote:
Giving a gay the possibility of having a family life outside wedlock would discriminate agains who pray tell? Straight people who choose not to get married?

Pey, Baha’i community law says no sexuality outside marriage, whatever your orientation, if you want to maintain your voting rights. Non-gays who do not comply, lose their voting rights. If Baha’is accepted gay sexual behaviour outside marriage and only condemned non-gay behaviour outside marriage, that would be discrimination against non-gays.

Where I personally consider that gays could benefit from more flexibility is that non-gays have a choice to marry, whereas gay marriages are not available.

Do pedophiles decide to be pedophiles? Or were they born with it, and cannot stop being pedophiles, because it is their nature? Would you allow consenting 11 year olds and 45 year olds be in relationships, 11 year olds and 21 year olds? How about a 15 year old and a 60 year old?

Or would you say, that it doesn't matter that it is your nature, that's just sick. Or that you cannot cure your pedophile problem, even though you don't want to be a pedophile and feel that you can't change your nature despite your best efforts? Or that you really can cure your pedophile problem, even thought you feel you cannot. Or that the best thing that a pedophile can do is to just suppress that side of themselves and try not act out their pedophilic nature, because it ultimately harmful to them and their potential partners?

One could argue about homosexuality in a similar matter. People might be extremely offended with the association of homosexuality being similar in nature to pedosexuality, but pedosexuals do have very similar feelings about their sexual orientation as homosexuals do, but often loathe themselves due to the extremely negative social attitude of them. Pederasty used to be accepted (and disliked) in societies such as ancient greece. And historical persia, arabia, and turkey. One could make similar arguments about necrophiliacs, or other socially loathed sexual fetishes.

If you think that homosexuals should be thought of as a healthy natural variation, but necrophiliacs and pedosexuals as not is that not mentally hypocritical?

Do pedophiles decide to be pedophiles? Or were they born with it, and cannot stop being pedophiles, because it is their nature? Would you allow consenting 11 year olds and 45 year olds be in relationships, 11 year olds and 21 year olds? How about a 15 year old and a 60 year old?

Or would you say, that it doesn't matter that it is your nature, that's just sick. Or that you cannot cure your pedophile problem, even though you don't want to be a pedophile and feel that you can't change your nature despite your best efforts? Or that you really can cure your pedophile problem, even thought you feel you cannot. Or that the best thing that a pedophile can do is to just suppress that side of themselves and try not act out their pedophilic nature, because it ultimately harmful to them and their potential partners?

One could argue about homosexuality in a similar matter. People might be extremely offended with the association of homosexuality being similar in nature to pedosexuality, but pedosexuals do have very similar feelings about their sexual orientation as homosexuals do, but often loathe themselves due to the extremely negative social attitude of them. Pederasty used to be accepted (and disliked) in societies such as ancient greece. And historical persia, arabia, and turkey. One could make similar arguments about necrophiliacs, or other socially loathed sexual fetishes.

If you think that homosexuals should be thought of as a healthy natural variation, but necrophiliacs and pedosexuals as not is that not mentally hypocritical?

Person,
woah! I'm just left shaking my head, don't know where to begin…

Person,
woah! I'm just left shaking my head, don't know where to begin…

Person – you are very mixed up individual. I am extremely offended by your comparison to glbts and pedophilia, etc.

Daniel Orey

Person – you are very mixed up individual. I am extremely offended by your comparison to glbts and pedophilia, etc.

Daniel Orey

Two words: "informed" and "consent". Neither is possible when the relationship is with a child, nor when the "relationship" is with a dead person. Over here, we're discussing loving, committed, long-term relationships between adult equals. I remain completely unconvinced that paedophiles and necrophiliacs are in the ball-park. Goodbye troll.

Two words: "informed" and "consent". Neither is possible when the relationship is with a child, nor when the "relationship" is with a dead person. Over here, we're discussing loving, committed, long-term relationships between adult equals. I remain completely unconvinced that paedophiles and necrophiliacs are in the ball-park. Goodbye troll.

You know. I used to get really offended by people like "person". Now I love it when they I see these comments. You should see some posted by this fundie named Candle something on youtube. I love it because they help prove our point 100 times better than we ever could- that the Bahai community truly is full of ignorant people who discriminate against the LGBT community. I sometimes feel I'm in an uphill battle to just convince people of this because the Bahai community is sold as such a tolerant and accepting place. Most people think it is similar to the Unitarians. So although I feel a little bit of vindication when I read such posts, for the most part I feel a lot of sadness because my Faith is being so mis-represented.

“How about a 15 year old and a 60 year old? ” But this part really cracks me up. The age of consent for marriage in the Faith is 15. LOL! Person you need to brush up on Bahai law.

Last night, over a nice dinner date, I learned more from my friend who is Catholic and belongs to an LGBT group in his parish. I wanted to know how the congregation balances the words of the Catholic leadership (which is very similar to the UHJ) with local acceptance of gays. He said that it is a fine balance. First the congregation is very open-minded, so of course that helps. And the LGBT group is just one of many “support” groups within the church. There are others for single straight people, young mothers, etc. The focus is creating a community that enriches the lives of the individuals and spreads the love of the Church, not rules. I guess in some way the Catholic church is even more stringent than Bahai.

They can ONLY have sex to reproduce (no condemns allowed). So every Catholic knows that’s a bunch of hogwash. They see the acceptance of gays in their community the same as accepting all the straight people who are using condomns- no big deal. The flip side is that the LGBT group doesn’t push the envelope. They are not clamoring for gay marriages to be performed at the altar, etc. But gay couples definitely come to the parish with their kids. He knows a few who drop their kids off at Sunday classes before they go to the other activiities in the Church. I think if Bahai communities would evolve to this point, that would be good enough for me. But unfortunately we are hindered by so many of the “persons” above and others I have met inside the community. Oh well…their loss.

You know. I used to get really offended by people like "person". Now I love it when they I see these comments. You should see some posted by this fundie named Candle something on youtube. I love it because they help prove our point 100 times better than we ever could- that the Bahai community truly is full of ignorant people who discriminate against the LGBT community. I sometimes feel I'm in an uphill battle to just convince people of this because the Bahai community is sold as such a tolerant and accepting place. Most people think it is similar to the Unitarians. So although I feel a little bit of vindication when I read such posts, for the most part I feel a lot of sadness because my Faith is being so mis-represented.

“How about a 15 year old and a 60 year old? ” But this part really cracks me up. The age of consent for marriage in the Faith is 15. LOL! Person you need to brush up on Bahai law.

Last night, over a nice dinner date, I learned more from my friend who is Catholic and belongs to an LGBT group in his parish. I wanted to know how the congregation balances the words of the Catholic leadership (which is very similar to the UHJ) with local acceptance of gays. He said that it is a fine balance. First the congregation is very open-minded, so of course that helps. And the LGBT group is just one of many “support” groups within the church. There are others for single straight people, young mothers, etc. The focus is creating a community that enriches the lives of the individuals and spreads the love of the Church, not rules. I guess in some way the Catholic church is even more stringent than Bahai.

They can ONLY have sex to reproduce (no condemns allowed). So every Catholic knows that’s a bunch of hogwash. They see the acceptance of gays in their community the same as accepting all the straight people who are using condomns- no big deal. The flip side is that the LGBT group doesn’t push the envelope. They are not clamoring for gay marriages to be performed at the altar, etc. But gay couples definitely come to the parish with their kids. He knows a few who drop their kids off at Sunday classes before they go to the other activiities in the Church. I think if Bahai communities would evolve to this point, that would be good enough for me. But unfortunately we are hindered by so many of the “persons” above and others I have met inside the community. Oh well…their loss.

Folks: take a mmoment (play it loud) to watch this: http://www.couragecampaign.org/page/s/divorce

Folks: take a mmoment (play it loud) to watch this: http://www.couragecampaign.org/page/s/divorce

Great link Daniel. Here is one that I saw today on facebook: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/2/6/04054/0002…
I love it because it shows where the future is going with the young people in our country- in the hear of Kansas of all places. Very cool!

Great link Daniel. Here is one that I saw today on facebook: http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/2/6/04054/0002…
I love it because it shows where the future is going with the young people in our country- in the hear of Kansas of all places. Very cool!

The rant seems a bit quiet these past few days… did any one get a chance to see this on JMG:
http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2009/02/please-selec…

which Joe got from:

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2009/02/please-selec…

regards-

Daniel Orey

The rant seems a bit quiet these past few days… did any one get a chance to see this on JMG:
http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2009/02/please-selec…

which Joe got from:

http://joemygod.blogspot.com/2009/02/please-selec…

regards-

Daniel Orey

click or paste the link to listen

http://ubnotorious.blogspot.com/2009/02/till-end-…

a hug to all from Daniel Orey

click or paste the link to listen

http://ubnotorious.blogspot.com/2009/02/till-end-…

a hug to all from Daniel Orey

For those of you inthe USA: Immigration equality legislation introduced in US Congress

US Senator Pat Leahy (D-Vermont) and Rep. Jerrold Nadley (D-New York) reintroduced the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) which would allow US citizens to sponsor their same-sex partners for eventual citizenship. (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeq… )

The current system tears apart families and abandons binational lesbian and gay couples, viewing them as legal strangers.Call your national representative today. Tell them that hardworking citizens shouldn’t have to choose between their country and the person they love, and that Congress has a responsibility to move this bill forward and fix this gross inequality. please call: http://www.immigrationequality.org/template2.php?…

It would make a real difference for Milton & I and many others if this passed.

Thanks!

Daniel Orey

For those of you inthe USA: Immigration equality legislation introduced in US Congress

US Senator Pat Leahy (D-Vermont) and Rep. Jerrold Nadley (D-New York) reintroduced the Uniting American Families Act (UAFA) which would allow US citizens to sponsor their same-sex partners for eventual citizenship. (http://www.google.com/hostednews/afp/article/ALeq… )

The current system tears apart families and abandons binational lesbian and gay couples, viewing them as legal strangers.Call your national representative today. Tell them that hardworking citizens shouldn’t have to choose between their country and the person they love, and that Congress has a responsibility to move this bill forward and fix this gross inequality. please call: http://www.immigrationequality.org/template2.php?…

It would make a real difference for Milton & I and many others if this passed.

Thanks!

Daniel Orey

Hi Bill. If you are still reading this thread, I have a question. You mentioned a letter from a gay youth that committed suicide because he couldn't reconcile his homosexuaity with the Bahai Faith. Do you have a copy of that letter? Do you know if the family of that individual would be ok with the world reading this letter? I think it would make our point so much clearer to be able to share this with the world. There is so much in the Bahai community that is brushed under the carpet. But at the same time, we have to be sensitive to the wishes of the family. Thanks.

Hi Bill. If you are still reading this thread, I have a question. You mentioned a letter from a gay youth that committed suicide because he couldn't reconcile his homosexuaity with the Bahai Faith. Do you have a copy of that letter? Do you know if the family of that individual would be ok with the world reading this letter? I think it would make our point so much clearer to be able to share this with the world. There is so much in the Bahai community that is brushed under the carpet. But at the same time, we have to be sensitive to the wishes of the family. Thanks.

Friends – One of our fellow Gay Baha'i brothers is in the news:

A Press Release with Photos:

http://chicago.indymedia.org/newswire/display/857…

A video as the actual arrest took place

http://www.youtube.com/user/ericachu

Friends – One of our fellow Gay Baha'i brothers is in the news:

A Press Release with Photos:

http://chicago.indymedia.org/newswire/display/857…

A video as the actual arrest took place

http://www.youtube.com/user/ericachu

Bill,

There's a huge difference. Being black is inherent/intrinsic to who one is. Here we're talking about acting on homosexual inclinations, which is not inherent/intrinsic. It's an action, which can be undertaken OR NOT. In other words, that is a choice. So asking for restraint is anything but outlandish, as you've suggested.

Bill,

There's a huge difference. Being black is inherent/intrinsic to who one is. Here we're talking about acting on homosexual inclinations, which is not inherent/intrinsic. It's an action, which can be undertaken OR NOT. In other words, that is a choice. So asking for restraint is anything but outlandish, as you've suggested.

Help me with this Masud. Are you saying that the inclinations you experience as part of your sexual orientation are not inherent/intrinsic to you. Let's not worry about the restraint aspect – that's about managing a state/condition – let's concentrate first on whether your sexual orientation is, or is not, intrinsic to you. Mine is part of who I am in this world of names, just as much as whether I'm black/white, diabetic/not, left-handed/right-handed, Maori/Pakeha, male/female. I guess I'm just surprised that you appear to think that your sexual orientation is quite malleable, or at least well outside of who you are in the world.

I trust that you're OK talking about this. You seem quite relaxed talking about the sexual orientation of others.

ka kite
Steve

Help me with this Masud. Are you saying that the inclinations you experience as part of your sexual orientation are not inherent/intrinsic to you. Let's not worry about the restraint aspect – that's about managing a state/condition – let's concentrate first on whether your sexual orientation is, or is not, intrinsic to you. Mine is part of who I am in this world of names, just as much as whether I'm black/white, diabetic/not, left-handed/right-handed, Maori/Pakeha, male/female. I guess I'm just surprised that you appear to think that your sexual orientation is quite malleable, or at least well outside of who you are in the world.

I trust that you're OK talking about this. You seem quite relaxed talking about the sexual orientation of others.

ka kite
Steve

Hetersexuality is also an action that can be undertaken OR NOT. The Bahai Faith give an outlet to heteresexuals, it does not to homosexuals. THAT is discrimination. Pretty simple to understand Masud. I can't believe you still don't get it. But of course in your eyes a gay person jumping from bed to bed is no different from one who is in a committed relationship and is raising a child with his partner. Can we say prejudice?

Hetersexuality is also an action that can be undertaken OR NOT. The Bahai Faith give an outlet to heteresexuals, it does not to homosexuals. THAT is discrimination. Pretty simple to understand Masud. I can't believe you still don't get it. But of course in your eyes a gay person jumping from bed to bed is no different from one who is in a committed relationship and is raising a child with his partner. Can we say prejudice?

Steve wrote:
Let's not worry about the restraint aspect – that's about managing a state/condition – let's concentrate first on whether your sexual orientation is, or is not, intrinsic to you.

Steve I gave a long reply on this: sexual orientation is partly genetic, partly biological, and partly acquired and subject to change during life.

Our sexual orientation can change if we take hormones, or after some experiences in life. In many cases, orientation is not exclusive and can be a matter of choice and opportunities.
To some extent, orientation drives can be similar to that of a non gay meeting someone else’s spouse with whom he falls in love.

I agree that some sexual orientations are exclusively gay, with no possibility for non gay relations, but in many cases it is just a fantasy on which we need to use restraint, as in non gay fantasies.

We have people with genetic predisposition to violence or addictive behaviour, including alcohol, gambling and drug misuse. They have to restrain themselves harder than others. They cannot argue that their genetic predisposition is an excuse for misbehaviour.

I continue to believe that allowing gay sexual behaviours outside marriage and forbidding non-gay relations outside marriage would be an unacceptable discrimination to non-gays. This has nothing to do with genetic predisposition or skin coulour that has no influence on our behaviour.

Steve wrote:
Let's not worry about the restraint aspect – that's about managing a state/condition – let's concentrate first on whether your sexual orientation is, or is not, intrinsic to you.

Steve I gave a long reply on this: sexual orientation is partly genetic, partly biological, and partly acquired and subject to change during life.

Our sexual orientation can change if we take hormones, or after some experiences in life. In many cases, orientation is not exclusive and can be a matter of choice and opportunities.
To some extent, orientation drives can be similar to that of a non gay meeting someone else’s spouse with whom he falls in love.

I agree that some sexual orientations are exclusively gay, with no possibility for non gay relations, but in many cases it is just a fantasy on which we need to use restraint, as in non gay fantasies.

We have people with genetic predisposition to violence or addictive behaviour, including alcohol, gambling and drug misuse. They have to restrain themselves harder than others. They cannot argue that their genetic predisposition is an excuse for misbehaviour.

I continue to believe that allowing gay sexual behaviours outside marriage and forbidding non-gay relations outside marriage would be an unacceptable discrimination to non-gays. This has nothing to do with genetic predisposition or skin coulour that has no influence on our behaviour.

Pey wrote: Hetersexuality is also an action that can be undertaken OR NOT. The Bahai Faith give an outlet to heteresexuals, it does not to homosexuals. THAT is discrimination.

Pey, your point is well taken. However, I would not say discrimination, but a natural injustice, just as some 10% of the population is left handed or inclined to becoming alcoholics unless they never drink alcohol at all.

Besides, the only solution to providing an outlet would be to instate gay marriages; then what will we do when orientations change later in life?

We have to consider both the views of those afflicted, and those who try and bring order to society.

Pey wrote: Hetersexuality is also an action that can be undertaken OR NOT. The Bahai Faith give an outlet to heteresexuals, it does not to homosexuals. THAT is discrimination.

Pey, your point is well taken. However, I would not say discrimination, but a natural injustice, just as some 10% of the population is left handed or inclined to becoming alcoholics unless they never drink alcohol at all.

Besides, the only solution to providing an outlet would be to instate gay marriages; then what will we do when orientations change later in life?

We have to consider both the views of those afflicted, and those who try and bring order to society.

And people want to know why we are outraged:

http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1627706.html

And people want to know why we are outraged:

http://www.sacbee.com/opinion/story/1627706.html

As someone who was a sissy, and called a fag as a kid, I can say that my being gay WAS / IS inherent/intrinsic to who I am… this is such crap… how on earth can you speak for those of us who suffered chastisement, violence and prejudice by other kids and teachers when growing up? As someone who has been passed over for promotion because of who he is, as someone who know folks who were kiled for who they are … your assumption is very hollow. This all happened long before I "knew" or accepted who I was… stop telling glbt's who we are and what they should be, and start listening to who we are…

As someone who was a sissy, and called a fag as a kid, I can say that my being gay WAS / IS inherent/intrinsic to who I am… this is such crap… how on earth can you speak for those of us who suffered chastisement, violence and prejudice by other kids and teachers when growing up? As someone who has been passed over for promotion because of who he is, as someone who know folks who were kiled for who they are … your assumption is very hollow. This all happened long before I "knew" or accepted who I was… stop telling glbt's who we are and what they should be, and start listening to who we are…

what are you talking about farhan? It is pure discrimination. The only solution is that gay partnerships are not specifically spoken about in the Aqdas, therefore it is outside the book. The present UHJ doesn't agree. They believe their hands are tied. So wether you are a rapist, a promiscous heterosexual man cheating on your wife, a child molester or a gay man raising a child with your committed partner of 10 years- you are ALL in the same boat "unchaste" and worthy of punishment. When the UHJ wakes up and realizes they have more wiggle room in the application of this "law" then the injustice will end. Til then- it is pure discrimination and the Bahai community will lose out on wonderful souls that could be active in it. (That includes me btw). Of course, if I'm lucky to be near a local Bahai community (like the one Sonja lives in) that would accept me as an equal- then sure I'd love to come back to the Bahai community; regardless of what the UHJ thinks or their "loyal" adherents like Masud.

what are you talking about farhan? It is pure discrimination. The only solution is that gay partnerships are not specifically spoken about in the Aqdas, therefore it is outside the book. The present UHJ doesn't agree. They believe their hands are tied. So wether you are a rapist, a promiscous heterosexual man cheating on your wife, a child molester or a gay man raising a child with your committed partner of 10 years- you are ALL in the same boat "unchaste" and worthy of punishment. When the UHJ wakes up and realizes they have more wiggle room in the application of this "law" then the injustice will end. Til then- it is pure discrimination and the Bahai community will lose out on wonderful souls that could be active in it. (That includes me btw). Of course, if I'm lucky to be near a local Bahai community (like the one Sonja lives in) that would accept me as an equal- then sure I'd love to come back to the Bahai community; regardless of what the UHJ thinks or their "loyal" adherents like Masud.

Amen brother.

Amen brother.

Today I was so irritated with my family. My mom kept talking about the poor Bahai souls who have been imprisoned in Iran. My heart goes out to them, but I still can't help and wonder why? Why has the Bahai community never said a word when a number of teens were executed a few years ago for the crime of homosexuality by the Iranian government. Why have I never heard the Bahais utter so much a word in the defence of the LGBT people who have suffered imprisonment, torture and more at the hands of the Ayatollahs. Trust me more, much more, have died for being caught as gay in Iran than the number of Bahais. Yet, the Bahai community is silent. The only time you hear the word gay muttered among Bahais is to remind fellow members that it is wrong and they are being unchaste if they give into it.

Today I was so irritated with my family. My mom kept talking about the poor Bahai souls who have been imprisoned in Iran. My heart goes out to them, but I still can't help and wonder why? Why has the Bahai community never said a word when a number of teens were executed a few years ago for the crime of homosexuality by the Iranian government. Why have I never heard the Bahais utter so much a word in the defence of the LGBT people who have suffered imprisonment, torture and more at the hands of the Ayatollahs. Trust me more, much more, have died for being caught as gay in Iran than the number of Bahais. Yet, the Bahai community is silent. The only time you hear the word gay muttered among Bahais is to remind fellow members that it is wrong and they are being unchaste if they give into it.

Today I was so irritated with my family. My mom kept talking about the poor Bahai souls who have been imprisoned in Iran. My heart goes out to them, but I still can't help and wonder why? Why has the Bahai community never said a word when a number of teens were executed a few years ago for the crime of homosexuality by the Iranian government. Why have I never heard the Bahais utter so much a word in the defence of the LGBT people who have suffered imprisonment, torture and more at the hands of the Ayatollahs. Trust me more, much more, have died for being caught as gay in Iran than the number of Bahais. Yet, the Bahai community is silent. The only time you hear the word gay muttered among Bahais is to remind fellow members that it is wrong and they are being unchaste if they give into it.

Today I was so irritated with my family. My mom kept talking about the poor Bahai souls who have been imprisoned in Iran. My heart goes out to them, but I still can't help and wonder why? Why has the Bahai community never said a word when a number of teens were executed a few years ago for the crime of homosexuality by the Iranian government. Why have I never heard the Bahais utter so much a word in the defence of the LGBT people who have suffered imprisonment, torture and more at the hands of the Ayatollahs. Trust me more, much more, have died for being caught as gay in Iran than the number of Bahais. Yet, the Bahai community is silent. The only time you hear the word gay muttered among Bahais is to remind fellow members that it is wrong and they are being unchaste if they give into it.

Right Masud. I'm curious for you to answer Steve's question. I deplore the idea of outing anyone because it is wrong. People should be allowed to deal with their sexuality in there own due time. BUT, like I"ve said before, if an individual consistently makes it an issue to belittle what homosexuals go through and downplay the injustices that we face (as you hav done), then it's ALL fair game. So please answer Steve's question if you are comfortable talking about your sexuality and how you deal with your inclinations.

Right Masud. I'm curious for you to answer Steve's question. I deplore the idea of outing anyone because it is wrong. People should be allowed to deal with their sexuality in there own due time. BUT, like I"ve said before, if an individual consistently makes it an issue to belittle what homosexuals go through and downplay the injustices that we face (as you hav done), then it's ALL fair game. So please answer Steve's question if you are comfortable talking about your sexuality and how you deal with your inclinations.

Farhan, you've just used up 195 words avoiding the question. I have no intention of discussing the restraint aspect until I find out whether my interlocutor thinks their own sexual orientation is intrinsic to them, in the same way other states/conditions, such as the ones I mentioned, are intrinsic to them.

If you'd like to join in, you have to answer the question given. I promise to talk about restraint once you do that.

Let me explain why. Perhaps it will help. I'm concerned that state/condition is being conflated with behaviour. You've already used the phrase "orientation drives". I have no idea what you mean by that, and I'd love to ask because it seems to be the ultimate in conflating state and behaviour, but I need to proceed methodically so we're both on the same page. OK?

Farhan, you've just used up 195 words avoiding the question. I have no intention of discussing the restraint aspect until I find out whether my interlocutor thinks their own sexual orientation is intrinsic to them, in the same way other states/conditions, such as the ones I mentioned, are intrinsic to them.

If you'd like to join in, you have to answer the question given. I promise to talk about restraint once you do that.

Let me explain why. Perhaps it will help. I'm concerned that state/condition is being conflated with behaviour. You've already used the phrase "orientation drives". I have no idea what you mean by that, and I'd love to ask because it seems to be the ultimate in conflating state and behaviour, but I need to proceed methodically so we're both on the same page. OK?

Steve wrote :
You've already used the phrase "orientation drives". I have no idea what you mean by that, and I'd love to ask because it seems to be the ultimate in conflating state and behaviour, but I need to proceed methodically so we're both on the same page. OK?

Steve, to my understanding, sexual drive can be oriented to diverse sexual behaviours. I do not believe that this orientation is entirely genetic, but only partly so and partly acquired through hormones and experience, and also partly a choice, at least as far as bisexuals are concerned.

I also believe that through education, our inborn patterns of behaviour can be modified to some extent. We might be genetically predestined to be left handed, overweight or violent, and through adaptation we can modify our behaviour.

Steve wrote :
You've already used the phrase "orientation drives". I have no idea what you mean by that, and I'd love to ask because it seems to be the ultimate in conflating state and behaviour, but I need to proceed methodically so we're both on the same page. OK?

Steve, to my understanding, sexual drive can be oriented to diverse sexual behaviours. I do not believe that this orientation is entirely genetic, but only partly so and partly acquired through hormones and experience, and also partly a choice, at least as far as bisexuals are concerned.

I also believe that through education, our inborn patterns of behaviour can be modified to some extent. We might be genetically predestined to be left handed, overweight or violent, and through adaptation we can modify our behaviour.

That's another 84 words, and you still haven't answered my question. Later on I'll consider your answer to the question I said I'd love to ask (in the future) but, as I've said, I need to proceed methodically.

The question I need to have answered first — so that we're on the same page — is about your sexual orientation and whether it's intrinsic to you in the kingdom of names. Never mind other people. Never mind your theories. This is about you and your sexual identity.

ka kite
Steve

That's another 84 words, and you still haven't answered my question. Later on I'll consider your answer to the question I said I'd love to ask (in the future) but, as I've said, I need to proceed methodically.

The question I need to have answered first — so that we're on the same page — is about your sexual orientation and whether it's intrinsic to you in the kingdom of names. Never mind other people. Never mind your theories. This is about you and your sexual identity.

ka kite
Steve

awesome! I love activism. I'll be doing a little of my own lobbying for the Human Rights Campaign in March. I'll be on Capitol Hill fighting the fight!

awesome! I love activism. I'll be doing a little of my own lobbying for the Human Rights Campaign in March. I'll be on Capitol Hill fighting the fight!

Steve wrote:
The question I need to have answered first — so that we're on the same page — is about your sexual orientation and whether it's intrinsic to you in the kingdom of names. Never mind other people. Never mind your theories. This is about you and your sexual identity. ka kite Steve

Steve, I have a clear non-gay orientation, but I am aware that at times in my life, my experience might have changed that orientation, and that medication can also modify not only the intensity of my sexual drive, but also its orientation. For example, it is now established that medication for Parkinson’s disorder can modify sexual drive and even lead to penal offences that are now being accepted as a side effect of that medication. I do not consider my sexual drive and orientation as being entirely innate. I am aware that I need self-restraint to comply by social standards, but I am well aware that this might have been more or less difficult for other people, and at certain times in my life.

As a doctor, I am accustomed to not considering myself as a standard, but as myself as part of variety of human beings.

Steve wrote:
The question I need to have answered first — so that we're on the same page — is about your sexual orientation and whether it's intrinsic to you in the kingdom of names. Never mind other people. Never mind your theories. This is about you and your sexual identity. ka kite Steve

Steve, I have a clear non-gay orientation, but I am aware that at times in my life, my experience might have changed that orientation, and that medication can also modify not only the intensity of my sexual drive, but also its orientation. For example, it is now established that medication for Parkinson’s disorder can modify sexual drive and even lead to penal offences that are now being accepted as a side effect of that medication. I do not consider my sexual drive and orientation as being entirely innate. I am aware that I need self-restraint to comply by social standards, but I am well aware that this might have been more or less difficult for other people, and at certain times in my life.

As a doctor, I am accustomed to not considering myself as a standard, but as myself as part of variety of human beings.

Thank Daniel. We need more of these stories to humanize what we are saying. Otherwise we are nothing more than "a sexual aberration", a controllable inclination, and so on and so forth….I swear my friends in Canada just shake their head wondering what the hell is wrong with us. They've had gay marriage for years and their society hasn't fallen apart anymore than ours!

Thank Daniel. We need more of these stories to humanize what we are saying. Otherwise we are nothing more than "a sexual aberration", a controllable inclination, and so on and so forth….I swear my friends in Canada just shake their head wondering what the hell is wrong with us. They've had gay marriage for years and their society hasn't fallen apart anymore than ours!

agree that some sexual orientations are exclusively gay, with no possibility for non gay relations, but in many cases it is just a fantasy on which we need to use restraint, as in non gay fantasies.
——————-
Well Farhan, I've yet to have a single fantasy of a woman. Trust me, I've tried. Iv'e stared at Angelina Jolie's hot body, but I seem to still glance over to Brad behind her. The same holds true for the majority of gay people that I know. A very, very small percentage of people are truly bisexual. But the majority are either straight or gay- regardless of what fantasies enter our mind- intrinsically you know who you can be truly intimate with and who you are faking it with. So you like to concentrate on this very small percentage of people who maybe can be conditioned to be perfectly straight and perfectly Bahai, but that still leaves out the majority of us from God's kingdom on earth. You need to go back to the drawing board Farhan…

agree that some sexual orientations are exclusively gay, with no possibility for non gay relations, but in many cases it is just a fantasy on which we need to use restraint, as in non gay fantasies.
——————-
Well Farhan, I've yet to have a single fantasy of a woman. Trust me, I've tried. Iv'e stared at Angelina Jolie's hot body, but I seem to still glance over to Brad behind her. The same holds true for the majority of gay people that I know. A very, very small percentage of people are truly bisexual. But the majority are either straight or gay- regardless of what fantasies enter our mind- intrinsically you know who you can be truly intimate with and who you are faking it with. So you like to concentrate on this very small percentage of people who maybe can be conditioned to be perfectly straight and perfectly Bahai, but that still leaves out the majority of us from God's kingdom on earth. You need to go back to the drawing board Farhan…

And oh farhan, what hormones pray tell do you speak of? Do you know some secret of making have the hots for Angelina vs. Brad? Please share. (But please don't say I need more testosterone in my blood- I have plenty. All it's done is make me lose my hair, but not much in making me attracted to women).

And oh farhan, what hormones pray tell do you speak of? Do you know some secret of making have the hots for Angelina vs. Brad? Please share. (But please don't say I need more testosterone in my blood- I have plenty. All it's done is make me lose my hair, but not much in making me attracted to women).

Thank you for partially answering my question, but you keep using up lots of words discussing both restraint and levels of sexual drive — which simply gives me the impression that you don't see a problem with conflating issues.

As for your assertion that "it is now established that medication for Parkinson’s disorder can modify sexual drive and even lead to penal offences that are now being accepted as a side effect of that medication." — I simply can't let that one do without responding.

You're the doctor, but my quick glance over the literature indicates to me that your example is somewhat false and strengthens my argument, not yours. What happens is that the medication reduces inhibitions and can result in an "impulse control disorder" (ICD). In other words, the patient, who up until then had been resisting or masking their innate propensities, loses their inhibitions and starts acting on impulse. With regard to homosexuality, perhaps it would have been better for these patients not to have lived a lie all their lives? There is no indication that the medicine modifes sexual orientation. Not that you actually said that, but it renders your example pretty useless in the context that you used it.

Back to your sexual orientation, which is all I asked about. According to you, it is "clearly non-gay" but not entirely innate. Tell me about the non-innate part. "Who would you go gay for?", as we say in this part of the world. Go on, you're amongst friends.

Thank you for partially answering my question, but you keep using up lots of words discussing both restraint and levels of sexual drive — which simply gives me the impression that you don't see a problem with conflating issues.

As for your assertion that "it is now established that medication for Parkinson’s disorder can modify sexual drive and even lead to penal offences that are now being accepted as a side effect of that medication." — I simply can't let that one do without responding.

You're the doctor, but my quick glance over the literature indicates to me that your example is somewhat false and strengthens my argument, not yours. What happens is that the medication reduces inhibitions and can result in an "impulse control disorder" (ICD). In other words, the patient, who up until then had been resisting or masking their innate propensities, loses their inhibitions and starts acting on impulse. With regard to homosexuality, perhaps it would have been better for these patients not to have lived a lie all their lives? There is no indication that the medicine modifes sexual orientation. Not that you actually said that, but it renders your example pretty useless in the context that you used it.

Back to your sexual orientation, which is all I asked about. According to you, it is "clearly non-gay" but not entirely innate. Tell me about the non-innate part. "Who would you go gay for?", as we say in this part of the world. Go on, you're amongst friends.

The same is for New Orleans / Hurricane Katrina…. where were the Baha'is? Where were the calls to assist from our leadership? It seems we don't have the ability to mobilize and affect change when change is needed.

The same is for New Orleans / Hurricane Katrina…. where were the Baha'is? Where were the calls to assist from our leadership? It seems we don't have the ability to mobilize and affect change when change is needed.

More info on Mormongate… odd how religious people seem to be lying to the public, and government…

http://californiansagainsthate.blogspot.com/

More info on Mormongate… odd how religious people seem to be lying to the public, and government…

http://californiansagainsthate.blogspot.com/

Steve wrote :
Tell me about the non-innate part. "Who would you go gay for?", as we say in this part of the world. Go on, you're amongst friends.

Steve, I would clearly feel no attraction, and even repulsion at the idea of a gay relation, however, during adolescence and on purely human attraction, I did sometimes feel admiration for some persons and given the circumstances, I can imagine that at that age experience might have led me to gay relations.

As to medication or surgery of Parkinson’s disorder, what I read on the subject suggests not only a suppression of inhibitions, but also an exacerbation of the sexual drive. And with out suggesting a change in orientation through hormones, there is much indication that of orientation can be modified through hormones.

To come back to your comparison, I do not believe that sexual orientation and more so behaviour is entirely determined by genes, as in the case of skin colour.

Steve wrote :
Tell me about the non-innate part. "Who would you go gay for?", as we say in this part of the world. Go on, you're amongst friends.

Steve, I would clearly feel no attraction, and even repulsion at the idea of a gay relation, however, during adolescence and on purely human attraction, I did sometimes feel admiration for some persons and given the circumstances, I can imagine that at that age experience might have led me to gay relations.

As to medication or surgery of Parkinson’s disorder, what I read on the subject suggests not only a suppression of inhibitions, but also an exacerbation of the sexual drive. And with out suggesting a change in orientation through hormones, there is much indication that of orientation can be modified through hormones.

To come back to your comparison, I do not believe that sexual orientation and more so behaviour is entirely determined by genes, as in the case of skin colour.

Lol Farhan, there is no evidence at all that sexual orientation is changed by hormones. Trials people did using testosterone ramped up the sex drive but did not change orientation. It would be great if you actually cited some evidence……

Lol Farhan, there is no evidence at all that sexual orientation is changed by hormones. Trials people did using testosterone ramped up the sex drive but did not change orientation. It would be great if you actually cited some evidence……

Hi Farhan,

You wrote:
"I would clearly feel no attraction, and even repulsion at the idea of a gay relation, however, during adolescence and on purely human attraction, I did sometimes feel admiration for some persons and given the circumstances, I can imagine that at that age experience might have led me to gay relations."

Thanks for that explanation. I can see that your orientation has modified over time, although it does sound like you've always been straight. I think Pey is right. Most folks are either gay or straight and are hardly likely to change.

I've always been slim, small in stature and have always looked younger than my years. That's made me more attractive to gay guys than straight women. And I've hung out with gay guys quite a bit — mainly because I looked after people with an intellectual handicap, then I worked as a librarian. So I've had plenty of opportunity to figure out my orientation and I'm sure I'm straight. Gay sex – sorry, definitely not interested. Straight sex – yes, that is a temptation.

Given that you "clearly feel no attraction, and even repulsion at the idea of a gay relation" and given that I've never felt any sexual attraction to a guy despite being in many situations where that was normal, there's a strong indication that our orientation is relatively fixed. My experience of most straight people is that their orientation remains fairly fixed, and I'm happy to accept the assurances of most gay people that their orientation is fairly fixed, too. Who would choose to be gay in this world?

I agree that the sexual orientation of a few people isn't fixed, but they are a minority.

So, in many ways, being gay is like being black. In many situations you're perceived as being different and that difference is viewed negatively. Sociologically speaking, both are deviants in situations where there is prejudice against them. Blacks can sometimes pass as whites, they can get by if they "know their place", and they learn to survive by suppressing their blackness in public. I'm sure gays can play those games too.

—————-

Originally you said:

"I have a clear non-gay orientation, but I am aware that at times in my life, my experience might have changed that orientation, and that medication can also modify not only the intensity of my sexual drive, but also its orientation. For example, it is now established that medication for Parkinson’s disorder can modify sexual drive and even
lead to penal offences that are now being accepted as a side effect of that medication."

Now you're saying:

"As to medication or surgery of Parkinson’s disorder, what I read on the subject suggests not only a suppression of inhibitions, but also an exacerbation of the sexual drive."

It seems to me that you're no longer saying that medication for Parkinsons has an effect on orientation — which leaves me wondering why you cited it as an example of medication that can modify the intensity and orientation of a patient's sex drive.

Hi Farhan,

You wrote:
"I would clearly feel no attraction, and even repulsion at the idea of a gay relation, however, during adolescence and on purely human attraction, I did sometimes feel admiration for some persons and given the circumstances, I can imagine that at that age experience might have led me to gay relations."

Thanks for that explanation. I can see that your orientation has modified over time, although it does sound like you've always been straight. I think Pey is right. Most folks are either gay or straight and are hardly likely to change.

I've always been slim, small in stature and have always looked younger than my years. That's made me more attractive to gay guys than straight women. And I've hung out with gay guys quite a bit — mainly because I looked after people with an intellectual handicap, then I worked as a librarian. So I've had plenty of opportunity to figure out my orientation and I'm sure I'm straight. Gay sex – sorry, definitely not interested. Straight sex – yes, that is a temptation.

Given that you "clearly feel no attraction, and even repulsion at the idea of a gay relation" and given that I've never felt any sexual attraction to a guy despite being in many situations where that was normal, there's a strong indication that our orientation is relatively fixed. My experience of most straight people is that their orientation remains fairly fixed, and I'm happy to accept the assurances of most gay people that their orientation is fairly fixed, too. Who would choose to be gay in this world?

I agree that the sexual orientation of a few people isn't fixed, but they are a minority.

So, in many ways, being gay is like being black. In many situations you're perceived as being different and that difference is viewed negatively. Sociologically speaking, both are deviants in situations where there is prejudice against them. Blacks can sometimes pass as whites, they can get by if they "know their place", and they learn to survive by suppressing their blackness in public. I'm sure gays can play those games too.

—————-

Originally you said:

"I have a clear non-gay orientation, but I am aware that at times in my life, my experience might have changed that orientation, and that medication can also modify not only the intensity of my sexual drive, but also its orientation. For example, it is now established that medication for Parkinson’s disorder can modify sexual drive and even
lead to penal offences that are now being accepted as a side effect of that medication."

Now you're saying:

"As to medication or surgery of Parkinson’s disorder, what I read on the subject suggests not only a suppression of inhibitions, but also an exacerbation of the sexual drive."

It seems to me that you're no longer saying that medication for Parkinsons has an effect on orientation — which leaves me wondering why you cited it as an example of medication that can modify the intensity and orientation of a patient's sex drive.

Steve wrote:
which leaves me wondering why you cited it as an example of medication that can modify the intensity and orientation of a patient's sex drive.

I was just pointing out how medication can influence our sexuality; I never implied that I had a new drug to straighten out gays.

Steve wrote:
which leaves me wondering why you cited it as an example of medication that can modify the intensity and orientation of a patient's sex drive.

I was just pointing out how medication can influence our sexuality; I never implied that I had a new drug to straighten out gays.

All you just proved Farhan is that people some people are willing to experiment. I tried making out with women and one time getting very close to having sex. Why? Not because of hormones, but because of societal pressures (especifically Bahai pressure to conform). It didn't work. It didn't work for me or countless others who entered fruitless marriages. So you haven't proven anything about orientation being innate or transient. You could have given in to your circumstances farhan and trust me, you would still be a very straight man today. It is how we are wired- just as our skin color, eye color, hair color. Environment has some effect on all of our physical characteristics, but it is primarily genetic. Our sexuality is just one other physical trait of who we are.
A brown eyed man can wear contacts to turn his eyes blue, he may even be able to fool the world that he is a blue eyed individual, but at the end of the day, he knows he has brown eyes. That's the way God made him.

All you just proved Farhan is that people some people are willing to experiment. I tried making out with women and one time getting very close to having sex. Why? Not because of hormones, but because of societal pressures (especifically Bahai pressure to conform). It didn't work. It didn't work for me or countless others who entered fruitless marriages. So you haven't proven anything about orientation being innate or transient. You could have given in to your circumstances farhan and trust me, you would still be a very straight man today. It is how we are wired- just as our skin color, eye color, hair color. Environment has some effect on all of our physical characteristics, but it is primarily genetic. Our sexuality is just one other physical trait of who we are.
A brown eyed man can wear contacts to turn his eyes blue, he may even be able to fool the world that he is a blue eyed individual, but at the end of the day, he knows he has brown eyes. That's the way God made him.

Pey wrote:
A brown eyed man can wear contacts to turn his eyes blue, he may even be able to fool the world that he is a blue eyed individual, but at the end of the day, he knows he has brown eyes.

Thanks for sharing your experience, all of you. I don’t think appearance is the right comparison; behaviour is closer: lets say a left handed person learning to use scissors with his right hand, but aware that he is left-handed. I used to have a left handed colleague who would get wild with his scissors, but he was an excellent surgeon and a wonderful person. BTW, I am right handed, but I can do many things, including making swift knot with my left hand: saves me a lot of operating time.

Pey wrote:
A brown eyed man can wear contacts to turn his eyes blue, he may even be able to fool the world that he is a blue eyed individual, but at the end of the day, he knows he has brown eyes.

Thanks for sharing your experience, all of you. I don’t think appearance is the right comparison; behaviour is closer: lets say a left handed person learning to use scissors with his right hand, but aware that he is left-handed. I used to have a left handed colleague who would get wild with his scissors, but he was an excellent surgeon and a wonderful person. BTW, I am right handed, but I can do many things, including making swift knot with my left hand: saves me a lot of operating time.

Right, but if you had to (God forbid) choose between your left hand or your right hand to be cut off because of some ailment let's say, which would you choose?

Right, but if you had to (God forbid) choose between your left hand or your right hand to be cut off because of some ailment let's say, which would you choose?

Pey wrote: Right, but if you had to (God forbid) choose between your left hand or your right hand to be cut off because of some ailment let's say, which would you choose?

Yes, cleptomania is an ailment, and who know, perhaps related to some genetic dopaminergic addictive behaviour; if I were given the chance, I would try to cure my cleptomania, or at least restrain from it., otherwise, I would sacrifice my left hand.

Joke appart, Pey, my teleological ethical procedures are related to the best ultimate results, and not to the value laden concerns linked with safeguarding moral values and traditions. I am more intereseted in preventing accidents than defining the sign posts and giving tickets, which is also an unfortunate necessity..

Pey wrote: Right, but if you had to (God forbid) choose between your left hand or your right hand to be cut off because of some ailment let's say, which would you choose?

Yes, cleptomania is an ailment, and who know, perhaps related to some genetic dopaminergic addictive behaviour; if I were given the chance, I would try to cure my cleptomania, or at least restrain from it., otherwise, I would sacrifice my left hand.

Joke appart, Pey, my teleological ethical procedures are related to the best ultimate results, and not to the value laden concerns linked with safeguarding moral values and traditions. I am more intereseted in preventing accidents than defining the sign posts and giving tickets, which is also an unfortunate necessity..

Pey wrote: Right, but if you had to (God forbid) choose between your left hand or your right hand to be cut off because of some ailment let's say, which would you choose?

Yes, kleptomania is an ailment, and who know, perhaps related to some genetic dopaminergic addictive behaviour; if I were given the chance, I would try to cure my kleptomania, or at least restrain from it., otherwise, I would sacrifice my left hand.

Joke apart, Pey, my teleological ethical procedures are related to the best ultimate results, and not to the value laden concerns linked with safeguarding moral values and traditions. I am more interested in preventing accidents than defining the sign posts and giving tickets, which is also an unfortunate necessity.

Pey wrote: Right, but if you had to (God forbid) choose between your left hand or your right hand to be cut off because of some ailment let's say, which would you choose?

Yes, kleptomania is an ailment, and who know, perhaps related to some genetic dopaminergic addictive behaviour; if I were given the chance, I would try to cure my kleptomania, or at least restrain from it., otherwise, I would sacrifice my left hand.

Joke apart, Pey, my teleological ethical procedures are related to the best ultimate results, and not to the value laden concerns linked with safeguarding moral values and traditions. I am more interested in preventing accidents than defining the sign posts and giving tickets, which is also an unfortunate necessity.

So you are saying then that if you had to choose between sacrificing your left hand or your right, you intrinsically know that you would give up your left hand, why? Because there is no doubt that you are a right handed person, no matter how well you have conditioned yourself to use your left hand for some tasks. Get my drift? If not, let me spell it out for you: no matter how much you try to condition someone to turn straight- it will not happen. Period.

So you are saying then that if you had to choose between sacrificing your left hand or your right, you intrinsically know that you would give up your left hand, why? Because there is no doubt that you are a right handed person, no matter how well you have conditioned yourself to use your left hand for some tasks. Get my drift? If not, let me spell it out for you: no matter how much you try to condition someone to turn straight- it will not happen. Period.

Last night aired an absolutely horrifying program on PBS "The Lobotomist"… it was worse than a horror movie, because it was true.

30-40 yrs ago this treatment was considered standard and a cure for mental ailments, many times for glbt's… if folks want o know why many of us reject the Faith’s view on homosexuality can be cured… this cold, horrifying, self righteous view on right and wrong and the terrible consequences it had on many people is why.

See; http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/lobotomist/program/

Last night aired an absolutely horrifying program on PBS "The Lobotomist"… it was worse than a horror movie, because it was true.

30-40 yrs ago this treatment was considered standard and a cure for mental ailments, many times for glbt's… if folks want o know why many of us reject the Faith’s view on homosexuality can be cured… this cold, horrifying, self righteous view on right and wrong and the terrible consequences it had on many people is why.

See; http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/amex/lobotomist/program/

Yeah Daniel. Hmm and what else was going on in the early decades of the 20th century? Oh yeah, some secretary was writing on behalf of Shoghi Effendi telling us that homosexuality is curable with a doctor's help. I wonder if he was thinking of the good ol doc you showed in that link?!

Yeah Daniel. Hmm and what else was going on in the early decades of the 20th century? Oh yeah, some secretary was writing on behalf of Shoghi Effendi telling us that homosexuality is curable with a doctor's help. I wonder if he was thinking of the good ol doc you showed in that link?!

it is my very deep fear that he was… What non-glbt folks here and in the greater community who believe we can be changed don't understand is that the Guardian was not talking about rubber band therapy. They are talking about doing away with us altogether… either thru sanctions, therapies that do not work, living dishonestly, or in a closet. I can't do that. I am more than happy and proud to be out, honest and respected for my work, university colleagues, non-Baha'i community, neighbors, my husband's family, my colleagues in three or four countries…

What I still feel, believe, and see is that the current out-moded homophobic based view of the Faith on homosexuality is causing much more harm to the Faith than being open and glbt in it could possibly be.

I think thru this one issue, the Baha'is are being tested, and found to be wanting… it is sad indeed.

Blessing to all.

Daniel

it is my very deep fear that he was… What non-glbt folks here and in the greater community who believe we can be changed don't understand is that the Guardian was not talking about rubber band therapy. They are talking about doing away with us altogether… either thru sanctions, therapies that do not work, living dishonestly, or in a closet. I can't do that. I am more than happy and proud to be out, honest and respected for my work, university colleagues, non-Baha'i community, neighbors, my husband's family, my colleagues in three or four countries…

What I still feel, believe, and see is that the current out-moded homophobic based view of the Faith on homosexuality is causing much more harm to the Faith than being open and glbt in it could possibly be.

I think thru this one issue, the Baha'is are being tested, and found to be wanting… it is sad indeed.

Blessing to all.

Daniel

What I don't undertand Daniel, is why local Bahai communities do not open up more to LGBT people. If there are liberal Catholic parishes that do it, then why not Bahai communities? Maybe Sonja is right. The UHJ is supposed to be the guard of tradition and in that respect, ultimately conservative. So they will never change. Same as the Papacy. But somehow local Catholics find a way to honor the Pope while still making their communities welcoming to all. Maybe it is because Bahais believe that the UHJ is something more than just our leadership. I think many actually do believe that they are God incarnate, but the Pope is not. But the truth is that in official Catholicism (regardless of what Bahais may believe), the Pope is also divinly guided by God. So the beliefe system among Catholics is exactly the same as the Bahais- an infallible authority figure. But somehow, Catholics have managed to have LGBT groups within some of their parishes WITH the blessings of their local Bishop. Try that out with an auxiliary board member.

What I don't undertand Daniel, is why local Bahai communities do not open up more to LGBT people. If there are liberal Catholic parishes that do it, then why not Bahai communities? Maybe Sonja is right. The UHJ is supposed to be the guard of tradition and in that respect, ultimately conservative. So they will never change. Same as the Papacy. But somehow local Catholics find a way to honor the Pope while still making their communities welcoming to all. Maybe it is because Bahais believe that the UHJ is something more than just our leadership. I think many actually do believe that they are God incarnate, but the Pope is not. But the truth is that in official Catholicism (regardless of what Bahais may believe), the Pope is also divinly guided by God. So the beliefe system among Catholics is exactly the same as the Bahais- an infallible authority figure. But somehow, Catholics have managed to have LGBT groups within some of their parishes WITH the blessings of their local Bishop. Try that out with an auxiliary board member.

Pey –

What we as glbt's have to do is be better Baha'is, indeed better than the Baha'is that have some wierd need to that judge us…

I consider myself an isolated believer, in a very hostile country (I am talking about Baha'i land, non-Baha'i land is less hostile). I try as best I can to live the life as prescribed, and go about doing my work as best I can, serving my friends and students in way that the Blessed Beauty asks me to do. I learned that it doesn't take or do I need a Baha'i community to raise children, read, fast, pray, teach, serve others… To my mind our best revenge, indeed example, can be to be better at what we are asked to do than those that judge us.

Our difficulty as glbt Baha'is is that we are to be judged twice… In so doing, we need be strong, and do our best and contribute to the greater good, and above all make sure we are not our own worst enemies. It is lonely, it is sometimes very sad. I loose my patience frequently (may gawd forgive me), but we have each other in places like this, to support and urge each other to not give up, and ignore the ones who are lost in their own fundamentalist sickness.

I think these forums are good. Even if some folks say some really dopey things… it is building a foundation… we are learning to teach each others that we are the ones that should also be included at the table.

hugs – Daniel

Pey –

What we as glbt's have to do is be better Baha'is, indeed better than the Baha'is that have some wierd need to that judge us…

I consider myself an isolated believer, in a very hostile country (I am talking about Baha'i land, non-Baha'i land is less hostile). I try as best I can to live the life as prescribed, and go about doing my work as best I can, serving my friends and students in way that the Blessed Beauty asks me to do. I learned that it doesn't take or do I need a Baha'i community to raise children, read, fast, pray, teach, serve others… To my mind our best revenge, indeed example, can be to be better at what we are asked to do than those that judge us.

Our difficulty as glbt Baha'is is that we are to be judged twice… In so doing, we need be strong, and do our best and contribute to the greater good, and above all make sure we are not our own worst enemies. It is lonely, it is sometimes very sad. I loose my patience frequently (may gawd forgive me), but we have each other in places like this, to support and urge each other to not give up, and ignore the ones who are lost in their own fundamentalist sickness.

I think these forums are good. Even if some folks say some really dopey things… it is building a foundation… we are learning to teach each others that we are the ones that should also be included at the table.

hugs – Daniel

I was wondering anyone know what ever happened about this outrage in Uganda?

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

I was wondering anyone know what ever happened about this outrage in Uganda?

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

Oh, my . . . I'll be going to Uganda in August. I was really looking forward to my first visit to the Baha'i Temple there, and it is even on my gay group's tour itinerary. I might just have to reconsider that stop for the group, but I'll go incognito for private prayer on my own.

Oh, my . . . I'll be going to Uganda in August. I was really looking forward to my first visit to the Baha'i Temple there, and it is even on my gay group's tour itinerary. I might just have to reconsider that stop for the group, but I'll go incognito for private prayer on my own.

research it, perhaps this was resolved

research it, perhaps this was resolved

on second thought, why change the itinerary? you can ask the guides about the rumor… I believe Sonja would encourage direct and honest confrontation

on second thought, why change the itinerary? you can ask the guides about the rumor… I believe Sonja would encourage direct and honest confrontation

And I never accused you of implying that you had a new drug to straighten out gays. Please respond to what I actually said. Otherwise you sound like a politician with something to hide.

I know, I should be more polite.But I know you're capable of engaging in open discussion and this obfuscation is beneath you.

And I never accused you of implying that you had a new drug to straighten out gays. Please respond to what I actually said. Otherwise you sound like a politician with something to hide.

I know, I should be more polite.But I know you're capable of engaging in open discussion and this obfuscation is beneath you.

Pey wrote:
let me spell it out for you: no matter how much you try to condition someone to turn straight- it will not happen. Period.

Well this is not entirely true; when we have right handed patients with an injury of the right hand undergo a long treatment, they learn how to use their left hand. If the treatment is long, they are sometimes even unable to switch back to the right hand and continue to use their left hand dominantly.

Adaptation is an outstanding faculty of the human being; it is one of our major capacities as compared to other animals where usually adaptation essentially takes place by natural selection through successive generations.

Pey wrote:
let me spell it out for you: no matter how much you try to condition someone to turn straight- it will not happen. Period.

Well this is not entirely true; when we have right handed patients with an injury of the right hand undergo a long treatment, they learn how to use their left hand. If the treatment is long, they are sometimes even unable to switch back to the right hand and continue to use their left hand dominantly.

Adaptation is an outstanding faculty of the human being; it is one of our major capacities as compared to other animals where usually adaptation essentially takes place by natural selection through successive generations.

Pey wrote :
Maybe Sonja is right. The UHJ is supposed to be the guard of tradition and in that respect, ultimately conservative. So they will never change.

I disagree, Pey ; the UHJ can adapt the application of the teachings to the needs of each day and age as Shoghi Effendi says in the World Order of Baha'u'llah, p 23:
“Such is the immutability of His revealed Word. Such is the elasticity which characterises the functions of His appointed ministers. The first preserves the identity of His Faith, and guards the integrity of His law. The second enables it, even as a living organism, to expand and adapt itself to the needs and requirements of an ever-changing society.”

Pey wrote :
Maybe Sonja is right. The UHJ is supposed to be the guard of tradition and in that respect, ultimately conservative. So they will never change.

I disagree, Pey ; the UHJ can adapt the application of the teachings to the needs of each day and age as Shoghi Effendi says in the World Order of Baha'u'llah, p 23:
“Such is the immutability of His revealed Word. Such is the elasticity which characterises the functions of His appointed ministers. The first preserves the identity of His Faith, and guards the integrity of His law. The second enables it, even as a living organism, to expand and adapt itself to the needs and requirements of an ever-changing society.”

Daniel wrote:
I try as best I can to live the life as prescribed, and go about doing my work as best I can, serving my friends and students in way that the Blessed Beauty asks me to do

I strongly commend you for this attitude, Daniel; For the moment, if a person whose way of life is persistently outside the scope of the teachings is liable to lose voting rights, he is to be welcomed in many other activities: praying in the temples, holding fire sides, study circles, children’s classes, devotional meetings, reflection meetings, etc; if membership to LSAs and participation in 19 day feasts is excluded, there can be misunderstanding on the part of some prudish Baha’is, since there is absolutely no directive against the participation of GLTB in other activities.

Daniel wrote:
I try as best I can to live the life as prescribed, and go about doing my work as best I can, serving my friends and students in way that the Blessed Beauty asks me to do

I strongly commend you for this attitude, Daniel; For the moment, if a person whose way of life is persistently outside the scope of the teachings is liable to lose voting rights, he is to be welcomed in many other activities: praying in the temples, holding fire sides, study circles, children’s classes, devotional meetings, reflection meetings, etc; if membership to LSAs and participation in 19 day feasts is excluded, there can be misunderstanding on the part of some prudish Baha’is, since there is absolutely no directive against the participation of GLTB in other activities.

Steve wrote :
But I know you're capable of engaging in open discussion and this obfuscation is beneath you.

There is no obfuscation Steve; I am openly saying that I have no medication in view for changing orientation, but we know that hormone levels can influence orientation before birth, and after. So it is not entirely a matter of genetics; if you have further questions, I will readily reply.

Steve wrote :
But I know you're capable of engaging in open discussion and this obfuscation is beneath you.

There is no obfuscation Steve; I am openly saying that I have no medication in view for changing orientation, but we know that hormone levels can influence orientation before birth, and after. So it is not entirely a matter of genetics; if you have further questions, I will readily reply.

I hope you are right. But I don't see it presently.

I hope you are right. But I don't see it presently.

Well you are welcome as long as you don't rock the boat. As long as you don't tell other Bahais that the "teaching" against homosexuality is not from Bahaullah. And as long as you don't try to save any more gay youth from the trauma inlficted on them by the words of secretaries writting on behalf of the UHJ or Shoghi Effendi. Show me a community that is so welcoming farhan? I have yet to see one. According to Sonja her home is one. That's all I know of right now.

Well you are welcome as long as you don't rock the boat. As long as you don't tell other Bahais that the "teaching" against homosexuality is not from Bahaullah. And as long as you don't try to save any more gay youth from the trauma inlficted on them by the words of secretaries writting on behalf of the UHJ or Shoghi Effendi. Show me a community that is so welcoming farhan? I have yet to see one. According to Sonja her home is one. That's all I know of right now.

But IF, you have the choice of using either your right or left, and God has intrinsically given you the right hand to use for everything, which would you choose? Your left, just for the challenge? Or maybe if a secretary had written that left handed people are God's people, then I guess because you are sucha good Bahai, you would get rid of your right hand to follow the "teachings". Sorry, but Bahaullah's Faith is not this type of fanaticism. Not to me anyway.

But IF, you have the choice of using either your right or left, and God has intrinsically given you the right hand to use for everything, which would you choose? Your left, just for the challenge? Or maybe if a secretary had written that left handed people are God's people, then I guess because you are sucha good Bahai, you would get rid of your right hand to follow the "teachings". Sorry, but Bahaullah's Faith is not this type of fanaticism. Not to me anyway.

what hormones farhan? hormones can give you physical features like hair on your face or breasts. I have a trans friend she is tranistioning to be a woman. And yes she is taking hormones to help her do that. But guess what? It is NOT affecting her intrinsic sexuality. She is primarily attracted to woman- so she is truly a lesbian. She does not feel the same physical intensity towards men that she feels when she sees a beautiful woman. So for her, the hormones are a way to make her body appear the way she sees herself- as a woman. But it does absolutely nothing to change the attraction that she has for women.

what hormones farhan? hormones can give you physical features like hair on your face or breasts. I have a trans friend she is tranistioning to be a woman. And yes she is taking hormones to help her do that. But guess what? It is NOT affecting her intrinsic sexuality. She is primarily attracted to woman- so she is truly a lesbian. She does not feel the same physical intensity towards men that she feels when she sees a beautiful woman. So for her, the hormones are a way to make her body appear the way she sees herself- as a woman. But it does absolutely nothing to change the attraction that she has for women.

Pey wrote:
Well you are welcome as long as you don't rock the boat. As long as you don't tell other Bahais that the "teaching" against homosexuality is not from Bahaullah.

I agree here Pey; You are welcome to play football with a team, as long as you don’t stop in the middle of the match and say “wait a minute, those rules are not right: you should change them”, or if in the middle of a philharmonic orchestra you stop the maestro and say: “..hey, wait a minute there, that is not how Beethoven intended to have it played”.

Pey wrote:
Well you are welcome as long as you don't rock the boat. As long as you don't tell other Bahais that the "teaching" against homosexuality is not from Bahaullah.

I agree here Pey; You are welcome to play football with a team, as long as you don’t stop in the middle of the match and say “wait a minute, those rules are not right: you should change them”, or if in the middle of a philharmonic orchestra you stop the maestro and say: “..hey, wait a minute there, that is not how Beethoven intended to have it played”.

This is probably the best approach, rather than being ashamed and trying to hide the fact that my religion is capable of persecution in its own way.

This is probably the best approach, rather than being ashamed and trying to hide the fact that my religion is capable of persecution in its own way.

Pey wrote :
I have a trans friend she is tranistioning to be a woman.

Pey, you know a case where hormones have no effect, and you presume that they have no effect on orientation; I know other cases where hormones do have an effect on orientation. This proves that we cannot generalise on individual cases, but after prospective studies we can make assumptions, and then again as in the horror cases of lobotomies, we so often realise that science was wrong in making those assumptions. I would be jeered at if I referred to things I learnt as a medic student and which would have eliminated me from studies if I had not referred to in exams.

Pey wrote :
I have a trans friend she is tranistioning to be a woman.

Pey, you know a case where hormones have no effect, and you presume that they have no effect on orientation; I know other cases where hormones do have an effect on orientation. This proves that we cannot generalise on individual cases, but after prospective studies we can make assumptions, and then again as in the horror cases of lobotomies, we so often realise that science was wrong in making those assumptions. I would be jeered at if I referred to things I learnt as a medic student and which would have eliminated me from studies if I had not referred to in exams.

Pey, here is what seems to me a very good summary of the present “state of science” in regards with factors that influence sexual orientation:

http://borngay.procon.org/viewanswers.asp?questio…

Pey, here is what seems to me a very good summary of the present “state of science” in regards with factors that influence sexual orientation:

http://borngay.procon.org/viewanswers.asp?questio…

Thanks Farhan, I appreciate being welcomed at your firesides… but it is just not the same in my part of the world… and if I can't share the news of my husband my work, our son, etc… what would be the point of sitting quietly next to those that talk freely about themselves, their friends, activities and children? Baha'is here have joined the fundamentalist, republican right-wing agenda here… and frankly they just scare me. Just warming a seat isn't my idea of spirituality, unless it is a bicycle seat on a long ride in the country away from these people. Thanks for the invite tho!

Thanks Farhan, I appreciate being welcomed at your firesides… but it is just not the same in my part of the world… and if I can't share the news of my husband my work, our son, etc… what would be the point of sitting quietly next to those that talk freely about themselves, their friends, activities and children? Baha'is here have joined the fundamentalist, republican right-wing agenda here… and frankly they just scare me. Just warming a seat isn't my idea of spirituality, unless it is a bicycle seat on a long ride in the country away from these people. Thanks for the invite tho!

hmmm… I am tempted to make a joke about hand jobs here… but essentially agree with Pey…something as deep seated as homosecxuality IS like the treatment the long treatment (I will avoid the Freudian opportunity there as well)… this to my mind is like the lobotomy treatments in the last century… the cure is far worse than the diss-ease you seek to cure.

hmmm… I am tempted to make a joke about hand jobs here… but essentially agree with Pey…something as deep seated as homosecxuality IS like the treatment the long treatment (I will avoid the Freudian opportunity there as well)… this to my mind is like the lobotomy treatments in the last century… the cure is far worse than the diss-ease you seek to cure.

Daniel wrote:
what would be the point of sitting quietly next to those that talk freely about themselves, their friends, activities and children?

Daniel, who talks about sitting quietly? If the Baha’i community mingled with people like you, I am sure that new horizons could be opened to them. It is not because someone is not enrolled in administrative activities that other activities are no longer open. Do you feel that more activities are open to gay couples in other congregations?

Daniel wrote:
what would be the point of sitting quietly next to those that talk freely about themselves, their friends, activities and children?

Daniel, who talks about sitting quietly? If the Baha’i community mingled with people like you, I am sure that new horizons could be opened to them. It is not because someone is not enrolled in administrative activities that other activities are no longer open. Do you feel that more activities are open to gay couples in other congregations?

Yeah. My mind was going in the direciton of such a joke too. But trying to keep serious. And in all seriousness, if you gave any right-handed person the option of which hand to cut off, no fool would say cut my right hand off. No matter how much you have "conitioned" your left hand. Come to think of it, decades ago, about the same time that the Guardian's secretary was writing, left-handed kids in school were also being forced to write with their right hand. Tell me Farhan, how succesful was that? And was it morrally correct? Did the majority of those kids become right-handed or did they revert back to using their left hand?

Yeah. My mind was going in the direciton of such a joke too. But trying to keep serious. And in all seriousness, if you gave any right-handed person the option of which hand to cut off, no fool would say cut my right hand off. No matter how much you have "conitioned" your left hand. Come to think of it, decades ago, about the same time that the Guardian's secretary was writing, left-handed kids in school were also being forced to write with their right hand. Tell me Farhan, how succesful was that? And was it morrally correct? Did the majority of those kids become right-handed or did they revert back to using their left hand?

Indeed I do… the two local gay papers each have 4 or 5 adds from inclusive Christian and Jewish congregations inviting people to come worship. Many of my friends have been married by Episcopal, Methodist and Lutheran pastors… my husband is Catholic, and even tho his Mother gave us permission to marry, my parents (Presbyterian) would not, so we had a Catholic priest bless us and our friends (using water we brought back from a holy spring on Mt. Shasta) after our wedding in the City Hall in August. Everyone I know, knows I am Baha'i and that the Baha'is do not accept glbt's… many knew this before I told then the story.

Indeed I do… the two local gay papers each have 4 or 5 adds from inclusive Christian and Jewish congregations inviting people to come worship. Many of my friends have been married by Episcopal, Methodist and Lutheran pastors… my husband is Catholic, and even tho his Mother gave us permission to marry, my parents (Presbyterian) would not, so we had a Catholic priest bless us and our friends (using water we brought back from a holy spring on Mt. Shasta) after our wedding in the City Hall in August. Everyone I know, knows I am Baha'i and that the Baha'is do not accept glbt's… many knew this before I told then the story.

Ok well at least you finally cited something. But what you cited speaks about pre-natal hormonal imbalance. That I actually agree with. I think there is possibility that linked with genetics, a hormonal change in the mother and fetus could triger one's sexuality. But that holds true just as much for one's heterosexuality. But as a 'treatment' in adults? Hardly. There is no such thing. So what do we make of what you have now proposed Farhan? Do we start messing with fetuses to make sure they come out straight? What if such treatment would cause a fetus miscarry? Which is the greatest sin? You've just opened up a WHOLE new can of worms with me.

Ok well at least you finally cited something. But what you cited speaks about pre-natal hormonal imbalance. That I actually agree with. I think there is possibility that linked with genetics, a hormonal change in the mother and fetus could triger one's sexuality. But that holds true just as much for one's heterosexuality. But as a 'treatment' in adults? Hardly. There is no such thing. So what do we make of what you have now proposed Farhan? Do we start messing with fetuses to make sure they come out straight? What if such treatment would cause a fetus miscarry? Which is the greatest sin? You've just opened up a WHOLE new can of worms with me.

Well if the rules were set up in a way to benefit only certain members of the team because they have let's say blue eyes vs. brown, then yes I would stop and say "wait a minute". Even in the middle of a football match- you should call out an injustice. Then maybe those he make the rules will get off their butts and honestly address the issue. Instead of letting secretaries write on their behalf. )

Well if the rules were set up in a way to benefit only certain members of the team because they have let's say blue eyes vs. brown, then yes I would stop and say "wait a minute". Even in the middle of a football match- you should call out an injustice. Then maybe those he make the rules will get off their butts and honestly address the issue. Instead of letting secretaries write on their behalf. )

Pey wrote:
So what do we make of what you have now proposed Farhan?

Pey, I have already explained that I am not proposing a treatment for changing orientation, but merely pointing out that orientation is not entirely genetic, but can be influenced not only by hormone levels during gestation, but also by hormone levels later on in life.

Hence all scientists do not share the idea that orientation is entirely genetic or entirely inborn.

Pey wrote:
So what do we make of what you have now proposed Farhan?

Pey, I have already explained that I am not proposing a treatment for changing orientation, but merely pointing out that orientation is not entirely genetic, but can be influenced not only by hormone levels during gestation, but also by hormone levels later on in life.

Hence all scientists do not share the idea that orientation is entirely genetic or entirely inborn.

Hi Farhan,

You wrote:

"Besides, the only solution to providing an outlet would be to instate gay marriages; then what will we do when orientations change later in life?"

This cuts both ways. If what you said is valid, then it's just as problematic to have straight marriages because "what will we do when orientations change later in life?"

The problem I've seen within the Baha'i community is gay guys entering into straight marriages and not being able to continue living a lie. And that isn't about orientations changing. That's about trying to fit into a straight world. That's about attempted changes in orientation failing. In contrast, I've not heard of anyone in the Baha'i community genuinely going through an orientation change.

And "instating gay marriages" is most definitely not the only solution. You should know that by now. You've been told of the alternative solutions often enough.

Hi Farhan,

You wrote:

"Besides, the only solution to providing an outlet would be to instate gay marriages; then what will we do when orientations change later in life?"

This cuts both ways. If what you said is valid, then it's just as problematic to have straight marriages because "what will we do when orientations change later in life?"

The problem I've seen within the Baha'i community is gay guys entering into straight marriages and not being able to continue living a lie. And that isn't about orientations changing. That's about trying to fit into a straight world. That's about attempted changes in orientation failing. In contrast, I've not heard of anyone in the Baha'i community genuinely going through an orientation change.

And "instating gay marriages" is most definitely not the only solution. You should know that by now. You've been told of the alternative solutions often enough.

Steve wrote :
it's just as problematic to have straight marriages because "what will we do when orientations change later in life?"

The teachings are clear here: sexuality within wedlock and fidelity, divorce being discouraged.

Steve wrote: The problem I've seen within the Baha'i community is gay guys entering into straight marriages and not being able to continue living a lie.

I have seen unhappy marriages and people work their way through the crisis or divorce.

Steve wrote: And "instating gay marriages" is most definitely not the only solution. You should know that by now. You've been told of the alternative solutions often enough.

I don’t see how we can be liberal about gay relations outside marriage, and not liberal about non-gay relations, without being unfair to non-gays, unless we decided that chastity was an outdated concept. Please explain what solution you suggest.

Steve wrote :
it's just as problematic to have straight marriages because "what will we do when orientations change later in life?"

The teachings are clear here: sexuality within wedlock and fidelity, divorce being discouraged.

Steve wrote: The problem I've seen within the Baha'i community is gay guys entering into straight marriages and not being able to continue living a lie.

I have seen unhappy marriages and people work their way through the crisis or divorce.

Steve wrote: And "instating gay marriages" is most definitely not the only solution. You should know that by now. You've been told of the alternative solutions often enough.

I don’t see how we can be liberal about gay relations outside marriage, and not liberal about non-gay relations, without being unfair to non-gays, unless we decided that chastity was an outdated concept. Please explain what solution you suggest.

Wow! The loveless Republican broomstickified Faith! Who would have ever thought it would have ever come to this? I certainly didn't. In the high energy Hey Day the Baha'i Faith was full of free thinkers. Many people were Sufi or Buddhist in their core spiritual beliefs but saw the Faith as a practical path for dealing with world problems. Not now. these people have a long way to go to get to any kind of personal spirituality where truly profound cosmic things start to happen all around you on the path of your life.

What can anyone here make of this strange mental state?

http://www.bci.org/bibap/currentbulletin.html

Here is a little bon mot from "THE GUIDANCE":

Q. When is a home visit not a home visit?

A. When it's a social call.

"If a home visit, to take another example, is defined in the courses as an
opportunity to enter into a deep conversation on spiritual matters, then it
should not be reduced to a mere social call in which the Faith may not even
be mentioned."
(Universal House of Justice 18 Aug 2005)

Wow! If you visit someone and don't do that "deep conversation" at a sufficient graded level of "deepness" I guess you can now be reported for crimes against the ITC and have a file opened on you.

The Faith has gone completely off the rails. Just unbelievably mentally ill people. These people on the ITC need to lighten up. They are grim. And they are endless in their somber work. They have to check the reports with their pie charts too much. they should do this instead at one of their somber and grievous meetings amid the endless Power Point presentations.

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

Wow! The loveless Republican broomstickified Faith! Who would have ever thought it would have ever come to this? I certainly didn't. In the high energy Hey Day the Baha'i Faith was full of free thinkers. Many people were Sufi or Buddhist in their core spiritual beliefs but saw the Faith as a practical path for dealing with world problems. Not now. these people have a long way to go to get to any kind of personal spirituality where truly profound cosmic things start to happen all around you on the path of your life.

What can anyone here make of this strange mental state?

http://www.bci.org/bibap/currentbulletin.html

Here is a little bon mot from "THE GUIDANCE":

Q. When is a home visit not a home visit?

A. When it's a social call.

"If a home visit, to take another example, is defined in the courses as an
opportunity to enter into a deep conversation on spiritual matters, then it
should not be reduced to a mere social call in which the Faith may not even
be mentioned."
(Universal House of Justice 18 Aug 2005)

Wow! If you visit someone and don't do that "deep conversation" at a sufficient graded level of "deepness" I guess you can now be reported for crimes against the ITC and have a file opened on you.

The Faith has gone completely off the rails. Just unbelievably mentally ill people. These people on the ITC need to lighten up. They are grim. And they are endless in their somber work. They have to check the reports with their pie charts too much. they should do this instead at one of their somber and grievous meetings amid the endless Power Point presentations.

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

In my friend's catholic parish they have an LGBT group with the blessings fo the local Bishop- as I have mentioned before. The other reason this group exists is because the lay person who helps coordinate the various groups within the church (LGBT is just one of them; there are also groups for mothers with infants, single people, etc.) happens to also be a lesbian. So this lesbian in a Catholic parish has a signficant role in running the church without anyone pointing a finger at her and telling her that she unnatural, has a sexual aberration etc and needs to get therapy to overcome her sexuality. Now watch, Farhan will return with "well she still can't become a Priest so it's the exact same thing on not serving on an LSA". Hardly Farhan. She is actually helping run the community- a community that accepts her and loves her as she is. The Bahais are a LONG way away from this (well except Sonja's household). Why? Because most Bahais, like you, can't breathe without waiting for the UHJ to tell you to breathe. The catholics I know respect the Pope, but they aren't so fundamentalist in their views. I just wish there was a balance among the Bahais of the same.

In my friend's catholic parish they have an LGBT group with the blessings fo the local Bishop- as I have mentioned before. The other reason this group exists is because the lay person who helps coordinate the various groups within the church (LGBT is just one of them; there are also groups for mothers with infants, single people, etc.) happens to also be a lesbian. So this lesbian in a Catholic parish has a signficant role in running the church without anyone pointing a finger at her and telling her that she unnatural, has a sexual aberration etc and needs to get therapy to overcome her sexuality. Now watch, Farhan will return with "well she still can't become a Priest so it's the exact same thing on not serving on an LSA". Hardly Farhan. She is actually helping run the community- a community that accepts her and loves her as she is. The Bahais are a LONG way away from this (well except Sonja's household). Why? Because most Bahais, like you, can't breathe without waiting for the UHJ to tell you to breathe. The catholics I know respect the Pope, but they aren't so fundamentalist in their views. I just wish there was a balance among the Bahais of the same.

The teachings are not clear, because Baha'u'llah was around prior to the modern concept of homosexuality. Besides, the teachings have no bearing on whether alleged changing orientations, whether hetero to homo or vice versa are going to be problematic.

You write:
"Please explain what solution you suggest."

There are many, but I quite like the solution P wrote about, the last you started talking about "gay marriage" as if it was only solution:

"Again you bring up gay marriage Farhan. I never said that. What I said is if two men come into the community, say they are gay and living together, introduce their kids etc.- the community just accepts them. No votin rights removed. No pointing to letter from secretaries telling them they are unchaste. And God forbid, no asking them to break up and destroy their family for Bahaullah. In return, this couple promises they won't expose themselves in front of everyone, perofrm homosexual acts on the internet for the world to see or do anything else that might give concrete evidence for removal of rights. Basically they will keep their sex lives to themselves in the privacy of their bedroom. What goes on in there is NO ONE's business. Just like it is no one's business what a heterosexual couple living in Bahaullah's fortress of well-being are doing in their bedroom…"
P's solution.

That solution ticks just as many boxes as your solution – it's just that some of the boxes are different:

What is the Bahá’í attitude towards homosexuality?
"Bahá’í law limits permissible sexual relations to those between a man and a woman in marriage. Believers are expected to abstain from sex outside matrimony. Bahá’ís do not, however, attempt to impose their moral standards on those who have not accepted the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh. While requiring uprightness in all matters of morality, whether sexual or otherwise, the Bahá’í teachings also take account of human frailty and call for tolerance and understanding in regard to human failings. In this context, to regard homosexuals with prejudice would be contrary to the spirit of the Bahá’í teachings."
The Baha'is – website of the BIC

The teachings are not clear, because Baha'u'llah was around prior to the modern concept of homosexuality. Besides, the teachings have no bearing on whether alleged changing orientations, whether hetero to homo or vice versa are going to be problematic.

You write:
"Please explain what solution you suggest."

There are many, but I quite like the solution P wrote about, the last you started talking about "gay marriage" as if it was only solution:

"Again you bring up gay marriage Farhan. I never said that. What I said is if two men come into the community, say they are gay and living together, introduce their kids etc.- the community just accepts them. No votin rights removed. No pointing to letter from secretaries telling them they are unchaste. And God forbid, no asking them to break up and destroy their family for Bahaullah. In return, this couple promises they won't expose themselves in front of everyone, perofrm homosexual acts on the internet for the world to see or do anything else that might give concrete evidence for removal of rights. Basically they will keep their sex lives to themselves in the privacy of their bedroom. What goes on in there is NO ONE's business. Just like it is no one's business what a heterosexual couple living in Bahaullah's fortress of well-being are doing in their bedroom…"
P's solution.

That solution ticks just as many boxes as your solution – it's just that some of the boxes are different:

What is the Bahá’í attitude towards homosexuality?
"Bahá’í law limits permissible sexual relations to those between a man and a woman in marriage. Believers are expected to abstain from sex outside matrimony. Bahá’ís do not, however, attempt to impose their moral standards on those who have not accepted the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh. While requiring uprightness in all matters of morality, whether sexual or otherwise, the Bahá’í teachings also take account of human frailty and call for tolerance and understanding in regard to human failings. In this context, to regard homosexuals with prejudice would be contrary to the spirit of the Bahá’í teachings."
The Baha'is – website of the BIC

Hi Dan,

It's still simmering. Last I heard, President Obama got dragged in because of a "two degrees of separation" situation. It seems that Rick Warren — the guy who gave his inauguration invocation — works closely with Martin Ssempa, a key figure in the Interfaith Coalition Against Homosexuality.

Sample source:Obama's First Gift to Africa: Rick Warren

Gotta love the desperate denial from World Citizen in the comments area.

Hi Dan,

It's still simmering. Last I heard, President Obama got dragged in because of a "two degrees of separation" situation. It seems that Rick Warren — the guy who gave his inauguration invocation — works closely with Martin Ssempa, a key figure in the Interfaith Coalition Against Homosexuality.

Sample source:Obama's First Gift to Africa: Rick Warren

Gotta love the desperate denial from World Citizen in the comments area.

Hi Daniel,

It's still simmering. Last I heard, President Obama got dragged in because of a "two degrees of separation" situation. It seems that Rick Warren — the guy who gave his inauguration invocation — works closely with Martin Ssempa, a key figure in the Interfaith Coalition Against Homosexuality.

Sample source:Obama's First Gift to Africa: Rick Warren

Gotta love the desperate denial from World Citizen in the comments area.

Dan, you should definitely ask the guides about the situation and it wouldn't hurt to point out that even conservatives like World Citizen can't believe it's happening.

Hi Daniel,

It's still simmering. Last I heard, President Obama got dragged in because of a "two degrees of separation" situation. It seems that Rick Warren — the guy who gave his inauguration invocation — works closely with Martin Ssempa, a key figure in the Interfaith Coalition Against Homosexuality.

Sample source:Obama's First Gift to Africa: Rick Warren

Gotta love the desperate denial from World Citizen in the comments area.

Dan, you should definitely ask the guides about the situation and it wouldn't hurt to point out that even conservatives like World Citizen can't believe it's happening.

OMG, if this weren't so tragic I'd be ROTFLMAO. I read the bulletin you posted, and can't believe this is the same religion I joined in 1970! What happened while I've been away? If this represents what it is like to be a Baha'i today, I'm so glad to be free of it (the organized part). Thank you for sharing this!

OMG, if this weren't so tragic I'd be ROTFLMAO. I read the bulletin you posted, and can't believe this is the same religion I joined in 1970! What happened while I've been away? If this represents what it is like to be a Baha'i today, I'm so glad to be free of it (the organized part). Thank you for sharing this!

The teachings are not clear, because Baha'u'llah was around prior to the modern concept of homosexuality. Besides, the teachings have no bearing on whether alleged changing orientations, whether hetero to homo or vice versa are going to be problematic.

You write:
"Please explain what solution you suggest."

There are many, but I quite like the solution P provided when you recently started talking about "gay marriage" as if it was only solution:

"Again you bring up gay marriage Farhan. I never said that. What I said is if two men come into the community, say they are gay and living together, introduce their kids etc.- the community just accepts them. No votin rights removed. No pointing to letter from secretaries telling them they are unchaste. And God forbid, no asking them to break up and destroy their family for Bahaullah. In return, this couple promises they won't expose themselves in front of everyone, perofrm homosexual acts on the internet for the world to see or do anything else that might give concrete evidence for removal of rights. Basically they will keep their sex lives to themselves in the privacy of their bedroom. What goes on in there is NO ONE's business. Just like it is no one's business what a heterosexual couple living in Bahaullah's fortress of well-being are doing in their bedroom…"
P's solution.

That solution ticks just as many boxes as your solution – it's just that some of the boxes are different:

What is the Bahá’í attitude towards homosexuality?
"Bahá’í law limits permissible sexual relations to those between a man and a woman in marriage. Believers are expected to abstain from sex outside matrimony. Bahá’ís do not, however, attempt to impose their moral standards on those who have not accepted the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh. While requiring uprightness in all matters of morality, whether sexual or otherwise, the Bahá’í teachings also take account of human frailty and call for tolerance and understanding in regard to human failings. In this context, to regard homosexuals with prejudice would be contrary to the spirit of the Bahá’í teachings."
The Baha'is – website of the BIC

The teachings are not clear, because Baha'u'llah was around prior to the modern concept of homosexuality. Besides, the teachings have no bearing on whether alleged changing orientations, whether hetero to homo or vice versa are going to be problematic.

You write:
"Please explain what solution you suggest."

There are many, but I quite like the solution P provided when you recently started talking about "gay marriage" as if it was only solution:

"Again you bring up gay marriage Farhan. I never said that. What I said is if two men come into the community, say they are gay and living together, introduce their kids etc.- the community just accepts them. No votin rights removed. No pointing to letter from secretaries telling them they are unchaste. And God forbid, no asking them to break up and destroy their family for Bahaullah. In return, this couple promises they won't expose themselves in front of everyone, perofrm homosexual acts on the internet for the world to see or do anything else that might give concrete evidence for removal of rights. Basically they will keep their sex lives to themselves in the privacy of their bedroom. What goes on in there is NO ONE's business. Just like it is no one's business what a heterosexual couple living in Bahaullah's fortress of well-being are doing in their bedroom…"
P's solution.

That solution ticks just as many boxes as your solution – it's just that some of the boxes are different:

What is the Bahá’í attitude towards homosexuality?
"Bahá’í law limits permissible sexual relations to those between a man and a woman in marriage. Believers are expected to abstain from sex outside matrimony. Bahá’ís do not, however, attempt to impose their moral standards on those who have not accepted the Revelation of Bahá’u’lláh. While requiring uprightness in all matters of morality, whether sexual or otherwise, the Bahá’í teachings also take account of human frailty and call for tolerance and understanding in regard to human failings. In this context, to regard homosexuals with prejudice would be contrary to the spirit of the Bahá’í teachings."
The Baha'is – website of the BIC

Steve wrote:

What I said is if two men come into the community, say they are gay and living together, introduce their kids etc.- the community just accepts them. No votin rights removed. No pointing to letter from secretaries telling them they are unchaste.

Steve, I get this point, but what I do not understand, is your position towards chastity for non-gays. If a gay couple is allowed to establish a family out of wedlock, how can we ask a non-gay couple to abide by the marriage laws?

If you were an LSA member having condoned a gay family, what would you say if an unmarried non-gay couple announced arrived at the meeting saying that they loved each other, that they felt repulsion at the idea of gay relations, but unable to convince their parents, they had decided not to marry, but just to live happily together?

Please reply to this question that I have been repeating for some 18 months.

Steve wrote:

What I said is if two men come into the community, say they are gay and living together, introduce their kids etc.- the community just accepts them. No votin rights removed. No pointing to letter from secretaries telling them they are unchaste.

Steve, I get this point, but what I do not understand, is your position towards chastity for non-gays. If a gay couple is allowed to establish a family out of wedlock, how can we ask a non-gay couple to abide by the marriage laws?

If you were an LSA member having condoned a gay family, what would you say if an unmarried non-gay couple announced arrived at the meeting saying that they loved each other, that they felt repulsion at the idea of gay relations, but unable to convince their parents, they had decided not to marry, but just to live happily together?

Please reply to this question that I have been repeating for some 18 months.

Steve wrote:
What I said is if two men come into the community, say they are gay and living together, introduce their kids etc.- the community just accepts them. No votin rights removed. No pointing to letter from secretaries telling them they are unchaste.

Steve, I get this point, but what I do not understand, is your position towards chastity for non-gays. If a gay couple is allowed to establish a family out of wedlock, how can we ask a non-gay couple to abide by the marriage laws?

If you were an LSA member having condoned a gay family, what would you say if an unmarried non-gay couple arrived at the meeting saying that they loved each other, that they felt repulsion at the idea of gay relations, but unable to convince their parents, they had decided not to marry, but just to live happily together?

Please reply to this question that I have been repeating for some 18 months.

Steve wrote:
What I said is if two men come into the community, say they are gay and living together, introduce their kids etc.- the community just accepts them. No votin rights removed. No pointing to letter from secretaries telling them they are unchaste.

Steve, I get this point, but what I do not understand, is your position towards chastity for non-gays. If a gay couple is allowed to establish a family out of wedlock, how can we ask a non-gay couple to abide by the marriage laws?

If you were an LSA member having condoned a gay family, what would you say if an unmarried non-gay couple arrived at the meeting saying that they loved each other, that they felt repulsion at the idea of gay relations, but unable to convince their parents, they had decided not to marry, but just to live happily together?

Please reply to this question that I have been repeating for some 18 months.

Then readily reply to this:

Why did you cite a treatment for Parkinsons as an example of medication that can modify the intensity and orientation of a patient's sex drive?

Then readily reply to this:

Why did you cite a treatment for Parkinsons as an example of medication that can modify the intensity and orientation of a patient's sex drive?

Hi Craig,

You wrote:
"What can anyone here make of this strange mental state?"

What I make of it is that the folks promoting this stuff are deadly serious about bringing about "a change of culture". The Ruhi institute process is about re-education. It's about re-engineering the Baha'is and their communities. Those who pay lip-service to the program are going to get left behind.

Yes, it's a strange mental state we're seeing, but it has its own internal logic that's worth exploring. The Baha'is are heading towards cult status just as fast as the programme is able to take them, and it will pay to know just where they're at, if any are to be helped.

There are endless opportunities to laugh at the excesses of the programme. I've temporarily given up on doing satire because my readers find straight reporting so much funnier. But what we're witnessing is very serious. Not Pol Pot serious, but equally misguided. The Baha'i Faith is being turned into the Jehovah's Witnesses. (Apologies to any JWs out there.)

ka kite
Steve
(Still a BIGS)

Hi Craig,

You wrote:
"What can anyone here make of this strange mental state?"

What I make of it is that the folks promoting this stuff are deadly serious about bringing about "a change of culture". The Ruhi institute process is about re-education. It's about re-engineering the Baha'is and their communities. Those who pay lip-service to the program are going to get left behind.

Yes, it's a strange mental state we're seeing, but it has its own internal logic that's worth exploring. The Baha'is are heading towards cult status just as fast as the programme is able to take them, and it will pay to know just where they're at, if any are to be helped.

There are endless opportunities to laugh at the excesses of the programme. I've temporarily given up on doing satire because my readers find straight reporting so much funnier. But what we're witnessing is very serious. Not Pol Pot serious, but equally misguided. The Baha'i Faith is being turned into the Jehovah's Witnesses. (Apologies to any JWs out there.)

ka kite
Steve
(Still a BIGS)

Hi Farhan,

P wrote the words you attribute to me, but i'm happy to own them.

I don't know what happens in your Baha'i community, but if a straight couple with children comes into my community and joins the NZ Baha'i community, it will probably be assumed that they are already married or in a civil union. If they tell folks they're in a de facto relationship then they'll probably be encouraged to get married or enter into a civil union.

Now, if a gay couple with children comes into my community and joins the NZ Baha'i community, I'm not sure what would happen. However, but I'm guessing the response would be different. It will probably not be assumed that they are in a civil union, even though it's just as likely as it would be with the straight couple. If they tell folks they're in a de facto relationship then they'll probably not be encouraged to enter into a civil union.

My feeling is that since NZ law makes a civil union functionally identical to marriage, and since Baha'is abide by the law, then the gay couple should be treated the same as the straight couple. The only barrier is that the Baha'i administration has traditionally held that there should be no blatant sexual activity or cohabiting outside of heterosexual marriage. Well, times have changed, and it's important not to lose sight of the real meaning of chastity and the real value of stable, long-term, monogamous, chaste, child-raising relationships.

Yes, chaste.

My position is that it is important for all Baha'is to try to be chaste in all that they do. Chastity is much more encompassing than being about sexual behaviour, but if we are going to focus on sexual behaviour, then part of the reason for practising restraint is to achieve a long-term, stable, fulfilling relationship. Whether you're gay or straight, single or a couple, what's the problem if you're working towards that?

So that's my "position towards chastity for non-gays". In effect, I don't have one because I don't feel any need to discriminate between gays and straights.

There are precedents. The Baha'i administration has traditionally held that there should be no polygamy, yet if a man with two wives joins the Baha'i community in a country where polygamy is legal, then the polygamous relationship is accepted. Similarly, the Baha'i administration has traditionally held that the purpose of marriage is procreation, but if a two people in their fertile years get married, yet have no children of their own (like Alison and me) the AO doesn't poke its nose in. In those situations it's understood that there are higher principles and necessary transitions involved.

I'm now at a point where I can answer your other question, which is:

"If a gay couple is allowed to establish a family out of wedlock, how can we ask a non-gay couple to abide by the marriage laws?

Yes, P's solution does involve turning a blind eye. I suggest that a blind eye is often turned when straight couples are having problems getting permission to get married. Particularly when it can be seen that they are ready for marriage.

Frankly, you'll have to ask P because I live in a country where gays and straights can enter into a civil union just like marriage, so I can't see why the NZ Baha'i community can't accept all converts who are already in a civil union, whether they are straight or gay. For me, unless one of the gays was a signed-up Baha'i before entering into a civil union, the problem wouldn't arise.

I suspect we're wandering down a path of partial solutions because the question hasn't been framed properly.

First, I would turn your question around and ask, "If a straight couple can get their relationship recognised by the state, then why can't a gay couple? And where the state does give equal recognition, why can't the Baha'i administration be equally non-discriminatory?"

Second, forcing anyone to do something misses the point. Straights and gays ideally would want to use restraint, be chaste and work towards a long-term, nurturing, monogamous relationship. The laws are meant to be an aid towards that, not a barrier.

"The proper use of the sex instinct is the natural right of every individual, and it is precisely for this very purpose that the institution of marriage has been established. The Baha'is do not believe in the suppression of the sex impulse but in its regulation and control."
(From a letter dated 5 September 1938 written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer)
(Shoghi Effendi: A Chaste and Holy Life, Page: 56)

Third you ask all couples, straight or gay, to abide by the marriage laws – parental permission, chastity, checking out the character of your intended partner, the whole nine yards. No-one is given a "get into matrimony free" card.

In summary: They're here, they're queer, get used to it.

Hi Farhan,

P wrote the words you attribute to me, but i'm happy to own them.

I don't know what happens in your Baha'i community, but if a straight couple with children comes into my community and joins the NZ Baha'i community, it will probably be assumed that they are already married or in a civil union. If they tell folks they're in a de facto relationship then they'll probably be encouraged to get married or enter into a civil union.

Now, if a gay couple with children comes into my community and joins the NZ Baha'i community, I'm not sure what would happen. However, but I'm guessing the response would be different. It will probably not be assumed that they are in a civil union, even though it's just as likely as it would be with the straight couple. If they tell folks they're in a de facto relationship then they'll probably not be encouraged to enter into a civil union.

My feeling is that since NZ law makes a civil union functionally identical to marriage, and since Baha'is abide by the law, then the gay couple should be treated the same as the straight couple. The only barrier is that the Baha'i administration has traditionally held that there should be no blatant sexual activity or cohabiting outside of heterosexual marriage. Well, times have changed, and it's important not to lose sight of the real meaning of chastity and the real value of stable, long-term, monogamous, chaste, child-raising relationships.

Yes, chaste.

My position is that it is important for all Baha'is to try to be chaste in all that they do. Chastity is much more encompassing than being about sexual behaviour, but if we are going to focus on sexual behaviour, then part of the reason for practising restraint is to achieve a long-term, stable, fulfilling relationship. Whether you're gay or straight, single or a couple, what's the problem if you're working towards that?

So that's my "position towards chastity for non-gays". In effect, I don't have one because I don't feel any need to discriminate between gays and straights.

There are precedents. The Baha'i administration has traditionally held that there should be no polygamy, yet if a man with two wives joins the Baha'i community in a country where polygamy is legal, then the polygamous relationship is accepted. Similarly, the Baha'i administration has traditionally held that the purpose of marriage is procreation, but if a two people in their fertile years get married, yet have no children of their own (like Alison and me) the AO doesn't poke its nose in. In those situations it's understood that there are higher principles and necessary transitions involved.

I'm now at a point where I can answer your other question, which is:

"If a gay couple is allowed to establish a family out of wedlock, how can we ask a non-gay couple to abide by the marriage laws?

Yes, P's solution does involve turning a blind eye. I suggest that a blind eye is often turned when straight couples are having problems getting permission to get married. Particularly when it can be seen that they are ready for marriage.

Frankly, you'll have to ask P because I live in a country where gays and straights can enter into a civil union just like marriage, so I can't see why the NZ Baha'i community can't accept all converts who are already in a civil union, whether they are straight or gay. For me, unless one of the gays was a signed-up Baha'i before entering into a civil union, the problem wouldn't arise.

I suspect we're wandering down a path of partial solutions because the question hasn't been framed properly.

First, I would turn your question around and ask, "If a straight couple can get their relationship recognised by the state, then why can't a gay couple? And where the state does give equal recognition, why can't the Baha'i administration be equally non-discriminatory?"

Second, forcing anyone to do something misses the point. Straights and gays ideally would want to use restraint, be chaste and work towards a long-term, nurturing, monogamous relationship. The laws are meant to be an aid towards that, not a barrier.

"The proper use of the sex instinct is the natural right of every individual, and it is precisely for this very purpose that the institution of marriage has been established. The Baha'is do not believe in the suppression of the sex impulse but in its regulation and control."
(From a letter dated 5 September 1938 written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer)
(Shoghi Effendi: A Chaste and Holy Life, Page: 56)

Third you ask all couples, straight or gay, to abide by the marriage laws – parental permission, chastity, checking out the character of your intended partner, the whole nine yards. No-one is given a "get into matrimony free" card.

In summary: They're here, they're queer, get used to it.

Hi Farhan,

P wrote the words you attribute to me, but i'm happy to own them.

I don't know what happens in your Baha'i community, but if a straight couple with children comes into my community and joins the NZ Baha'i community, it will probably be assumed that they are already married or in a civil union. If they tell folks they're in a de facto relationship then they'll probably be encouraged to get married or enter into a civil union.

Now, if a gay couple with children comes into my community and joins the NZ Baha'i community, I'm not sure what would happen. However, I'm guessing the response would be different. It would probably not be assumed that they are in a civil union, even though it's just as likely. If they tell folks they're in a de facto relationship then they'll probably not be encouraged to enter into a civil union.

My feeling is that since NZ law makes a civil union functionally identical to marriage, and since Baha'is abide by the law, then the gay couple should be treated the same as the straight couple. The only barrier is that the Baha'i administration has traditionally held that there should be no blatant sexual activity or cohabiting outside of heterosexual marriage. Well, times have changed, and it's important not to lose sight of the real meaning of chastity and the real value of stable, long-term, monogamous, chaste, child-raising relationships.

My position is that it is important for all Baha'is to try to be chaste in all that they do. Foir the simple reason that Baha'u'llah said so somewhere. I'm sure i can chase up a reference if you need it. Chastity is much more encompassing than being about sexual behaviour, but if we are going to focus on sexual behaviour, then part of the reason for practising restraint is to achieve a long-term, stable, fulfilling monogamous relationship. Whether you're gay or straight, single or a couple, what's the problem if you're working towards that, or something close?

So that's my "position towards chastity for non-gays". In effect, I don't have one because I don't feel any need to discriminate between gays and straights.

There are precedents for the Baha'i administration to accept gay unions. The Baha'i administration has traditionally held that there should be no polygamy, yet if a man with two wives joins the Baha'i community in a country where polygamy is legal, then the polygamous relationship is accepted. Similarly, the Baha'i administration has traditionally held that the purpose of marriage is procreation, but if a two people in their fertile years get married, yet have no children of their own (like Alison and me) the AO doesn't poke its nose in. In those situations it's understood that there are higher principles, necessary transitions and plain old fashioned privacy issues involved.

I'm now at a point where I can answer your other question, which is:

"If a gay couple is allowed to establish a family out of wedlock, how can we ask a non-gay couple to abide by the marriage laws?

Yes, P's solution does involve turning a blind eye. I suggest that a blind eye is often turned when straight couples are having problems getting permission to get married. Particularly when it can be seen that they are ready for marriage.

But, frankly, you'll have to ask P to answer that question because I live in a country where gays and straights can enter into civil unions that are just like marriage. So I can't see why the NZ Baha'i community can't accept all converts who are already in a civil union, whether they are straight or gay. For me, unless one of the gays was a signed-up Baha'i before entering into a civil union, the problem wouldn't arise.

I suspect we're wandering down a path of partial solutions because the question hasn't been framed properly.

First, I would turn your question around and ask, "If a straight couple can get their relationship recognised by the state, then why can't a gay couple? And where the state does give equal recognition, why can't the Baha'i administration be equally non-discriminatory?"

Second, forcing anyone to do something misses the point. Straights and gays ideally would want to use restraint, be chaste and work towards a long-term, nurturing, monogamous relationship. The laws are meant to be an aid towards that, not a barrier.

"The proper use of the sex instinct is the natural right of every individual, and it is precisely for this very purpose that the institution of marriage has been established. The Baha'is do not believe in the suppression of the sex impulse but in its regulation and control."
(From a letter dated 5 September 1938 written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer)
(Shoghi Effendi: A Chaste and Holy Life, Page: 56)

Third, you ask all couples, straight or gay, to abide by the marriage laws – parental permission, chastity, checking out the character of your intended partner, the whole nine yards. No-one is given a "get into matrimony free" card.

In summary: They're here, they're queer, get used to it.

Hi Farhan,

P wrote the words you attribute to me, but i'm happy to own them.

I don't know what happens in your Baha'i community, but if a straight couple with children comes into my community and joins the NZ Baha'i community, it will probably be assumed that they are already married or in a civil union. If they tell folks they're in a de facto relationship then they'll probably be encouraged to get married or enter into a civil union.

Now, if a gay couple with children comes into my community and joins the NZ Baha'i community, I'm not sure what would happen. However, I'm guessing the response would be different. It would probably not be assumed that they are in a civil union, even though it's just as likely. If they tell folks they're in a de facto relationship then they'll probably not be encouraged to enter into a civil union.

My feeling is that since NZ law makes a civil union functionally identical to marriage, and since Baha'is abide by the law, then the gay couple should be treated the same as the straight couple. The only barrier is that the Baha'i administration has traditionally held that there should be no blatant sexual activity or cohabiting outside of heterosexual marriage. Well, times have changed, and it's important not to lose sight of the real meaning of chastity and the real value of stable, long-term, monogamous, chaste, child-raising relationships.

My position is that it is important for all Baha'is to try to be chaste in all that they do. Foir the simple reason that Baha'u'llah said so somewhere. I'm sure i can chase up a reference if you need it. Chastity is much more encompassing than being about sexual behaviour, but if we are going to focus on sexual behaviour, then part of the reason for practising restraint is to achieve a long-term, stable, fulfilling monogamous relationship. Whether you're gay or straight, single or a couple, what's the problem if you're working towards that, or something close?

So that's my "position towards chastity for non-gays". In effect, I don't have one because I don't feel any need to discriminate between gays and straights.

There are precedents for the Baha'i administration to accept gay unions. The Baha'i administration has traditionally held that there should be no polygamy, yet if a man with two wives joins the Baha'i community in a country where polygamy is legal, then the polygamous relationship is accepted. Similarly, the Baha'i administration has traditionally held that the purpose of marriage is procreation, but if a two people in their fertile years get married, yet have no children of their own (like Alison and me) the AO doesn't poke its nose in. In those situations it's understood that there are higher principles, necessary transitions and plain old fashioned privacy issues involved.

I'm now at a point where I can answer your other question, which is:

"If a gay couple is allowed to establish a family out of wedlock, how can we ask a non-gay couple to abide by the marriage laws?

Yes, P's solution does involve turning a blind eye. I suggest that a blind eye is often turned when straight couples are having problems getting permission to get married. Particularly when it can be seen that they are ready for marriage.

But, frankly, you'll have to ask P to answer that question because I live in a country where gays and straights can enter into civil unions that are just like marriage. So I can't see why the NZ Baha'i community can't accept all converts who are already in a civil union, whether they are straight or gay. For me, unless one of the gays was a signed-up Baha'i before entering into a civil union, the problem wouldn't arise.

I suspect we're wandering down a path of partial solutions because the question hasn't been framed properly.

First, I would turn your question around and ask, "If a straight couple can get their relationship recognised by the state, then why can't a gay couple? And where the state does give equal recognition, why can't the Baha'i administration be equally non-discriminatory?"

Second, forcing anyone to do something misses the point. Straights and gays ideally would want to use restraint, be chaste and work towards a long-term, nurturing, monogamous relationship. The laws are meant to be an aid towards that, not a barrier.

"The proper use of the sex instinct is the natural right of every individual, and it is precisely for this very purpose that the institution of marriage has been established. The Baha'is do not believe in the suppression of the sex impulse but in its regulation and control."
(From a letter dated 5 September 1938 written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi to an individual believer)
(Shoghi Effendi: A Chaste and Holy Life, Page: 56)

Third, you ask all couples, straight or gay, to abide by the marriage laws – parental permission, chastity, checking out the character of your intended partner, the whole nine yards. No-one is given a "get into matrimony free" card.

In summary: They're here, they're queer, get used to it.

Thanks Steve for your helpful message; you wrote:
My feeling is that since NZ law makes a civil union functionally identical to marriage, and since Baha'is abide by the law, then the gay couple should be treated the same as the straight couple.

Farhan: This is a valid point; although I am not sure on what basis an NSA would act. I understand that the UHJ has replied to this circa 1995, but i have been unable to find that reply.

Steve: Well, times have changed, and it's important not to lose sight of the real meaning of chastity and the real value of stable, long-term, monogamous, chaste, child-raising relationships.

Farhan: Again I understand this, but we need God’s prescriptions, and God does not need ours, so in some regards, the Baha’i revelation reaffirms ancient traditions, and in others, these are revoked. We read in Gleanings LXXXVII:
“Were His law to be such as to strike terror into the hearts of all that are in heaven and on earth, that law is naught but manifest justice. The fears and agitation which the revelation of this law provokes in men's hearts should indeed be likened to the cries of the suckling babe weaned from his mother's milk, if ye be of them that perceive. Were men to discover the motivating purpose of God's Revelation, they would assuredly cast away their fears, and, with hearts filled with gratitude, rejoice with exceeding gladness.”

Steve: So that's my "position towards chastity for non-gays". In effect, I don't have one because I don't feel any need to discriminate between gays and straights.

Farhan: This can mean that we should either drop the question of sexuality limited to within wedlock altogether, or else we instate gay marriages.

Steve: Yes, P's solution does involve turning a blind eye. I suggest that a blind eye is often turned when straight couples are having problems getting permission to get married.
Farhan: This is not the case in France; no voting rights have been withdrawn from gays to date in France, but several for non-gay marriages without parent’s consent.
Steve: I can't see why the NZ Baha'i community can't accept all converts who are already in a civil union, whether they are straight or gay.

Farhan: This is one reason that Baha’i youth might wish to settle their married life before declaring, but again, this is like the patient spitting out his medication when the nurse is not looking.

Steve: "If a straight couple can get their relationship recognised by the state, then why can't a gay couple?

Farhan: if we respect the laws of the country, we do not abandon ours. If the law says alcohol only over 18 years of age, this is not applicable to Baha’is.

Steve quotes: "The proper use of the sex instinct is the natural right of every individual, and it is precisely for this very purpose that the institution of marriage has been established.”

Farhan: again this implies either extending the institution of marriage to gays, or else allowing sexuality outside marriage for every one.

Thanks Steve for your helpful message; you wrote:
My feeling is that since NZ law makes a civil union functionally identical to marriage, and since Baha'is abide by the law, then the gay couple should be treated the same as the straight couple.

Farhan: This is a valid point; although I am not sure on what basis an NSA would act. I understand that the UHJ has replied to this circa 1995, but i have been unable to find that reply.

Steve: Well, times have changed, and it's important not to lose sight of the real meaning of chastity and the real value of stable, long-term, monogamous, chaste, child-raising relationships.

Farhan: Again I understand this, but we need God’s prescriptions, and God does not need ours, so in some regards, the Baha’i revelation reaffirms ancient traditions, and in others, these are revoked. We read in Gleanings LXXXVII:
“Were His law to be such as to strike terror into the hearts of all that are in heaven and on earth, that law is naught but manifest justice. The fears and agitation which the revelation of this law provokes in men's hearts should indeed be likened to the cries of the suckling babe weaned from his mother's milk, if ye be of them that perceive. Were men to discover the motivating purpose of God's Revelation, they would assuredly cast away their fears, and, with hearts filled with gratitude, rejoice with exceeding gladness.”

Steve: So that's my "position towards chastity for non-gays". In effect, I don't have one because I don't feel any need to discriminate between gays and straights.

Farhan: This can mean that we should either drop the question of sexuality limited to within wedlock altogether, or else we instate gay marriages.

Steve: Yes, P's solution does involve turning a blind eye. I suggest that a blind eye is often turned when straight couples are having problems getting permission to get married.
Farhan: This is not the case in France; no voting rights have been withdrawn from gays to date in France, but several for non-gay marriages without parent’s consent.
Steve: I can't see why the NZ Baha'i community can't accept all converts who are already in a civil union, whether they are straight or gay.

Farhan: This is one reason that Baha’i youth might wish to settle their married life before declaring, but again, this is like the patient spitting out his medication when the nurse is not looking.

Steve: "If a straight couple can get their relationship recognised by the state, then why can't a gay couple?

Farhan: if we respect the laws of the country, we do not abandon ours. If the law says alcohol only over 18 years of age, this is not applicable to Baha’is.

Steve quotes: "The proper use of the sex instinct is the natural right of every individual, and it is precisely for this very purpose that the institution of marriage has been established.”

Farhan: again this implies either extending the institution of marriage to gays, or else allowing sexuality outside marriage for every one.

Steve wrote : Why did you cite a treatment for Parkinsons as an example of medication that can modify the intensity and orientation of a patient's sex drive?
Steve, there is misunderstanding here: I was pointing out to the fact that contrary to skin colour, sexual behaviour is not entirely inborn or genetic and that dopamine can modify the sexual drive and hormones (at least in some cases) influence orientation, before and after birth

Steve wrote : Why did you cite a treatment for Parkinsons as an example of medication that can modify the intensity and orientation of a patient's sex drive?
Steve, there is misunderstanding here: I was pointing out to the fact that contrary to skin colour, sexual behaviour is not entirely inborn or genetic and that dopamine can modify the sexual drive and hormones (at least in some cases) influence orientation, before and after birth

Dan wrote : OMG, if this weren't so tragic I'd be ROTFLMAO. I read the bulletin you posted, and can't believe this is the same religion I joined in 1970! What happened while I've been away? If this represents what it is like to be a Baha'i today, I'm so glad to be free of it (the organized part).

Dan, you remind me of conversations we have between colleagues on surgical feats in the 1970’s: so much liberty, no statistics, insurance bills, controls, paper work, consensus and multidisciplinary meetings, evaluations etc. With all this paperwork, breast cancer recovery rates have moved from 25% to 85%.

We are victims of what Alvin Toffler in the 1970’s called the Future Shock: adaptation crisis. We had fun with our harmonicas, and now we are invited to join a philharmonic orchestra; we had fun fishing, and now we are invited to join a fishing enterprise, get gasoline for the boat, fridges, transporters, insurances, sailor’s wages, stock markets…

In Frankfurt the representative of one Eastern European country explained how they had applied the recipe of the Faith for teaching, as for making bread, and to their astonishment it had worked, and then they realised that they had no trucks to transport the bread. Mass teaching needs mass production methods. We are moving from taxis to trains, from kitchen gardens to industrial farming, individual tutorship of the 1970s to big schools and a prepared curriculum. This doesn’t exclude fishing rods, home made bread, kitchen gardens, taxis and tutors… we still need all this traditional stuff, AND the new industrial methods.

Dan wrote : OMG, if this weren't so tragic I'd be ROTFLMAO. I read the bulletin you posted, and can't believe this is the same religion I joined in 1970! What happened while I've been away? If this represents what it is like to be a Baha'i today, I'm so glad to be free of it (the organized part).

Dan, you remind me of conversations we have between colleagues on surgical feats in the 1970’s: so much liberty, no statistics, insurance bills, controls, paper work, consensus and multidisciplinary meetings, evaluations etc. With all this paperwork, breast cancer recovery rates have moved from 25% to 85%.

We are victims of what Alvin Toffler in the 1970’s called the Future Shock: adaptation crisis. We had fun with our harmonicas, and now we are invited to join a philharmonic orchestra; we had fun fishing, and now we are invited to join a fishing enterprise, get gasoline for the boat, fridges, transporters, insurances, sailor’s wages, stock markets…

In Frankfurt the representative of one Eastern European country explained how they had applied the recipe of the Faith for teaching, as for making bread, and to their astonishment it had worked, and then they realised that they had no trucks to transport the bread. Mass teaching needs mass production methods. We are moving from taxis to trains, from kitchen gardens to industrial farming, individual tutorship of the 1970s to big schools and a prepared curriculum. This doesn’t exclude fishing rods, home made bread, kitchen gardens, taxis and tutors… we still need all this traditional stuff, AND the new industrial methods.

The sad thing, Farhan, is that there is no mass-production formula for spiritual change. This religion forbids proscelitization. We are to attract members through the example of our lives, and not through home visits. Baha'is need guidance in how to put their spiritual principles into action in their own personal lives — how to get involved in their local communities and truly make a difference without expectations. You're busy baking bread and figuring out how to deliver it, but don't realize the product has no lasting nutritional value.

The sad thing, Farhan, is that there is no mass-production formula for spiritual change. This religion forbids proscelitization. We are to attract members through the example of our lives, and not through home visits. Baha'is need guidance in how to put their spiritual principles into action in their own personal lives — how to get involved in their local communities and truly make a difference without expectations. You're busy baking bread and figuring out how to deliver it, but don't realize the product has no lasting nutritional value.

About Uganda — I wrote to my tour operator there, requesting an update on the persecution of gay people in 2007, and raised safety concerns for my group in August. Here is the reply, for those who are interested. I have now written to gayrightsuganda.org to get more information from their perspective, and will update you all as it arrives. I will be asking them specifically about the continued involvement of the Baha'i Faith in any ongoing discrimination. Hugs, Dan

About Uganda — I wrote to my tour operator there, requesting an update on the persecution of gay people in 2007, and raised safety concerns for my group in August. Here is the reply, for those who are interested. I have now written to gayrightsuganda.org to get more information from their perspective, and will update you all as it arrives. I will be asking them specifically about the continued involvement of the Baha'i Faith in any ongoing discrimination. Hugs, Dan

Here is the letter from Uganda tour operator:

Dear Dan,
Thanks for your kind mail. First of all, I would like to inform you that we have been taking gays for Safaris and haven't had their right violated. Though it happened, there has been an organization that has been set up to protect gays in Uganda and I don't think the violence's against gays will happen again.

Please check the link below for the objective of the gay community.
http://www.gayrightsuganda.org/index.php/about-ga…

I therefore assure you that the group will be very safe. Our company welcomes every kind of person and since we tailor our tours to our clients' needs, protecting our clients' rights is our obligation. Please just be informed that the group will be safe. Last week we took a gay and a lesbian and trust me , they came back very happy. All that happened to the gays in the past will never happen again.

Here is the letter from Uganda tour operator:

Dear Dan,
Thanks for your kind mail. First of all, I would like to inform you that we have been taking gays for Safaris and haven't had their right violated. Though it happened, there has been an organization that has been set up to protect gays in Uganda and I don't think the violence's against gays will happen again.

Please check the link below for the objective of the gay community.
http://www.gayrightsuganda.org/index.php/about-ga…

I therefore assure you that the group will be very safe. Our company welcomes every kind of person and since we tailor our tours to our clients' needs, protecting our clients' rights is our obligation. Please just be informed that the group will be safe. Last week we took a gay and a lesbian and trust me , they came back very happy. All that happened to the gays in the past will never happen again.

brilliant!

brilliant!

Dan wrote :
The sad thing, Farhan, is that there is no mass-production formula for spiritual change

True Dan, this change is transmitted from heart to heart, as we read in the Valley of contentment:
“The pen steppeth not into this region, the ink leaveth only a blot. In these planes, the nightingale of the heart hath other songs and secrets, which make the heart to stir and the soul to clamor, but this mystery of inner meaning may be whispered only from heart to heart, confided only from breast to breast.”

When there is a great demand, as it is now, there should be a proportional effort to provide help for those who request, so Baha’is are required to massively respond to this demand. Western civilisation is individualistic. News Baha’is get hugs and a gift, and are then abandoned to themselves to explain all that to their worried families.

When I was a child, my parents were pioneers in Tanganyika and every week end we would visit the new Baha’is, take them books, discuss with them and their families and friends and I would run around after the chicken and goats and occasionally listen to the teachings. We now call that “home visits” and now that inactive Baha’is are helped understand its importance in Ruhi book 2 it suddenly becomes dangerous?

There is nothing unnatural about visiting friends and neighbours, and if truly we believe that you hold a remedy to the spiritual ills of the world, we are not allowed to keep it to ourselves.

Dan wrote :
The sad thing, Farhan, is that there is no mass-production formula for spiritual change

True Dan, this change is transmitted from heart to heart, as we read in the Valley of contentment:
“The pen steppeth not into this region, the ink leaveth only a blot. In these planes, the nightingale of the heart hath other songs and secrets, which make the heart to stir and the soul to clamor, but this mystery of inner meaning may be whispered only from heart to heart, confided only from breast to breast.”

When there is a great demand, as it is now, there should be a proportional effort to provide help for those who request, so Baha’is are required to massively respond to this demand. Western civilisation is individualistic. News Baha’is get hugs and a gift, and are then abandoned to themselves to explain all that to their worried families.

When I was a child, my parents were pioneers in Tanganyika and every week end we would visit the new Baha’is, take them books, discuss with them and their families and friends and I would run around after the chicken and goats and occasionally listen to the teachings. We now call that “home visits” and now that inactive Baha’is are helped understand its importance in Ruhi book 2 it suddenly becomes dangerous?

There is nothing unnatural about visiting friends and neighbours, and if truly we believe that you hold a remedy to the spiritual ills of the world, we are not allowed to keep it to ourselves.

Hi Farhan,

You wrote:

"…we need God’s prescriptions, and God does not need ours…"

Show me how my solution follows "God's prescriptions" any less than yours. I accept that your solution ticks different boxes from mine, but it appears you won't acknowledge that, despite your soothing "I understand that" bedside manner.

"if we respect the laws of the country, we do not abandon ours."

Who said anything about abandoning any aspect of Baha'i law? Moreover, if accepting gay couples is abandonment of Baha'i law then so is accepting polygamous and intentionally childless couples. As I said, "In those situations it's understood that there are higher principles, necessary transitions and plain old fashioned privacy issues involved."

I've served on an assembly. Ideally you weigh up all the issues, spiritual principles and applicable laws, and then you try to chart a course that balances all of these and is likely to lead to a good outcome. But good luck with your one-size-fits-all "…we need God’s prescriptions, and God does not need ours…" approach.

ka kite
Steve

Hi Farhan,

You wrote:

"…we need God’s prescriptions, and God does not need ours…"

Show me how my solution follows "God's prescriptions" any less than yours. I accept that your solution ticks different boxes from mine, but it appears you won't acknowledge that, despite your soothing "I understand that" bedside manner.

"if we respect the laws of the country, we do not abandon ours."

Who said anything about abandoning any aspect of Baha'i law? Moreover, if accepting gay couples is abandonment of Baha'i law then so is accepting polygamous and intentionally childless couples. As I said, "In those situations it's understood that there are higher principles, necessary transitions and plain old fashioned privacy issues involved."

I've served on an assembly. Ideally you weigh up all the issues, spiritual principles and applicable laws, and then you try to chart a course that balances all of these and is likely to lead to a good outcome. But good luck with your one-size-fits-all "…we need God’s prescriptions, and God does not need ours…" approach.

ka kite
Steve

No there is no misunderstanding. You didn't talk about hormones and pre/post natal sexual orientation until after you made the statement I'm questioning you about. You're still obfuscating. Here's the question again. I just want a straight answer.

Why did you cite a treatment for Parkinsons as an example of medication that can modify the intensity and orientation of a patient's sex drive?

No there is no misunderstanding. You didn't talk about hormones and pre/post natal sexual orientation until after you made the statement I'm questioning you about. You're still obfuscating. Here's the question again. I just want a straight answer.

Why did you cite a treatment for Parkinsons as an example of medication that can modify the intensity and orientation of a patient's sex drive?

Hi Dan,

Somehow I guessed you wouldn't be impressed by Farhan's answer. Actually, Farhan is misleading you. There's precious little edible bread being baked. The Baha'is are still trying to leaven the lump. They get a rise here and a rise there, but usually it fails during the proofing process, but they stick it in the oven anyway. The result is half-baked, unleavened lumps.

Hi Dan,

Somehow I guessed you wouldn't be impressed by Farhan's answer. Actually, Farhan is misleading you. There's precious little edible bread being baked. The Baha'is are still trying to leaven the lump. They get a rise here and a rise there, but usually it fails during the proofing process, but they stick it in the oven anyway. The result is half-baked, unleavened lumps.

Hi Farhan,

You wrote:
"…and now that inactive Baha’is are helped understand its importance in Ruhi book 2 it suddenly becomes dangerous?"

No-one mentioned danger. Why do you keep muddying the waters? It's very difficult to have a meaningful discussion when your mind wanders off into fantasy.

Hi Farhan,

You wrote:
"…and now that inactive Baha’is are helped understand its importance in Ruhi book 2 it suddenly becomes dangerous?"

No-one mentioned danger. Why do you keep muddying the waters? It's very difficult to have a meaningful discussion when your mind wanders off into fantasy.

Steve wrote : Show me how my solution follows "God's prescriptions" any less than yours
Baha’u’llah has appointed the UHJ as the law maker, and the present ruling is that if we want to enjoy voting rights, in addition to all other community activities, sexuality is to be restrained to within wedlock. You suggest that this is old fashioned and needs to be changed.

You do not reply to how we could justify that gay sexuality should be made licit outside marriage and not non-gay sexuality.

Steve wrote : Show me how my solution follows "God's prescriptions" any less than yours
Baha’u’llah has appointed the UHJ as the law maker, and the present ruling is that if we want to enjoy voting rights, in addition to all other community activities, sexuality is to be restrained to within wedlock. You suggest that this is old fashioned and needs to be changed.

You do not reply to how we could justify that gay sexuality should be made licit outside marriage and not non-gay sexuality.

Steve wrote: Why did you cite a treatment for Parkinsons as an example of medication that can modify the intensity and orientation of a patient's sex drive?

Farhan: I am not going to waste my time quibbling or re-quoting: Whether you misunderstood or I miswrote, I was pointing out to the fact that contrary to skin colour, sexual behaviour is not entirely inborn or genetic and that dopamine can modify the sexual drive and hormones (at least in some cases) influence orientation, before and after birth. You have no reply to this, so you are trying to discredit my reasoning.

Steve wrote: No-one mentioned danger. Why do you keep muddying the waters? It's very difficult to have a meaningful discussion when your mind wanders off into fantasy.

Farhan: You are right again and so smart in muddying the waters; indeed you did not say “danger” but you said “very serious” and “misguided” which I contracted to “dangerous” from of your phrase: “But what we're witnessing is very serious. Not Pol Pot serious, but equally misguided.”

The readers of the blog will sort out for themselves.

Steve wrote: Why did you cite a treatment for Parkinsons as an example of medication that can modify the intensity and orientation of a patient's sex drive?

Farhan: I am not going to waste my time quibbling or re-quoting: Whether you misunderstood or I miswrote, I was pointing out to the fact that contrary to skin colour, sexual behaviour is not entirely inborn or genetic and that dopamine can modify the sexual drive and hormones (at least in some cases) influence orientation, before and after birth. You have no reply to this, so you are trying to discredit my reasoning.

Steve wrote: No-one mentioned danger. Why do you keep muddying the waters? It's very difficult to have a meaningful discussion when your mind wanders off into fantasy.

Farhan: You are right again and so smart in muddying the waters; indeed you did not say “danger” but you said “very serious” and “misguided” which I contracted to “dangerous” from of your phrase: “But what we're witnessing is very serious. Not Pol Pot serious, but equally misguided.”

The readers of the blog will sort out for themselves.

Hi Farhan,

you wrote:
You have no reply to this, so you are trying to discredit my reasoning.

One thing at a time, please.

OK, you don't want to answer my question. I'll drop it.

I've already replied to your assertions about dopamine. The literature indicates to me that inhibitions are reduced and that people — who would otherwise have been inhibited from gambling, homosexuality, pederasty and buying things due to familial and societal disapproval — sometimes cut loose. I don't see that as a modification of the sex drive.

As for your coment about hormones. Pey has already pointed out that the material you cited studied pre-natal hormonal imbalance. This is hardly relevant to the adults we're discussing, and their potential "treatment / re-orientation / re-assignment". Cite some studies showing that adults can change their orientation through hormone treatment and I'll be happy to discuss it. I need more than repetitive baseless assertions from someone with a very poor record so far of coming up with anything accurate or substantive. Especially one who blathers on about "misperceptions" when cornered.

…you did not say “danger” but you said “very serious” and “misguided”

Let's walk through what you actually did. When you replied to Dan, you suddenly paraphased something I said in a different sub-thread, when I was talking about the whole of Ruhi ReEducation, not just a harmless "home visit". And you did this without any kind of attribution or link. This is just more obfuscation, Farhan.

If I've misperceived, please walk me through my misperception.

Hi Farhan,

you wrote:
You have no reply to this, so you are trying to discredit my reasoning.

One thing at a time, please.

OK, you don't want to answer my question. I'll drop it.

I've already replied to your assertions about dopamine. The literature indicates to me that inhibitions are reduced and that people — who would otherwise have been inhibited from gambling, homosexuality, pederasty and buying things due to familial and societal disapproval — sometimes cut loose. I don't see that as a modification of the sex drive.

As for your coment about hormones. Pey has already pointed out that the material you cited studied pre-natal hormonal imbalance. This is hardly relevant to the adults we're discussing, and their potential "treatment / re-orientation / re-assignment". Cite some studies showing that adults can change their orientation through hormone treatment and I'll be happy to discuss it. I need more than repetitive baseless assertions from someone with a very poor record so far of coming up with anything accurate or substantive. Especially one who blathers on about "misperceptions" when cornered.

…you did not say “danger” but you said “very serious” and “misguided”

Let's walk through what you actually did. When you replied to Dan, you suddenly paraphased something I said in a different sub-thread, when I was talking about the whole of Ruhi ReEducation, not just a harmless "home visit". And you did this without any kind of attribution or link. This is just more obfuscation, Farhan.

If I've misperceived, please walk me through my misperception.

That doesn't show my how my solution follows "God's prescriptions" any less than yours. It just shows me that you're hung up on sexual behaviour and your perception of what's primary in Baha'i law. My solution puts equity, inclusiveness and individuals first, and I've already shown that these values are espoused on official baha'i websites when homosexuality is discussed. So please try answering the question again.

Baha’u’llah has appointed the UHJ as the law maker, and the present ruling is that if we want to enjoy voting rights, in addition to all other community activities, sexuality is to be restrained to within wedlock. You suggest that this is old fashioned and needs to be changed.

No, you may be thinking of someone else. I don't think wedlock (or any kind of long-term, committed, monogamous, loving, fulfilling, chaste, child-nurturing institution) is old fashioned at all. I'm promoting the notion that "wedlock" be available to both gays and straights.

Yes, legally it's a bit iffy, but so is masturbation, which is "sexuality" outside of wedlock and — if I was anything to go by — is prevalent in the unmarried Baha'i population. But the Baha'is have managed to chart a course through that minefield without causing serious hurt and scarring and without bringing the law you refer to into disrepute. It's called "giving people a bit of wiggle room".

If people are trying to live good, responsible lives, you don't leave them stranded just because you don't agree 100% with what they're doing. You do your best to work with them towards goals you both agree on. What's the problem with that?

That doesn't show my how my solution follows "God's prescriptions" any less than yours. It just shows me that you're hung up on sexual behaviour and your perception of what's primary in Baha'i law. My solution puts equity, inclusiveness and individuals first, and I've already shown that these values are espoused on official baha'i websites when homosexuality is discussed. So please try answering the question again.

Baha’u’llah has appointed the UHJ as the law maker, and the present ruling is that if we want to enjoy voting rights, in addition to all other community activities, sexuality is to be restrained to within wedlock. You suggest that this is old fashioned and needs to be changed.

No, you may be thinking of someone else. I don't think wedlock (or any kind of long-term, committed, monogamous, loving, fulfilling, chaste, child-nurturing institution) is old fashioned at all. I'm promoting the notion that "wedlock" be available to both gays and straights.

Yes, legally it's a bit iffy, but so is masturbation, which is "sexuality" outside of wedlock and — if I was anything to go by — is prevalent in the unmarried Baha'i population. But the Baha'is have managed to chart a course through that minefield without causing serious hurt and scarring and without bringing the law you refer to into disrepute. It's called "giving people a bit of wiggle room".

If people are trying to live good, responsible lives, you don't leave them stranded just because you don't agree 100% with what they're doing. You do your best to work with them towards goals you both agree on. What's the problem with that?

Steve, I suggest we keep this exchange useful by discussing opinions, without trying to pass judgment on those who hold those opinions. The opinions I hold are 1) that both the sexual drive and orientation are not entirely genetic, since they can change spontaneously and be modified by medication and hormones before and after birth. I hence disagree that the sexual drive and orientation are comparable to skin colour, and 2) we cannot liberalise gay relations outside marriage without liberalising non gay relations.

Steve, I suggest we keep this exchange useful by discussing opinions, without trying to pass judgment on those who hold those opinions. The opinions I hold are 1) that both the sexual drive and orientation are not entirely genetic, since they can change spontaneously and be modified by medication and hormones before and after birth. I hence disagree that the sexual drive and orientation are comparable to skin colour, and 2) we cannot liberalise gay relations outside marriage without liberalising non gay relations.

Steve wrote: Cite some studies showing that adults can change their orientation through hormone treatment and I'll be happy to discuss it.

Farhan: Once again, I am not saying that I know of a hormone therapy that can change orientation in adults, but I am saying that there are some studies suggesting that orientation can be influenced by hormones. Here is one source you might wish to study: http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=…
One of the studies on the site I suggested: http://borngay.procon.org/viewanswers.asp?questio… concludes that we can hypothesize that hyperandrogenism, which is associated with polycystic ovary syndrome, may be one of the factors contributing to the sexual orientation of women.'"

Steve wrote: Cite some studies showing that adults can change their orientation through hormone treatment and I'll be happy to discuss it.

Farhan: Once again, I am not saying that I know of a hormone therapy that can change orientation in adults, but I am saying that there are some studies suggesting that orientation can be influenced by hormones. Here is one source you might wish to study: http://cat.inist.fr/?aModele=afficheN&cpsidt=…
One of the studies on the site I suggested: http://borngay.procon.org/viewanswers.asp?questio… concludes that we can hypothesize that hyperandrogenism, which is associated with polycystic ovary syndrome, may be one of the factors contributing to the sexual orientation of women.'"

Steve: The literature indicates to me that inhibitions are reduced. I don't see that as a modification of the sex drive

Farhan: Inhibition is part of our resulting sex drive; I am not referring to orientation here. Sexuality is part of our natural functions, and culture, education, experiences, genetics, hormones, medication and many other factors can determine how much of our time we are going to consecrate to sexuality, and how much to other sources of pleasure such as art, poetry, music, religion, socialising, etc. Much of this is controlled by neurotransmitters such as dopamine, enkephalines and other substances that can be increased or decreased either by chemical or by psychological factors.

Steve: The literature indicates to me that inhibitions are reduced. I don't see that as a modification of the sex drive

Farhan: Inhibition is part of our resulting sex drive; I am not referring to orientation here. Sexuality is part of our natural functions, and culture, education, experiences, genetics, hormones, medication and many other factors can determine how much of our time we are going to consecrate to sexuality, and how much to other sources of pleasure such as art, poetry, music, religion, socialising, etc. Much of this is controlled by neurotransmitters such as dopamine, enkephalines and other substances that can be increased or decreased either by chemical or by psychological factors.

Yes, I'm happy to continue discussing opinions, but I reserve the right to criticise the quality and veracity of those opinions.

…since they can change spontaneously and be modified by medication and hormones before and after birth. I hence disagree that the sexual drive and orientation are comparable to skin colour…

You've either left your argument half-finished or you're assuming that skin colour doesn't change spontaneously and can't be modified by chemicals. However, it does and it can:

hyperpigmentation
hypopigmentation

Skin colour is the product of a complex interation between genetics and environment — and the mechanism differs between various groups, for example, East Asians and Africans.

Homosexuality therefore remains analagous to skin colour.

we cannot liberalise gay relations outside marriage without liberalising non gay relations.

I agree, and that's why I suggest that the "between a man and a woman" clause be removed from Baha'i marriage. There are plenty of examples of Aqdas laws being applied on a mutatis mutandis basis, and this could be one of them.

Have a look at what has been suggested for the inheritance laws:

"Whether they do necessarily favour the male heirs is the main question which will be addressed here. I will argue that the laws allow more room for interpretation, and for the broad application of the mutatis mutandis principle, than has previously been recognized, largely because a key text in the Questions and Answers to the Aqdas, question 37 (Q37, p. 118), was not available in English until 1992.
<a hreg="http://www.bahai-library.org/bsr/bsr05/54_mcglinn_inheritance.htm">Some considerations relating to the
inheritance laws of the Kitáb-i-Aqdas – Sen McGlinn

That aside, what is considered mutatis mutandis changes over time. Something that wouldn't have made sense to alter 100 years ago may make sense to alter now.

Yes, I'm happy to continue discussing opinions, but I reserve the right to criticise the quality and veracity of those opinions.

…since they can change spontaneously and be modified by medication and hormones before and after birth. I hence disagree that the sexual drive and orientation are comparable to skin colour…

You've either left your argument half-finished or you're assuming that skin colour doesn't change spontaneously and can't be modified by chemicals. However, it does and it can:

hyperpigmentation
hypopigmentation

Skin colour is the product of a complex interation between genetics and environment — and the mechanism differs between various groups, for example, East Asians and Africans.

Homosexuality therefore remains analagous to skin colour.

we cannot liberalise gay relations outside marriage without liberalising non gay relations.

I agree, and that's why I suggest that the "between a man and a woman" clause be removed from Baha'i marriage. There are plenty of examples of Aqdas laws being applied on a mutatis mutandis basis, and this could be one of them.

Have a look at what has been suggested for the inheritance laws:

"Whether they do necessarily favour the male heirs is the main question which will be addressed here. I will argue that the laws allow more room for interpretation, and for the broad application of the mutatis mutandis principle, than has previously been recognized, largely because a key text in the Questions and Answers to the Aqdas, question 37 (Q37, p. 118), was not available in English until 1992.
<a hreg="http://www.bahai-library.org/bsr/bsr05/54_mcglinn_inheritance.htm">Some considerations relating to the
inheritance laws of the Kitáb-i-Aqdas – Sen McGlinn

That aside, what is considered mutatis mutandis changes over time. Something that wouldn't have made sense to alter 100 years ago may make sense to alter now.

Thanks for providing citations. I don't have an account with Inist, so I can't view the first item. The second site provides some useful summaries of what appears to be a highly politicised debate.

I lack the training to work my way through the issues, so I prefer to bring it down to individuals and populations i know about. I have seen harm done through Baha'is getting married, and discovering that they cannot continue to love a lie. I have not heard of any Baha'i changing orientation spontaneously. I'm inclined to think of saxual orientation as being very stable, although I certainly don't rule out medical conditions, chemicals and environmental factors in a change.

Like you say, humans are very adaptable – I think all creatures are. I think we disagree over whether there is an need for change, and whether such a change is beneficial.

While summarisng the study you say:

…one of the factors contributing to the sexual orientation of women

I see no mention of "women". Is this the part you're summarising?

"It is likely, indeed, that if there is a genetic element to the development of homosexuality, it probably works through prenatal and early childhood hormones."

Can we agree to talk about adults, and not about foetuses and babies? The issue here surely is about how the Baha'is relate to adult homosexuals, and not about the medical/ethical issues surrounding the pre and post-natal prevention of homosexuality much later in life — as interesting as that other topic is. I imagine you're aware that many Baha'is believe that adult homosexuality can be "cured". That's the context for these discussions.

Thanks for providing citations. I don't have an account with Inist, so I can't view the first item. The second site provides some useful summaries of what appears to be a highly politicised debate.

I lack the training to work my way through the issues, so I prefer to bring it down to individuals and populations i know about. I have seen harm done through Baha'is getting married, and discovering that they cannot continue to love a lie. I have not heard of any Baha'i changing orientation spontaneously. I'm inclined to think of saxual orientation as being very stable, although I certainly don't rule out medical conditions, chemicals and environmental factors in a change.

Like you say, humans are very adaptable – I think all creatures are. I think we disagree over whether there is an need for change, and whether such a change is beneficial.

While summarisng the study you say:

…one of the factors contributing to the sexual orientation of women

I see no mention of "women". Is this the part you're summarising?

"It is likely, indeed, that if there is a genetic element to the development of homosexuality, it probably works through prenatal and early childhood hormones."

Can we agree to talk about adults, and not about foetuses and babies? The issue here surely is about how the Baha'is relate to adult homosexuals, and not about the medical/ethical issues surrounding the pre and post-natal prevention of homosexuality much later in life — as interesting as that other topic is. I imagine you're aware that many Baha'is believe that adult homosexuality can be "cured". That's the context for these discussions.

Play it loud and proud:

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=743419608&…

Play it loud and proud:

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=743419608&…

thanks B for keeping this going. I'm in LA now and am travelling so don't have time to contribute, but I see I don't need to! all the best, sonja

thanks B for keeping this going. I'm in LA now and am travelling so don't have time to contribute, but I see I don't need to! all the best, sonja

Farhan I'll give you the reply that maybe you glossed over. Your straight couple can leave the community. Go off get married as non-bahais, then maybe after some time come back apolegetic and say they now wish to be Bahais. What would you do Farhan? Would you turn them away? Tell them that they just played the system and are not worthy of being fully accepted in the community with rights? I think most Bahai communities would just let it go and accept the couple with full rights. No one would be repulsed by them. BUT a gay couple with their kids… well that's a WHOLE different story. Their only option is to leave- period. Which is really what the "majority" of Bahais and the current administration want anyway.

Farhan I'll give you the reply that maybe you glossed over. Your straight couple can leave the community. Go off get married as non-bahais, then maybe after some time come back apolegetic and say they now wish to be Bahais. What would you do Farhan? Would you turn them away? Tell them that they just played the system and are not worthy of being fully accepted in the community with rights? I think most Bahai communities would just let it go and accept the couple with full rights. No one would be repulsed by them. BUT a gay couple with their kids… well that's a WHOLE different story. Their only option is to leave- period. Which is really what the "majority" of Bahais and the current administration want anyway.

Btw Farhan, when I mentioned your hormone theory to my friend who is transitioning into a woman- she gave out a big laugh. She said hormones do a lot of things, but they certainly do not change a person's orientation (just their sexual drive). And when I told her that these comments came from a doctor- well let's just say her mouth dropped with utter disbelief. Who better to know about hormones than someone who is using them?

Btw Farhan, when I mentioned your hormone theory to my friend who is transitioning into a woman- she gave out a big laugh. She said hormones do a lot of things, but they certainly do not change a person's orientation (just their sexual drive). And when I told her that these comments came from a doctor- well let's just say her mouth dropped with utter disbelief. Who better to know about hormones than someone who is using them?

Pey wrote: What would you do Farhan? Would you turn them away?
Pey, I would do nothing. I would abide by the rules of the community, like any other Baha’i, and as an individual I would welcome and serve all the lovers of the Faith, whatever their status.

Pey wrote: What would you do Farhan? Would you turn them away?
Pey, I would do nothing. I would abide by the rules of the community, like any other Baha’i, and as an individual I would welcome and serve all the lovers of the Faith, whatever their status.

Pey wrote: Who better to know about hormones than someone who is using them?
Pey, you cannot make generalisations from one case. I gave references by people working in this field. Thank you for sharing your view and that of your friend.

Pey wrote: Who better to know about hormones than someone who is using them?
Pey, you cannot make generalisations from one case. I gave references by people working in this field. Thank you for sharing your view and that of your friend.

ahhh, I see. So let's use hormones to get the sex drive to the point of non-existance in gays, so therefore they no longer will have the urge to wnat to have sex with someone- anyone. But rather open up a book or maybe go to Ruhi classes. But of course that you still haven't solved the problem of helping gays "overcome" their sexuality so they can function in a healthy Bahai fortress of well-being. But that really doesn't matter, now does it?

ahhh, I see. So let's use hormones to get the sex drive to the point of non-existance in gays, so therefore they no longer will have the urge to wnat to have sex with someone- anyone. But rather open up a book or maybe go to Ruhi classes. But of course that you still haven't solved the problem of helping gays "overcome" their sexuality so they can function in a healthy Bahai fortress of well-being. But that really doesn't matter, now does it?

I certainly can when this one person knows MANY other people in her situation. She almost committed suicide, but saved herself from that by education herself and getting proper therapy. I can use her information when I know she has read and studied more about the causes of sexual orientation and gender indentitiy in her young life than you probably have in a medical class. Oh yeah, she can talk with A LOT more authority Farhan.

I certainly can when this one person knows MANY other people in her situation. She almost committed suicide, but saved herself from that by education herself and getting proper therapy. I can use her information when I know she has read and studied more about the causes of sexual orientation and gender indentitiy in her young life than you probably have in a medical class. Oh yeah, she can talk with A LOT more authority Farhan.

Do you realize Farhan, how dangerous your words are here? It may seem innocent, but I read something else. I seriously see you looking at a gay person's sex drive and thinking it possibly can be remedied through hormones. Like decades ago it could possibly be remedied trhoug a lobbotomy. And as long as we get the sex drive down in that person to the point where they feel nothing, then we have succeeded in helping gays ovecome their sexuality. Scary!

Do you realize Farhan, how dangerous your words are here? It may seem innocent, but I read something else. I seriously see you looking at a gay person's sex drive and thinking it possibly can be remedied through hormones. Like decades ago it could possibly be remedied trhoug a lobbotomy. And as long as we get the sex drive down in that person to the point where they feel nothing, then we have succeeded in helping gays ovecome their sexuality. Scary!

God Bless Harvey Milk!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_tOT-3rFEc&eu…

God Bless Harvey Milk!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d_tOT-3rFEc&eu…

Pey wrote : I seriously see you looking at a gay person's sex drive and thinking it possibly can be remedied through hormones.

Pey, if you go back and read my postings carefully, you will see that I am holding the view that sexual behaviour is not comparable to skin colour because it is not entirely genetic, it can change during our lifetime and can be modified by medication and education. I have repeatedly said that I do not believe that homosexuality can be “cured” by hormones.

I understand that your views are different; thanks for expressing them.

Pey wrote : I seriously see you looking at a gay person's sex drive and thinking it possibly can be remedied through hormones.

Pey, if you go back and read my postings carefully, you will see that I am holding the view that sexual behaviour is not comparable to skin colour because it is not entirely genetic, it can change during our lifetime and can be modified by medication and education. I have repeatedly said that I do not believe that homosexuality can be “cured” by hormones.

I understand that your views are different; thanks for expressing them.

Farhan you said: Our sexual orientation can change if we take hormones, or after some experiences in life….
We have people with genetic predisposition to violence or addictive behaviour, including alcohol, gambling and drug misuse. They have to restrain themselves harder than others. They cannot argue that their genetic predisposition is an excuse for misbehaviour.
———————————-
From these posts of your Farhan I read that you consider hormones something that can affect orientation. Then you changed to say how much they affect our concentration on sex vs. other things like reading books, etc. I'm just putting two and two together Farhan. Were you not saying that hormones affect our sexuality and that they may be use to address the issue of homosexuality. I'm not talking about a "cure" because there is none. Unless by cure you mean helping homosexuals get rid of any sexual drive they may have.

Farhan you said: Our sexual orientation can change if we take hormones, or after some experiences in life….
We have people with genetic predisposition to violence or addictive behaviour, including alcohol, gambling and drug misuse. They have to restrain themselves harder than others. They cannot argue that their genetic predisposition is an excuse for misbehaviour.
———————————-
From these posts of your Farhan I read that you consider hormones something that can affect orientation. Then you changed to say how much they affect our concentration on sex vs. other things like reading books, etc. I'm just putting two and two together Farhan. Were you not saying that hormones affect our sexuality and that they may be use to address the issue of homosexuality. I'm not talking about a "cure" because there is none. Unless by cure you mean helping homosexuals get rid of any sexual drive they may have.

and btw Farhan, we have proven to you that skin color is also not entirely genetic. So what exactly was your point in bringing up hormones. You still believe that hormones can alter a person's sexual feelings/drive as an adult, right? This is sometihng that I agree with. So what now? What do you do with that information?

and btw Farhan, we have proven to you that skin color is also not entirely genetic. So what exactly was your point in bringing up hormones. You still believe that hormones can alter a person's sexual feelings/drive as an adult, right? This is sometihng that I agree with. So what now? What do you do with that information?

http://breakingdailynews.com/2005/11/30/gay-men-u…

can you see Farhan why I am a little sensitive when I hear a professional, a Doctor, who innocently brings up issues of hormones affecting sexual orientation. especially when this doctor believes that gays can "adapt" to a life more in tune with official Bahai law. It is treading some scary water farhan.

http://breakingdailynews.com/2005/11/30/gay-men-u…

can you see Farhan why I am a little sensitive when I hear a professional, a Doctor, who innocently brings up issues of hormones affecting sexual orientation. especially when this doctor believes that gays can "adapt" to a life more in tune with official Bahai law. It is treading some scary water farhan.

Hi Farhan,

You wrote:
"if you go back and read my postings carefully, you will see that I am holding the view that sexual behaviour is not comparable to skin colour because it is not entirely genetic, it can change during our lifetime and can be modified by medication and education."

You seem to use certain phrases interchangeably, even though they have quite different meanings. For example, you now refer to "sexual behaviour" even though the focus of this discussion has been on "sexual orientation". I first noticed this when we were talking about treatment for Parkinsons causing a loss of inhibitions and leading to behaviour that may be perceived to be socially unacceptable. You seemed to characterise some of this as "modification of the sex drive" when the cause seemed to be directly attributable to the loss of inhibitions.

Can we agree that our core focus is on sexual orientation, not sexual behaviour?

" I have repeatedly said that I do not believe that homosexuality can be 'cured' by hormones."

Another problem is that your responses are contradictory – but others have covered that aspect already.

Hi Farhan,

You wrote:
"if you go back and read my postings carefully, you will see that I am holding the view that sexual behaviour is not comparable to skin colour because it is not entirely genetic, it can change during our lifetime and can be modified by medication and education."

You seem to use certain phrases interchangeably, even though they have quite different meanings. For example, you now refer to "sexual behaviour" even though the focus of this discussion has been on "sexual orientation". I first noticed this when we were talking about treatment for Parkinsons causing a loss of inhibitions and leading to behaviour that may be perceived to be socially unacceptable. You seemed to characterise some of this as "modification of the sex drive" when the cause seemed to be directly attributable to the loss of inhibitions.

Can we agree that our core focus is on sexual orientation, not sexual behaviour?

" I have repeatedly said that I do not believe that homosexuality can be 'cured' by hormones."

Another problem is that your responses are contradictory – but others have covered that aspect already.

that is beautiful. Sonja if you run into Dustin Lance Black while in LA, please tell him THANK YOU! )

that is beautiful. Sonja if you run into Dustin Lance Black while in LA, please tell him THANK YOU! )

The New York Times has published a compromise proposal for the "gay marriage" issue – A Reconciliation on Gay Marriage:

"It would work like this: Congress would bestow the status of federal civil unions on same-sex marriages and civil unions granted at the state level, thereby conferring upon them most or all of the federal benefits and rights of marriage. But there would be a condition: Washington would recognize only those unions licensed in states with robust religious-conscience exceptions, which provide that religious organizations need not recognize same-sex unions against their will. The federal government would also enact religious-conscience protections of its own. All of these changes would be enacted in the same bill."

The civil union half of the trade-off looks to me very much like what has been put in place in NZ with very little fuss and bother. In NZ, the only benefit offered for those opposing any change was that "marriage", as a legal term, is reserved for straights. Straights can and do opt for a civil union. In the US there does seem to be a far more powerful anti- gay marriage sentiment from religious sources than there is in NZ, so I can see why religious organisations might need to be offered a "Get Out Of Gay Rights Free" card as part of the deal. Or perhaps religions in NZ already have access to sufficient human rights exceptions to continue their gay-unfriendly ways, if they wish.

Anyway, what do folks here on Baha'i Rants, particularly those living in the US, think about the proposal?

The New York Times has published a compromise proposal for the "gay marriage" issue – A Reconciliation on Gay Marriage:

"It would work like this: Congress would bestow the status of federal civil unions on same-sex marriages and civil unions granted at the state level, thereby conferring upon them most or all of the federal benefits and rights of marriage. But there would be a condition: Washington would recognize only those unions licensed in states with robust religious-conscience exceptions, which provide that religious organizations need not recognize same-sex unions against their will. The federal government would also enact religious-conscience protections of its own. All of these changes would be enacted in the same bill."

The civil union half of the trade-off looks to me very much like what has been put in place in NZ with very little fuss and bother. In NZ, the only benefit offered for those opposing any change was that "marriage", as a legal term, is reserved for straights. Straights can and do opt for a civil union. In the US there does seem to be a far more powerful anti- gay marriage sentiment from religious sources than there is in NZ, so I can see why religious organisations might need to be offered a "Get Out Of Gay Rights Free" card as part of the deal. Or perhaps religions in NZ already have access to sufficient human rights exceptions to continue their gay-unfriendly ways, if they wish.

Anyway, what do folks here on Baha'i Rants, particularly those living in the US, think about the proposal?

I actually would be happy with that. But I don't like the part "most" federal benefits/rights. It's either all or nothing. I would rather have a federal law stating that in all legal documents (federal, state, municipality- wherever) where the word "marriage" appears, civil unions can be replaced in that language to equally protect those in Civil Unions. Steve you just don't understand how fanatical and organized the religious right is in the US. They fought tooth and nail against the Hate Crimes Bill (Matthew Sheppard Act) by telling their congregations that if a preacher got up in the pulpit and denounced homosexuality he would be lead off to jail! These people are truly sick- they feed on the ignorance and fear of their followers. In my state last year, they helped defeat an anti-bullying bill that would have protected all kids from hate in schools because they told people that it would teach kids to be homosexual. WTF?! Protecting a child from being called a fag and beat up in school would make the other kids turn gay? This is what we are dealing with here. And it is disheartening when the Bahais appear more and more like these people rather than Abdul-Baha.

I actually would be happy with that. But I don't like the part "most" federal benefits/rights. It's either all or nothing. I would rather have a federal law stating that in all legal documents (federal, state, municipality- wherever) where the word "marriage" appears, civil unions can be replaced in that language to equally protect those in Civil Unions. Steve you just don't understand how fanatical and organized the religious right is in the US. They fought tooth and nail against the Hate Crimes Bill (Matthew Sheppard Act) by telling their congregations that if a preacher got up in the pulpit and denounced homosexuality he would be lead off to jail! These people are truly sick- they feed on the ignorance and fear of their followers. In my state last year, they helped defeat an anti-bullying bill that would have protected