• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Do Baha'is honestly believe a person can not be gay?

GabrielWithoutWings

Well-Known Member
How is it intolerant to have a standard and then enforce it?

I would pull a Godwin here, but I won't.

It isn't unfair to ask people not to act on their urges when those urges run contrary to the goal or standard set. Hell, is it unfair for government agencies to tell their operatives who work in top-secret settings not to go talk about it? Even though they may have the urge to do so?

1. If the goal or standard set includes enforcing prejudice on people that do not inflict direct harm upon anyone else, then the goal or standard set is wrong and needs to be changed.

2. Operatives who work for government agencies usually have a choice in the matter. Gay people don't.

If someone wishes to be a part of a group or adhere to a certain lifestyle that has certain defined practices and restraints that define it, then you cannot say it is unfair to limit the person in anyway that it limits anyone. It presume that there is a universal definition of how things should be and what is fair and that all things in the world must ascribe to such a definition.


How is it not biased when it comes from a particular perspective?

1. Very true. However, do NOT call yourself a 'progressive, new revelation' when you're espousing and promoting the same old tired song. Don't say you're all inclusive to women, then try and justify how women can't be elected to the UHJ. Don't say that you're for promoting family values and tolerance when you don't allow gay people to have a family of their own.

2. There is a universal definition of how things should be. It's called being excellent to each other.
 
Last edited:

jimdand

New Member
What a provactive post.

No "organized" religion, that I know of accepts homosexuality. Not Christians, nor Jews, nor (particurlaly) Islam. That would certainly includes the Buha'i faith.

We (those of us who are gay) are people whom were given a different path in life to follow. We fall under a different star.

Our heterosexual counterparts are very comfortable in their (lives) and ability to accomplish the prescripts set forth against homosexuality. How nice for them.

Unfortunately, that flies into the face of reality. Since (and I will quote classical history) --- men and women, in the days of Christ's time, have been (some 20%) "gay" or bi-sexual. That equation has never changed. Today, some 20% of the men and women in this world are gay or bi-sexual.

The news gets even worse ---- in the future --- some 20% of the men and women in this world will be gay or bi-sexual. That equation will never change.

Do you know what I find most interesting? We are supposed to be "advanced" in social attitudes.

Yet, in antiquity, no Roman Province ever looked down upon homosexuality or bi-sexuality. It was always accepted as a "natural" phenomonon of life. In fact, most Roman Emperors were well known to have engaged in same-sex activity.

Yet, here we are, in the 21st Century, wherein no man is allowed to "look upon another man".

My. How we have PROGRESSED in social attitudes ?--- or have we regressed? One has to wonder. Of course, once must possess a Cerebrum.

Therefore, one has to wonder, to answer your post: Is Baha'i the faith you want to aspire to --- or, do you choose your own destiny and "pray from a closet"? If you do, then you will surely find the Gates of Heaven.

To remind those of you, who are Chirstians in belief: Jesus gave up his life to protect the disenfranchised ---- those whom were excluded from participating in Judaism --- the Great Temple of Jeruselem, because they were "impure".

Perhaps, you who posted this: you might consider Wicca (the "old" religion). Therein, there is no discrimination. You would accepted as just whom you are.

Finally. Love conquers all. It is through love that we learn to understand, accept and forgive (those of us) who have "short-comings" ----- and can't "be" like everyone else.

If, you, indeed, "love" thy fellow person, whether gay, straight, bi-sexual --- or whatever --- it is then that you are enlightened. If it is you who "hate" those whom are different? Then, let's see just whom will be welcomed unto the Gates of Paradise. You have a nasty surpirise waiting for you --- and you won't like it.

You got it. It's the gays. Because G-d / Allah protects the innocent, those whom can't help what they are --- and are simply given the path in life that HE gave to --- NOT YOU.

The only person you're fooling, is yourself.

Have a nice Sunday brunch at your local Church, Temple or Mosque. I hope you enjoy it.

Except ---- you're not going where you thought you were. You'll be down shoveling coal with the politicians and lawyers under "Old Harry's" watch. And yu know who he is.
 
doppelgänger;2364695 said:
Right. I just wish the Baha'i Faith would quit misrepresenting their religion as being inclusive of differing perspectives or in any way relativistic, or open to personal interpretation. It's dishonest.

The religion is exclusivist and intolerant of dissent. Just be honest and own it Baha'i friends.

Not to be a female dog about this, but...

The Baha'i Faith is the proper noun, like Islam is the proper noun for the Islamic religion. :D

But yeah, I do see your point. I think it is silly that Haifan Baha'is have used the 'liberal' face to attract followers, but they do it for their 'Entry By Troops' ideal.
 
How is it intolerant to have a standard and then enforce it?

It isn't unfair to ask people not to act on their urges when those urges run contrary to the goal or standard set. Hell, is it unfair for government agencies to tell their operatives who work in top-secret settings not to go talk about it? Even though they may have the urge to do so?

I guess many of us are liberal dissidents and heretics. :D

How is it not biased when it comes from a particular perspective?

Because just like the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Haifan Baha'i Faith controls much of its information and tries to only present a positive 'faith-promoting' history.

Any form of criticism in the fundamentalist Baha'i Faith is condemned and strongly discouraged.
 
What a provactive post.
No "organized" religion, that I know of accepts homosexuality. Not Christians, nor Jews, nor (particurlaly) Islam. That would certainly includes the Buha'i faith.

Unitarian Universalism accepts gay and lesbian members, and has always done so.

Hinduism historically has also accepted homosexuality, and Buddhism has been rather quiet about it.
 

Rainbow Mage

Lib Democrat/Agnostic/Epicurean-ish/Buddhist-ish
No "organized" religion, that I know of accepts homosexuality. Not Christians, nor Jews, nor (particurlaly) Islam. That would certainly includes the Baha'i faith.

Actually that's incorrect. Lots of religions accept homosexuality, maybe just not ones you've come into contact with.
 

Wombat

Active Member
The point is that we adhere to our scriptures..

That's great Bruce...because the Baha'i scriptures declare "Justice is the Best Beloved of All Things"

So perhaps you could do me (and the readers/potential enquirers) the very small justice of answering the pertinent questions and explaining >how< the Baha'i community does real justice when someone in the community is accused of being an active homosexual?

Would you care to explain the Baha'i Fair Due Process proceedings by which it is determined if a Baha'i is in an active homosexual relationship or not?

How, >exactly<, is it determined that a Baha'i is actively Gay and in "violation" of this "Baha'i law" prior to being "deprived of administrative rights"?

and like it or not, these clearly PROHIBIT homosexual acts.

Yes, you have said that. Yes, we understand that.

Having "PROHIBITED homosexual acts" how does/how is the Baha'i community going to enforce this "PROHIBITION" and this "Baha'i law"?...By catching homosexuals >in the act<?

Seriously Bruce...There's not much point having a prohibition/law against something you cannot prove is going on.

The LSA or community member says- "They are a Gay couple"...the accused say- "Hey...We just share a House/Appartment...back off".

Now what Bruce?

We are not about to go against our scriptures merely to placate some current popular position.

Are you/Baha'is prepared to go against the scriptures in denial of basic common justice principles?

And as I indicated, anyone who chooses to remain chaste is most welcome to continue as a Baha'i regardless of whether he/she is homosexual or heterosexual.


That's great Bruce...how does the LSA/community determine if the couple in the house "remain chaste" or not?

Its a simple, basic, pertinent question that goes to the core of Baha'i scripture/principles so that they are not seen to be "overturned".
 

Wombat

Active Member
I guess many of us are liberal dissidents and heretics. :D .

Just as long as you’re not a ‘Cormorant Baker’!
http://bahaisonline.net/tcb/
Cos then I would have to ‘Shun’ you! :slap:



Because just like the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Haifan Baha'i Faith controls much of its information and tries to only present a positive 'faith-promoting' history..

"Control" up to and including legal proceedings (failed) to control use and owership of the very word 'Baha'i'-

Breakaway Baha'i can still use name. The Spokesman-Review, November 26, 2010
[URL="http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/nov/26/in-brief-drug-agents-fin..."]www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/nov/26/in...[/URL]

Federal appeals court rules in favor of splinter Baha'i group
Orthodox believers can keep calling themselves Baha'i, court says

November 25, 2010 By Manya A. Brachear, Tribune reporter
articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-11-25/n...
www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/11/fede...
Opinion of US 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Case No. 08-2306 - November 23, 2010
[URL="http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/US_7th_Circuit_Court_of_Appe..."]www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/US_7th...[/URL]


Any form of criticism in the fundamentalist Baha'i Faith is condemned and strongly discouraged.

Nay...Any form of questioning, critique or advocasy of basic justice principles >in or regarding the Baha'i community< is taken to be criticism of and attack upon the Baha'i Faith by the fundamentalist Baha'is... such critique or questioning is condemned and strongly discouraged by declairing the advocate an "Enemy of the Faith"....and "Spiritual Poison".

I'm a bit of a female dog about getting these matters precise :D


 

Wombat

Active Member

BruceDLimber

Well-Known Member
doppelgänger;2364695 said:
Right. I just wish Baha'i would quit misrepresenting their religion as being inclusive of differing perspectives or in any way relativistic, or open to personal interpretation. It's dishonest.

It's not the least dishonest because the Baha'i scriptures state that each individual may investigate truth and have his or her own perspective, clearly recognize other religions, and also state that EVERYTHING in this life is relative! Quotes upon request, and there's no "misrepresentation" whatever!

Bruce
 

BruceDLimber

Well-Known Member
Are you/Baha'is prepared to go against the scriptures in denial of basic common justice principles?

We are not "going against them" in the least.

You're merely trying to apply cafeteria-style religion in picking and choosing which sections you do and don't accept, a style we reject!

how does the LSA/community determine if the couple in the house "remain [sic] chaste" or not?

It doesn't.


And your question makes clear that you obviously don't understand how we operate and what we do and don't have happening, which means your complaints fall under the classical definition of prejudice ("pre-judging"), yet another prohibition in our scriptures.

Bruce
 
Last edited:
Just as long as you’re not a ‘Cormorant Baker’!
http://bahaisonline.net/tcb/
Cos then I would have to ‘Shun’ you! :slap:

Thank you so much for the link! :D It's always refreshing to read from the breezes of inspiration of a liberal Baha'i ideal. :)

"Control" up to and including legal proceedings (failed) to control use and owership of the very word 'Baha'i'-

Breakaway Baha'i can still use name. The Spokesman-Review, November 26, 2010
[URL="http://www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/nov/26/in-brief-drug-agents-fin..."]www.spokesman.com/stories/2010/nov/26/in...[/URL]

Federal appeals court rules in favor of splinter Baha'i group
Orthodox believers can keep calling themselves Baha'i, court says

November 25, 2010 By Manya A. Brachear, Tribune reporter
articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-11-25/n...
www.chicagobreakingnews.com/2010/11/fede...
Opinion of US 7th Circuit Court of Appeals, Case No. 08-2306 - November 23, 2010
<A href="http://www.google.com/url?sa=D&q=http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/US_7th_Circuit_Court_of_Appeals_11-23-2010.html&usg=AFQjCNGlPfpL2YQjQe09x3u8ccDYLB1pow" target=_blank>[URL="http://www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/US_7th..."]www.fglaysher.com/bahaicensorship/US_7th... [/URL]

With this in mind, no one can ever 'trademark' the name Baha'i, and I think it is silly that the National Spiritual Assembly of the United States have tried to do so.

Nay...Any form of questioning, critique or advocasy of basic justice principles >in or regarding the Baha'i community< is taken to be criticism of and attack upon the Baha'i Faith by the fundamentalist Baha'is... such critique or questioning is condemned and strongly discouraged by declairing the advocate an "Enemy of the Faith"....and "Spiritual Poison".

I'm a bit of a female dog about getting these matters precise :D

That's true; questioning even the accuracy of the decisions made by the Universal House of Justice can lead to subtle accusations of going on 'Covenant-Breaker' websites.

:thud: Oh Baha'u'llah, what hast thou done... :(
 
And your question makes clear that you obviously don't understand how we operate and what we do and don't have happening, which means your complaints fall under the classical definition of prejudice ("pre-judging"), yet another prohibition in our scriptures.

Bruce

You are making it clear that you are ALREADY prejudging Wombat that he does not know how 'you operate' and 'what you do and don't have happening.'

Is it a little silly to assume, when I know that Wombat has been in the fundamentalist Baha'i community for years?
 

doppelganger

Through the Looking Glass
It's not the least dishonest because the Baha'i scriptures state that each individual may investigate truth and have his or her own perspective, clearly recognize other religions, and also state that EVERYTHING in this life is relative!
. . . and provided that this search for relative truth happens to lead them to the One Truth as officially approved for the Baha'i Faith, they are welcome to participate as full members . . . otherwise . . .

Who do you think you're fooling, Bruce?

If truth were relative, then you wouldn't be posting in defense of your religious institution stripping people of some of their rights to participate fully in the community because they hold differing opinions and practice when it comes to human sexuality.

So the misrepresentations continue . . .
 

TheKnight

Guardian of Life
1. If the goal or standard set includes enforcing prejudice on people that do not inflict direct harm upon anyone else, then the goal or standard set is wrong and needs to be changed.
Only if the goal.standard is an optional one. To believe in the Bahai faith is an optional thing. It's not a requirement. If someone wants to be a Bahai then they accept all the standards and goals that the Bahai's set to define themselves as Bahai.

If someone doesn't like it, then they shouldn't become a Bahai. No one is forcing them to believe in the Bahai faith.

2. Operatives who work for government agencies usually have a choice in the matter. Gay people don't.
Operatives can either work for the government or not work for the government but cannot change that they may know Top Secret information.

Gay people can either believe in a religious organization or not, but cannot change that they are gay. If you want to join an organization that has certain standards of behavior for its members then you have to accept those standards or decide not to be a member.

1. Very true. However, do NOT call yourself a 'progressive, new revelation' when you're espousing and promoting the same old tired song. Don't say you're all inclusive to women, then try and justify how women can't be elected to the UHJ. Don't say that you're for promoting family values and tolerance when you don't allow gay people to have a family of their own.
I'm not a Bahai.

2. There is a universal definition of how things should be. It's called being excellent to each other.

I don't accept any such universal definition. There is no universal definition. Especially not one espoused by anyone who can't force me to believe in it. Any idea which is universal must be accepted by everyone. If it isn't, then it isn't universal.

Because just like the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, the Haifan Baha'i Faith controls much of its information and tries to only present a positive 'faith-promoting' history.

Any form of criticism in the fundamentalist Baha'i Faith is condemned and strongly discouraged.

That doesn't answer my question. You simply went from one biased opinion to another.
 

Wombat

Active Member
We are not "going against them" in the least.

And yet, when it comes to &#8220;basic common justice principles&#8221; I could not find them applied, adhered to or even willingly discussed within the &#8216;Consultative&#8217; Baha&#8217;i community in twenty years.
Nor, since I came on the Net over a decade ago have I been able to find >any Baha&#8217;i< (your good self included) willing to openly/honestly discuss basic common justice principles and provision within the Baha&#8217;i community.
How is such disinterest in Fair Due Process >not< &#8220;going against&#8221; the principle of &#8216;Justice-Best Beloved of All Things&#8217;?

"You're merely trying to apply cafeteria-style religion in picking and choosing which sections you do and don't accept, a style we reject!"

Ah Huh...And on the &#8216;Principles Menu&#8217; of the &#8216;Cafe Baha&#8217;i&#8217; how many times does the Head Chef (Baha&#8217;u&#8217;llah) specifically
serve up &#8216;Justice&#8217; as an issue/principle?


Hundreds?...Thousands of times?....And how many times does He make clear and explicit reference to homosexuality? >NOT ONCE<.

Tell me again about &#8220;cafeteria-style religion in picking and choosing which sections you do and don't accept, a style we reject&#8221;.

Quote:
how does the LSA/community determine if the couple in the house "remain chaste" or not?

"It doesn't".

Thank you for devoting so much time, attention and informative detail to the questions I have thrice put before you Bruce. I am overwhelmed by the outpouring of &#8216;Independent Investigation of Truth&#8217; and &#8216;Consultative Principle&#8217; you display in the great warm justice you do the issue.

Slight problem with &#8220;It doesn't&#8221;-

&#8220;&#8220;This person should have it brought to his attention that such acts [homosexual] are condemned by Bahá'u'lláh, and that he must mend his ways, if necessary consult doctors and make efforts to overcome this affliction, which is corruptive for him and bad for the Cause. If after a period of probation you do not see an improvement, he should have his voting rights taken away." Letter written on behalf of Shoghi Effendi, letter dated 6/20/53 to NSA of Canada.&#8221;


Now...unless this individual was fornicating in public...it leaves the rational enquirer to conclude that the LSA/community >DOES< &#8220;determine&#8221; who is engaged in &#8220;such acts&#8221;, who must &#8220;mend his ways&#8221;, who must &#8220;consult doctors and make efforts to overcome this affliction&#8221; and who must be put on &#8220;a period of probation&#8221;.
Because Bruce...if, after all this medical treatment and probation &#8220;you [LSA/community] do not see an improvement&#8221; YOU MUST BE SEEING SOMETHING ON WHICH TO &#8220;DETERMINE&#8221;- &#8220;he should have his voting rights taken away&#8221;!!!
The LSA/Community must have some mechanism to &#8220;determine if he/a Baha&#8217;i couple have become/remained chaste or not&#8221;...otherwise how can they remove his/their voting rights?

The evasive &#8220;It doesn't&#8221; is clearly and obviously patently false.

"And your question makes clear that you obviously don't understand how we operate and what we do and don't have happening,"

With all the respect I can muster Bruce... &#8220;How Baha&#8217;is operate&#8221; and what you do has been so set and predictable for so long the pattern/technique is well documented-
The Baha'i Technique. (Compiled about eight-nine years ago)


1. As far as possible they hold back from responding.
[See all prior posts in which you repeatedly refuse to answer pertinent questions...all online Baha&#8217;i apologists employ evasion and refusal to answer pertinent questions as their primary tool.]

2. Then they claim no knowledge of the given issue by feigning ignorance

[&#8220;It doesn't.&#8221; qualifies as pleading &#8220;no knowledge&#8221; and &#8220;feigning ignorance&#8221; of something that is quite clearly transpiring- determination of who is Gay and not chaste prior to loss of voting rights]


2. After the exposer has exposed they will try to divert to secondary and totally peripheral and irrelevant side-issues.

[See all references to &#8220;cafeteria-style religion&#8221; etc that have >nothing to do< with the questions/issues raised but refused answer.


3. The exposer is then painted as someone with an axe to grind, biased, deluded (while they, the Baha&#8217;i, still have not responded to the main issue exposed)
[ I &#8220;obviously don't understand&#8221; I&#8217;m &#8220;prejudiced ("pre-judging")....and Bruce &#8220;still has not responded to the main issue exposed&#8221;

5. Next they relate mental instability and insanity to the exposer, i.e. shoot the messenger.
[Oh...there&#8217;s time yet....but already,in my &#8220;prejudice&#8221; I have sinned by breaching &#8220;yet another prohibition in our scriptures&#8221;...is 'bad' as good as 'mad'?]

6. Then, the last tactic, is to wheel out dubious personas on the scene who claim to be neutral Baha&#8217;i or non-Baha&#8217;i observers who then begin attacking the exposer as well as the issue exposed while supporting the Bahai&#8217;s and their issues as so-called neutral Baha&#8217;is or non-Baha&#8217;is
[Ditto...Wait and see ;-]
..............................................


I do understand how Baha&#8217;is operate Bruce...I understand that there is no way on God&#8217;s green Earth that you/any Baha&#8217;i are going to answer the pertinent questions re how the Baha&#8217;i community can determine if a Baha&#8217;i is Gay/chaste prior to removing Voting Rights.

&#8220;It doesn't&#8221; only reflects The Baha'i Technique-
1/ As far as possible they hold back from responding
 
Last edited:

Wombat

Active Member
Only if the goal.standard is an optional one. To believe in the Bahai faith is an optional thing. It's not a requirement..[/quote]

That depends on your moral/ethical conditioning and stance...there are some who believe that (wether they like it or not) they are obliged to embrace and hold to 'truth' and respond to appropriate 'authority'. If, being raised in the Baha'i faith or comming into it on the basis that it is 'true' and has 'authority' it is not " an optional thing". It is a "requirement" and a responsibility.

If they then discover that the Baha'i community is not true to the principles of the Baha'i Faith....then they have another requirement and responsibility.


If someone wants to be a Bahai then they accept all the standards and goals that the Bahai's set to define themselves as Bahai.

No...I'm sorry...>God< sets the "standards and goals" "to be a Bahai"-

‘Baha’i’- Follower of Baha’u’llah.

"To be a Bahai simply means to love all the world; to love humanity and try to serve it; to work for universal peace and universal brotherhood." -- Abdu'l-Baha

"You can be a Baha'i-Christian, a Baha'i-Freemason, a Baha'i-Jew, a Baha'i-Muhammadan" ('Abdu'l-Baha in London, p.97)

"the Bahai's set" only the membership and functioning of >the Baha'i community<.

The Baha'i Faith and the Baha'i community/Administrative Order >are not< one in the same thing.

If someone doesn't like it, then they shouldn't become a Bahai. No one is forcing them to believe in the Bahai faith.

Depends on what the "it" is that "someone doesn't like" if 'it' is a blatant injustice or disreguard for justice or a clear abrogation of Baha'i principles then why should they abandon their "faith" rather than seek to correct the injustice within the community?

"Gay people can either believe in a religious organization or not, but cannot change that they are gay."

Ah huh...And if you are fifteen years old, old enough to Declare your Baha'i faith, come from a three generation Baha'i family, your social circle is Baha'i, your friends are 'The Friends'- all declared Baha'i.........do you think at fifteen you >know< if you are Gay or not?

What I'm saying is that many young Baha'is find themselves deeply imeshed and comitted in and to both the Baha'i Faith and the Baha'i community- subsequently find they are Gay- are required (if they out themselves or are exposed) to undergo- "consult doctors and make efforts to overcome this affliction, which is corruptive for him and bad for the Cause. If after a period of probation you do not see an improvement, he should have his voting rights taken away"....and as you say and most Gays know- they "cannot change that they are gay."

I have watched young Gay Baha'is struggle with this horrid- man made/Baha'i Administrative predicament...I have watched grown men, members of the Baha'i National Spiritual Assembly live fearful of being 'outed'....it is not pleasant, it is not just....it is not necessary.

If you want to join an organization that has certain standards of behavior for its members then you have to accept those standards or decide not to be a member.

Or you seek to ensure that the "standards of behavior for its members" are fair, just, practical, compassionate, principled and workable.

And, once more I ask of anyone who can answer, if the organizations standards of behavior for membership can come down to- not just sexuality but >active< sexuality >how on earth< is any religious organization going to determine what is or is not taking place behind closed doors?
 

doppelganger

Through the Looking Glass
Only if the goal.standard is an optional one. To believe in the Bahai faith is an optional thing. It's not a requirement. If someone wants to be a Bahai then they accept all the standards and goals that the Bahai's set to define themselves as Bahai.

If someone doesn't like it, then they shouldn't become a Bahai. No one is forcing them to believe in the Bahai faith.
That is completely true. However, adherents to the Baha'i faith should not misrepresent that membership in the Baha'i community is open to persons who do not agree to adhere to dogmas and beliefs dictated from the political leadership of the faith.

It's certainly their prerogative to be intolerant and disrespectful of homosexuals. No doubt they aren't far removed from most of the world's major religious institutions on that issue either.

But I would really like to see people of the Baha'i faith stop habitually presenting it like it were UU or something, where people of differing faiths and values come together in community and understanding. Baha'i is, in fact, anything but that.

It's the half-truths and deceptions that have left a particularly bad taste to me. At least with other fundamentalists (whether Muslim, Christian, Hindu, etc.), they don't pretend you can go on a personal search for truth and still join them in their community regardless of what you find.
 
doppelgänger;2366620 said:
That is completely true. However, adherents to the Baha'i faith should not misrepresent that membership in the Baha'i community is open to persons who do not agree to adhere to dogmas and beliefs dictated from the political leadership of the faith.

It's certainly their prerogative to be intolerant and disrespectful of homosexuals. No doubt they aren't far removed from most of the world's major religious institutions on that issue either.

But I would really like to see people of the Baha'i faith stop habitually presenting it like it were UU or something, where people of differing faiths and values come together in community and understanding. Baha'i is, in fact, anything but that.

It's the half-truths and deceptions that have left a particularly bad taste to me. At least with other fundamentalists (whether Muslim, Christian, Hindu, etc.), they don't pretend you can go on a personal search for truth and still join them in their community regardless of what you find.

It is unfortunate. Many of the activities in the fundamentalist Baha'i community employ the core activities and other activities (the Ruhi book course, Anna's Presentation, Musical Firesides, Children's Classes), and even Devotionals and 'English Classes' as bait for 'seekers' or 'non-Baha'is' so as to become Baha'is. They are nothing short of preaching activities, and have left me feeling that we have potentially used such things, not as an outreach of goodwill, but to bring people into the organisation.

I seek a Baha'i Faith away from prejudice and discrimination, where I am tolerated and respected as a human being, and a citizen of the world of humanity. I love Baha'u'llah's teachings, and will always remain a core Baha'i in my heart, even if people disagree with me with my involvement in the Unitarian church, or otherwise.

I am not 'misrepresenting' the Faith. I am part of the Faith... I am NOT part of their Administrative Order, nor do I see it as a necessity for one to follow Baha'u'llah.


"O SON OF SPIRIT!

The best beloved of all things in My sight is Justice; turn not away therefrom if thou desirest Me, and neglect it not that I may confide in thee. By its aid thou shalt see with thine own eyes and not through the eyes of others, and shalt know of thine own knowledge and not through the knowledge of thy neighbor. Ponder this in thy heart; how it behooveth thee to be. Verily justice is My gift to thee and the sign of My loving-kindness. Set it then before thine eyes."

-- Hidden Words I:2
 
Top