Homosexuality and religious.

[dybmh]

A question I must ask. Are all the laws we are required to live by, by defualt discrimination?

It depends on the scope of the law and whom it applies to. In other words, it depends on who the "we" is in the question you asked.

 

[CG Didymus]

I wish people could bring themselves to consider the broader question of "unnatural" versus "uncommon."

It is very uncommon to be albino, but quite natural. It's somewhat uncommon to be left-handed, or have black hair and blue eyes, but quite natural. It's quite uncommon to be attracted to one's own gender, but no science has ever shown it to be unnatural -- and much science suggests the opposite.

Yes, this is supposed to be a person equal to Jesus or Buddha, a manifestation of God. He gets his information directly from an all-knowing Creator. And this manifestation says it is unnatural and forbids people from doing it.

So, how should a Baha'i interpret that? If that's really what they believe, it seems like if they should just and out and say it. That they should tell gays how wrong, how evil, how distorted, how sick their behavior is. But no, Baha'is are to love them and treat them no different than anybody else?

Then why don't Baha'is just take one more little step and say that it's okay to be gay. And say, "Homosexuality is fine with us. We don't condemn you. We don't think you're weird. You are wonderful exactly how you are." And then say, "We are working to unite all people in peace and harmony. We are against prejudices of all kinds. We believe all people are one no matter where they came from and what they believe. And we'd love to have you join us too and be part of the Baha'i family."

But I get the feeling that's exactly what they think they are saying.

 

[Evangelicalhumanist]

No, the trajectory was simply misunderstood.

I accept that if I am misunderstood in this forum, the problem must reside with me -- that I did not properly communicate what I intended. Or, when someone didn't understand me and asks for clarification, I will make my best effort to clarify.

So, when you ask about homosexual relationships not resulting in offspring, what point were trying to make, if all sexual relationships aren't necessarily about offspring?

 

[CG Didymus]

Unnatural
1. contrary to the ordinary course of nature; abnormal.
"death by unnatural causes"

https://www.google.com/search?q=unn...l2j0i512l5.5620j1j15&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8

Do you really want an anatomy lesson or discussion about the birds and bees?

Science and religion should agree? I guess not. You believe it is immoral and unnatural and that it is forbidden. Why? Because Baha'i Scripture says so.

 

[CG Didymus]

I am amazed people ask such questions.

But I will admit, I can never come to terms with such activity anyway, must be part of my nature and nurture.

My guess Nature and Nurture is a key to understanding this topic a lot better as well.

As I have a son who is gay, I have considered all this in deep reflection, he had great turmoil in the very important development years.

Regards Tony

Again and again and again... It is you Baha'is that say religious beliefs without the support of science can be nothing more than a superstitious belief. Where's the science? Does your son believe he is being immoral and going against nature?

 

[dybmh]

Even though Tony brought it up, I think it would be good to be gentle when asking questions about his son.

Thank you,

 

[CG Didymus]

I was going to cut and paste the question here.....

Stupid Questions

but my higher nature overcame my lower nature

Higher nature?

A Baha'i world view embraces science, reason and critical evaluation.

That's you saying that. So, asked this "very stupid" question.

Is there any science that you've come across that supports the Baha'i belief that homosexuality is unnatural?

Your guy says it unnatural. He has so scientific support? Maybe this is a stupid question, but maybe the Baha'i belief about homosexuality is one of those stupid and horrible superstitious religious beliefs? But what would I know?

 

[CG Didymus]

I would say that psychology is more relevant. In 1973 homosexuality was removed from the DMS as it was no longer considered a mental disorder.

Out of DSM: Depathologizing Homosexuality

Yet, Baha'is say this about homosexuality...

"To be afflicted this way is a great burden to a conscientious soul. But through the advice and help doctors, through a strong and determined effort, and through prayer, a soul can overcome this handicap."​

They say "afflicted", a "great burden", "though advice and help (from) doctors", a "soul can overcome this handicap." It sure sounds like Baha'is believe it is a mental disease.

 

[CG Didymus]

Even though Tony brought it up, I think it would be good to be gentle when asking questions about his son.

Thank you,

I think it's a very important question, because I don't think Tony really believes his son is evil or mentally sick for being gay. I would hope he accepts his son as being normal. But then how does he reconcile that with his religious beliefs? So, what does a parent do? Take the side of their child or their religion?

 

[CG Didymus]

CG - I just read this, it is not that long. It really answer all the issues. It was guidance for American Baha'i, but is applicable for all Baha'i.

The Baha’i Teachings and Homosexuality

Regards Tony

Yes, I saw that today. Like I said in another post, Baha'is are only one small step away from accepting gays as being normal. Too bad it's an infallible law, huh?

 

[CG Didymus]

That is very untrue statement CG.

In fact the investigation really just begins when one signs that card. Enough was known when signing that card, to have Faith, that what we will seek, we will find.

But that independent investigation, unfortunately, stopped when they signed their declaration card. From that point on they have to believe it all or they are not true believers.

Well, I think it is true for some Baha'is. Once they declare themselves Baha'is, they are expected to believe everything the Baha'i Faith teaches. The investigating whether it is true or not has ended.

 

[CG Didymus]

I knew you would answer that well.

Again, why do Baha'is even pretend that science and religion must go hand and hand. Homosexuality being immoral and unnatural are perfect examples of what could very well be a "superstitious" religious belief. How would we go about testing that?

 

[F1fan]

Yet, Baha'is say this about homosexuality...

"To be afflicted this way is a great burden to a conscientious soul. But through the advice and help doctors, through a strong and determined effort, and through prayer, a soul can overcome this handicap."​

They say "afflicted", a "great burden", "though advice and help (from) doctors", a "soul can overcome this handicap." It sure sounds like Baha'is believe it is a mental disease.

As we know the Abrahamic religions have been prejudical over the millennia, and this attitude has been largely adopted by societies outside the East. I think this is especially true since the Abrahamic religions are massively patriarchal, and I think that idea of "male" had a certain image. Homosexuality would no doubt be in conflict with this masculine ideal.

I am confident that Baha'u'llah just adopted this attitude. Would he be able to spread his teachings if he accepted gays in the 19th century? Doubtful. So the leadershi ever since has had to shape what and how Bahai believe, and that is to vilify gays.

It's interesting. I'd be curious how the Bahai leadership has changed their doctrines over time to better conform to modern attitudes. Do you know when the bit you quoted was written?

 

[CG Didymus]

Since homosexuality has been demonstrated to occur in multiple species, the prospect is very dubious.

Yeah, I think religious people are saying that because his thing goes in the girl's little thing and squirts some stuff and a baby starts to grow... that is natural. For a girl to go down on another girl, or a guy to do stuff with his thingy to another guy, what's the purpose. That won't make a baby. So, those things aren't "natural" or they are not nature's way of making babies. Or something like that.

 

[dybmh]

Yet, Baha'is say this about homosexuality...

"To be afflicted this way is a great burden to a conscientious soul. But through the advice and help doctors, through a strong and determined effort, and through prayer, a soul can overcome this handicap."​

They say "afflicted", a "great burden", "though advice and help (from) doctors", a "soul can overcome this handicap." It sure sounds like Baha'is believe it is a mental disease.

Please don't forget, that statment was compiled by the UHJ in 1993 almost 30 years ago. A lot has progressed in Gay rights since then.

 

[dybmh]

I think it's a very important question, because I don't think Tony really believes his son is evil or mentally sick for being gay. I would hope he accepts his son as being normal. But then how does he reconcile that with his religious beliefs? So, what does a parent do? Take the side of their child or their religion?

Yes, it's an important question, but, it could have been asked better, imo. To answer your question, I think a parent does the best they can in that difficult situation.

 

[Vinayaka]

Yeah, I think religious people are saying that because his thing goes in the girl's little thing and squirts some stuff and a baby starts to grow... that is natural. For a girl to go down on another girl, or a guy to do stuff with his thingy to another guy, what's the purpose. That won't make a baby. So, those things aren't "natural" or they are not nature's way of making babies. Or something like that.

As you and I both know, this homosexual thingamajigger is only the tip of the iceberg when it comes to contradictions within the Baha'i faith. Even if the nine men of the UHJ did decide to allow gay marriage (what a revolt that might cause, eh?) there are so many other issues to address, like infallibility, distorted statistics, singular focus on proselytizing, covenant breakers and shunning, gender equality, and more that it might not help much at all. But who knows, the troops may be arriving as we speak.

 

[F1fan]

Yeah, I think religious people are saying that because his thing goes in the girl's little thing and squirts some stuff and a baby starts to grow... that is natural. For a girl to go down on another girl, or a guy to do stuff with his thingy to another guy, what's the purpose. That won't make a baby. So, those things aren't "natural" or they are not nature's way of making babies. Or something like that.

Early religious people had zero science to work with. All they had was basic trial and error, and observations over time. They knew reproduction in animals and humans was male/female. They assumed God created things this way. I will bet they put seious prohibitions on sex because women were being raped, and always pregnant. A lot of death came to women and babies giving birth, so no doubt they had to be careful about it. Homosexuality would be a solution, but again what were they going to do with allowing that? Gay folks are a rare category.

 

[CG Didymus]

It is basically between the individual and God.

There's been links to a gay Baha'i who got reported. Did take a look at them?

 

[TransmutingSoul]

It depends on the scope of the law and whom it applies to. In other words, it depends on who the "we" is in the question you asked.

Any law of any Nation, the we are those that follow a law.

Regards Tony