Homosexuality and religious.

[ppp]

Marriage between a man and a woman is not forbidden.
Any other kind of marriage is forbidden.

In Baha't society, yes. I already said that, and you said that I was wrong.

 

[ppp]

Agreed. You've probably seen comparisons of equality and equity. Equality is closer to everybody gets the same thing, whereas equity is closer to each gets what he needs. Forbidding abortion to all is equality. Forbidding same sex marriage to all is equality:

While that is true, I balk at that a little... because the common usage of 'equality' in terms of equal access to rights is as defined by the equity illustration. And the people who are arguing the contrary are almost inevitably making bad-faith arguments. But yes, I agree with your semantics (in the real sense of the word).

 

[loverofhumanity]

I said expression of affection not limited to sex are prohibited. You do realize the two people in love express affection in all sorts of ways that are not sexual, right? Including marriage. Why focus on the sex?



I have heard this before. The law applies to all except that the marriage can only be between people of the allowed race, sex, gender, religion, caste, chin shape, etc. What you have is a law that is intentionally crafted to exclude a group of people from enjoying the solace of marriage. You are adopting the position of Virginia in Loving vs Virginia.


Well, you adopt the language of equality, but when it comes to your words, and the impact of your laws what you practice is indeed discrimination.

Nature is like that too. It discriminated against men by only permitting women childbirth but nobody complains because that’s the way the world was made. So nature deliberately excluded men from certain roles for the perpetuation of the human race and so marriage between men and women is for a very important purpose other than pleasure. No discrimination in perpetuating the human race. You wouldn’t exist if you didn’t have both a mother and father.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Comparing homosexuality to child abuse is always a good look.

But anyway, so you admit that Bahaism is prejudicial towards homosexuals, despite your claims that it isn't.

No comparison. It’s just that both fall under immorality as does adultery and sex before marriage.

 

[Aupmanyav]

This a clear instruction to obey what God has revealed through the Messenger, even if what was revealed makes no sense to us.

In other words, 'FOLLOW ME BLINDLY'.

How I think and feel about homosexuals is an entirely different matter.

If you are a Bahai, you cannot think differently. That is forbidden.

You wouldn’t exist if you didn’t have both a mother and father.

And what is the harm if a certain small percentage of people do not do that? I forget the name of a Bahai member here who has stated in this very topic that he/she is married to a transgender (I can find it out by going through the earlier posts). They will not have any children between them.

 

[CG Didymus]

In my religion, God has no problem with homosexuality.

So, God tells some people it is okay and others to kill gays and with the Baha'i Faith that it is not natural, and they should seek help. The more I think about it, though, I think the real issue here is that some of us have been arguing/debating with Baha'is for months and even years. We can't prove there isn't a God, and they can't prove there is a God. But we can show that what their leader said is not supported by science. And that's important because Baha'is supposedly believe science and religion should agree... otherwise religion can become filled with superstitious beliefs. And the other important thing here is.... If he's really from God, then we're supposed to believe this stuff and follow it.

So, does science agree with the Baha'i Faith? That being gay is a mental problem and they should seek help to overcome their problem. If not... Did the Baha'i prophet really get this from God, or did it come from his own head and is nothing but a superstitious, anti-science, religious belief? And if this quote is part of the teachings against homosexuality, then is does say "purge". Truly from God or just religious extremism?

Ye are forbidden to commit adultery, sodomy and lechery. Avoid them, O concourse of the faithful. By the righteousness of God! Ye have been called into being to purge the world from the defilement of evil passions.

 

[CG Didymus]

Yes God wanted to set up a society that was morally pure in many ways and the laws were a way to achieve that.

He couldn't get people to obey his moral code even with the threat of being stoned to death. There are probably not many other sins that are broken as much as the sexual sins. Then, if we add in just thinking about it is like committing it, then it might be the number most often broken law of God.

 

[CG Didymus]

Happiness is completely subjective. There's no way to answer such a question and therefore no reason to pursue it further.

Something doesn't seem right about expecting people to see some other person and not have any desires to want to make love to them. But that's what some religions do expect. And then they say that is what God expects of them?

 

[CG Didymus]

What is being "flagrantly homosexual"?
And why should a person be disenfranchised for it?
Can people lose their right to vote for being "flagrantly heterosexual"?

Why is homosexuality against Bahai laws?

So, the Baha'i Faith is okay with anything that a person does in private? Why don't I believe that.

 

[CG Didymus]

I accept the teachings of Baha’u’llah because I believe they are from God. And I believe God knows more than you or I about what is best for us as humans. And in His wisdom He has said that marriage between a man and woman is what is best for humanity so I do not consider myself more knowledgeable than God and have been happily married to a wonderful lady for about 43 years.

200 years ago, what laws of God would you follow? I would assume a Baha'i looking back in time would say the laws of Islam. So, how many wives did God allow then. Did those laws abrogate the laws of previous laws of God given to earlier manifestations? If so, then the world, to be truly following God should have obeyed those laws? And exactly how many wives does God allow now under the Baha'i laws?

 

[Trailblazer]

In other words, 'FOLLOW ME BLINDLY'

No, Baha'u'llah said the exact opposite of that.

“Bahá’u’lláh asked no one to accept His statements and His tokens blindly. On the contrary, He put in the very forefront of His teachings emphatic warnings against blind acceptance of authority, and urged all to open their eyes and ears, and use their own judgement, independently and fearlessly, in order to ascertain the truth. He enjoined the fullest investigation and never concealed Himself, offering, as the supreme proofs of His Prophethood, His words and works and their effects in transforming the lives and characters of men.”
Bahá’u’lláh and the New Era, p. 8

If you are a Bahai, you cannot think differently. That is forbidden.

I can think whatever I want to because I have free will to choose.
God gave us all free will so we could think for ourselves.

 

[ppp]

Nature is like that too

Why do so many theists try to justify their immoral behaviors by citing mindless objects and processes?

Judge: you think you were justified in electrocuting your neighbors.
You: Well nature electrocutes people too..
So yes!

Go read up on the naturalistic fallacy.

Just because nature can electrocute the neighbor kids does not mean that you are justified in electrocuting your neighbor.

 

[Trailblazer]

Something doesn't seem right about expecting people to see some other person and not have any desires to want to make love to them. But that's what some religions do expect. And then they say that is what God expects of them?

Something doesn't seem right about people having desires for sex and acting on these desires just because that have the desires. But that's what some people do. They don't care what God expects of them. All they care about is getting off. What Shoghi Effendi said about the spiritual low water mark is an understatement.

"In another letter on the Guardian's behalf, also to an individual believer, the secretary writes:

'Amongst the many other evils afflicting society in this spiritual low water mark in history is the question of immorality, and over-emphasis of sex…'

"This indicates how the whole matter of sex and the problems related to it have assumed far too great an importance in the thinking of present-day society.

'Such a chaste and holy life, with its implications of modesty, purity, temperance, decency, and clean-mindedness, involves no less than the exercise of moderation in all that pertains to dress, language, amusements, and all artistic and literary avocations. It demands daily vigilance in the control of one's carnal desires and corrupt inclinations.'

(From a letter of the Universal House of Justice to an individual believer, a copy of which was sent to the compiler with a letter dated March 8, 1981)

Lights of Guidance/Chastity and Sex Education - Bahaiworks, a library of works about the Bahá’í Faith

 

[ppp]

Something doesn't seem right about people having desires for sex and acting on these desires just because that have the desires.

What is actually not right about that?

 

[Trailblazer]

What is actually not right about that?

What is right about that?

 

[Truthseeker]

So for example Baha'i Houses of justice should not fine people who engage in homosexual sex acts neither now or at any stage in the future?

There's no way for us to tell now. I'm not going to pre-judge the Universal House of Justice based on my own opinion. Though my opinion is that homosexual acts would probably have a lesser penalty that adultery, since under Baha'i law homesexuals cannot marry each other, and heterosexuals can marry the opposite sex and have sex within the confines of marriage.

This may sound odd to you, but homosexuals might very well marry heterosexuals. This happened in my case. My wife Sara is gay, and I'm not. Our relationship is based not on sex but friendship and love.

 

[Truthseeker]

I don't understand why homosexuals should not engage in sex act, if sex in marriage union is OK? That is unfair to homosexuals and Allah's laws are always fair. Why should homosexuals be deprived from their small pleasures? Bahaollah was concerned only about pederasty, and I agree with him. If the participants are adults, I think it is OK.
I did not say anything about Bahaollah wanted to purge the world of homosexuals. No, I have never discriminated against LGBTQ. It is good that you have gone one step further by marrying one. In what way I lack understanding of Bahai morals?

I was not talking to you.

 

[YoursTrue]

There's no way for us to tell now. I'm not going to pre-judge the Universal House of Justice based on my own opinion. Though my opinion is that homosexual acts would probably have a lesser penalty that adultery, since under Baha'i law homesexuals cannot marry each other, and heterosexuals can marry the opposite sex and have sex within the confines of marriage.

This may sound odd to you, but homosexuals might very well marry heterosexuals. This happened in my case. My wife Sara is gay, and I'm not. Our relationship is based not on sex but friendship and love.

So there's no way to judge or tell within the Bahai religion if someone engages in homosexual actions (male or female)? I mean it's ok or permitted without restriction, censure, or restraint?

 

[Truthseeker]

You didn't understand any of my post, did you?
I'm sure it must be mere coincidence, but seems like every Bahai on here is strangely and blithely incapable of understanding simple concepts, and analogies are like Greek to them. If my field was sociology, I would apply for funding to conduct some studies. It is truly fascinating.

I noticed you didn't cite a passage where the world was to be purged of homosexuals.

 

[Brian2]

So you accept that in modern society where unmarried relationships are not vilified as immoral, marriage is not as important as commitment.

BTW, marriage is still a legal contract. Also, you can have legal contracts covering unmarried relationships and their offspring.

So all in all, I guess you are no longer so opposed to unmarried relationships?

I am not as opposed to unmarried relationships as some Christians and commitment is more important that a marriage certificate imo.