samtonga43
Well-Known Member
I would have thought that a religion for this age would communicate its message in the language of today's people. Why 17th Century English?
-
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!
Homosexuality and religious.
- Thread starter Spirit of Light
- Start date
Sgt. Pepper
All you need is love.
You stated the reason why I posted a special message (read here) to @Evangelicalhumanist the other day. I truly feel for him, knowing that he has been reading what I perceive to be pernicious homophobic sentiment in this thread. I think the sentiment is shameful.
There is great irony in deciding who should have rights and who shouldn't. But to their credit, despite lots of racial discrimination style language in the leaders in past decades, they seem to have eliminated that aspect of discrimination.
I am sorry for your loss. My father is the closest person I can relate to. Mom died from Alzheimer's and he was in a poor state for awhile there. It does happen to all married folks, one of the spouses, unless they die together in something like a car accident. Best wishes.Thanks. No, I don't think anyone can imagine it unless it happens to them. I am like a sinking ship doing everything I can to stay afloat.
That would interest me as well.
The list of previous prophets before Baha'u'llah most certainly has no atheists in it. The 'unity of mankind' idea forgets about lots of folks ... a large chunk of my religion, Hinduism, all the indigenous faiths, and of course, atheists. Just google Baha'i + atheism for more.
I agree with this. I don't recall ever hearing anything about it but its name until coming to RF. I was surprised to see how many westerners like yourself it had attracted
Does that make sense to you - skeptics never mention the Baha'i faith until they do?
Nobody posting on RF appears to have a vendetta against the Baha'i faith or its adherents. What you have been seeing is a negative reaction to some Baha'i doctrine and to the willingness of the Baha'i to accept it without challenge, and for many, to defend it. Also, to compound the problem, such people appear to reject the doctrine in their own lives, yet still carry water for an ideology that embraces a destructive, irrational doctrine.
I believe THAT is what is so interesting here. Yes, Baha'i are already politely silent in Western culture, which antitheists believe is the proper behavior for ALL religions in a secular society. My objection is to faith in general, and the effect it has on people. This thread has been an excellent opportunity to examine that. Like I said, I think the Baha'i posting here are generally decent people, but this doctrine has had a damaging effect on them, the same one we see in the antichoice Christians - zero expression of empathy for the targeted demographic, whether that be homosexuals in a homophobic world or pregnant women. Irrational, destructive doctrine seems to strip people of the capacity for that, and not just the religious. We see this problem with empathy coming from the gun people and the anti-mask people as well - an appalling lack of compassion for others.
But those were never good people, unlike the Baha'i here. They're like the prominent members of Congress who seem to hate everything, who have nothing nice or constructive to say ever. The Baha'i aren't like that. They seem kind, gentle, optimistic and constructive. Yet there is that lack of empathy carved out for homosexuals due to destructive religious doctrine. If the Baha'i faith were its only source, then there would be no systemic homophobic bigotry. As you noted, the Baha'i simply don't affect Western culture. The harm of that religion is limited to its adherents, especially the handful of known homosexuals they encounter such as those in the video provided here.
So you consider it a vendetta against Baha'i to object to this? Isn't that an example of how that faith actually affects people? Here you are defending it, when without it, I am sure that you would be taking an empathetic position toward homosexuals rather than posting STD data in furtherance of a destructive religious doctrine. I call this the Mother Teresa effect of some religions - making good people worse. Her church convinced her that letting the dying poor suffer was a blessing from Jesus, and to continue fraudulently collecting donations to ease their suffering that would never be spent on them. That's how you turn a spiritual genius into something less. And I see the same thing in this thread - otherwise good people defending the bad because of their religious faith.
And I object. Strenuously. I will denounce this doctrine and those carrying water for it. I object to what it has done to those who condone it whatever their faith, and what they in turn do to others. Why? Because it's the right thing to do, and I don't have any faith-based doctrine asking me to do otherwise. I hope you will notice how many apparently decent and intelligent people agree with this attitude, and ask yourself why. Are you on the right side of this moral issue?
The Baha'i say that they exist to promote world unity, but who's actually doing that here? What are the Baha'i on this thread doing to promote unity, and what are the critics of its homophobic doctrine doing? Who's working for tolerance? Who's promoting love - the ones with the platitudes and accusations of vendetta, or the ones arguing against religious bigotry?
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
Also "If two men among you are guilty of lewdness, punish them both".
So you believe that practicing homosexuals should be punished.
Well, he was wrong there. Much of sharia is derived from the sunnah, which is the example of Muhammad. Homosexuals are sentenced to death because Muhammed sentences them to death. Same with stoning adulterers.
The Quran says they should be punished. Muhammad sentenced them to death. Muhammad was god's infallible messenger. Therefore god approves of killing homosexuals.
QED.
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
What's that supposed to mean? Do you think gay people generally make unwanted advances to other men/women?
KWED
Scratching head, scratching knee
You don't seem to understand how Islam works. It is not just the Quran. It is also the sunnah of Muhammad. Much of the detail of Islamic practice and law comes from the sunnah. The Quran doesn't even specify the five daily prayers. Are you claiming that Islam therefore does not require five daily prayers?
The Quran says to obey Allah and his messenger. The Quran is Allah's word, the sunnah is Muhammad's.
Oh I forgot, when you post your beliefs in a discussion you're not claiming it's true, even though you are stating your beliefs as if they are true.
It casts doubt on the belief that baha'u'llah is an actual prophet, or messenger from a God. It creates a huge dilemma, why would God create gays and then condemn gays?
It's more likley that Baha'u'llah was prejudiced and wrote his prejudice into his dictates from God.
Or God is cruel and a bigot.
That's OK because believers always adjust their God to fit what they believe. No doubt many good Bahai are struggling to be decent people but also accept that they have to prejudice against gays, as God demands.
If a decent Bahai wants to ignore this prejudice, and accept gays having intimate repationships, then they are dismissing what God says and will have to manage that themselves in their own heads. The best approach is keep it a secret (as if God wouldn't know) and carry on as if you are prejudiced. But still Bahai would have to engage with other Bahai who are fine with being prejudiced and condemning gays, as God commands.
To my mind Baha'u'llah was a product of his time and adopted this prejudice with most everyone else. And he didn't allow Bahai any escape from the prejudice. Bahai have no choice but to adopt a prejudice against gays. Looking at some of the rules, he's not a nice God. He's nice if you follow the rules, but if you step out of line....... watch out.
And what does God do personally? Nothing. He leaves the punishment to believers. Almost as if the God doesn't exist.
This is just not consistent. We understand that gays were prejudiced against by societies all through the 1990's and they started getting acceptance after that. Is it that God created gays, then condemned them, and that is a loving thing to do?
It's more likely your prophet adoped a prejudice and included it in his dictates, and is using God as window dressing. What would it take for Bahai to change their minds (law) against gays? You say God can change the law, but God isn't interacting with you folks. Would you accept anyone who claims to be a messenger? How would you guys know? You would have to wonder what the hell is wrong with God that he changes his mind all of a sudden about a law that has been acted on for over a century. Damn. What will God change next? And why didn't God foresee this?
I understand you want to dump all the accountability on God, and just claim you have no choice, you are just following orders. But you ignore that yu have a choice. If you are a good person why do you need an ideology at all? Are you truly less of a spiritual being if you don;t identify as a Bahai? And you are stuck having to defend bigotry, regardless how you try to soften it.
This illustrates that you fear the Bahai authority (who represent the strict God laws) but think you can get away with it from God knowing. I suspect you are an atheist who likes being a theist. You don't seem to believe a God exists, but like to talk about God as if it does. I suspect many theists are the same, they really don't really fear God, they fear the hierarchy of their religion. The absent God does nothing. The hierarchy does, and can do what they want to their followers.That's if they find out about it.
I hope you can see what this thread is doing to me.
Right. And it won't be God coming forth to announce a change in the laws, it will be another human being. And how does that flawed human who God doesn't seem worthy of contacting directly know who is genuine and who is a false prophet? I've heard it explained, but we are still dealing with fallible believers who are prone to errors of judgment.
Sgt. Pepper
All you need is love.
Yes, the Bible indicates that God is capable of hate. In fact, the Bible says that God hated Esau.
Sheldon
Veteran Member
It's beyond tedious to explain each time she does this, that a belief is the acceptance that something is true. If someone claims to believe something, they are claiming it is true, that is precisely what it means.
I agree that some of our teachings are difficult for
I think one way of understanding others beliefs was described beautifully by Rumi.
The truth was a mirror in the hands of God. It fell, and broke into pieces. Everybody took a piece of it, and they looked at it and thought they had the truth..
It’s up to them if they are happy being a Baha’i with laws they disagree with. There’s no point in staying a Baha’i if you’re not happy.
samtonga43
Well-Known Member
Is the point of religion to make one 'happy'?
But every Baha'i person could perfectly easily understand how immutable sexual orientation really is.
I confess, I've never had an honest answer from a heterosexual person to this thought experiment, but that doesn't mean they couldn't do it -- if they wanted to, if they really sought understanding.
And that thought experiment is simply to ask yourself, "if I were commanded to change my sexual orientation, how would I do it, could I even accomplish it?" I do not mean just to give in an do it with an individual of your own gender a time or two. I mean really to want a person of your own gender, for the rest of your life, and when seeing a member of the opposite gender (to which you are presently oriented) -- even naked -- to experience no desire, and perhaps even just a little revulsion.
And if they really, really thought about it, they could only answer, "I couldn't do it." And of course they couldn't. nobody expects that they could.
But it is what they expect of gay people like myself.