Homosexuality and religious.

[loverofhumanity]

it's unjust to require gay Baha'i men to be celibate

Just found an interesting quote.


“the Jewish people will become glorified to such an extent as to draw the jealousy of its enemies and the envy of its friends.” (Abdul-Baha)

 

[dybmh]

That only applies to Baha’is not others but Baha’i heterosexuals as well. But this is a personal matter of conscience between a person and God.

Hetrosexuals are not required to be celibate, Homosexuals are required to be celibate. That's unequal treatment, therefore it's unjust.

Further the notion that homosexuality is a spiritual affliction is superstitious.

"Baha’u’llah exhorts men to free their minds from the superstitions of the past and to seek independently for truth putting aside all dogmas. Religions are one. Let us banish creeds that the reality may become unveiled. In which sacred book do you find this?" – Abdu’l-Baha, Divine Philosophy, pp. 82-83

 

[Sheldon]

If i believed man's philosophy I might go along with the idea that homosexual behavior is ok.

Why you believe in homophobic claims is not relevant to the fact you're being homophobic by expressing them.

As a Christian, i believe what the Bible says about this.

Which is deeply homophobic, quoting it doesn't change the fact it contains homophobic texts.

Christians are directed to respect everyone.

You just disrespected gay people above by saying you don't believe homosexuality is ok, which is both homophobic, and violates this doctrinal claim.

 

[Sheldon]

The "different" opinion IS homophobic, you can't decry homosexuality and claim you're not homophobic, that's absurd. You may want to believe you're not being homophobic, but you certainly are, as your religion clearly is.

Keep going...
Sticks and stones may break my bones but words will never hurt me.

What possible relevance has that? I just pointed out that decrying or derogating homosexuality is homophobic, which you had denied. Trying to falsely play the victim is risible.

People have a choice whether they make homophobic statements, no one chooses their sexual orientation.

 

[dybmh]

Just found an interesting quote.


“the Jewish people will become glorified to such an extent as to draw the jealousy of its enemies and the envy of its friends.” (Abdul-Baha)

Look at that! Thank you!

 

[Sheldon]

Well that's clear as mud.

Maybe because your own eyes are what is full of mud...to see the truth each person has to wipe their own mud out of their eyes.

That irrational ad hominem fallacy doesn't address the glaring contradiction in your post. I suppose it's easier to attack me than address what I said, but it's also irrational.

You can't both stay out of politics and be involved. Do you know what the law of non-contradictin is?

↑
Religious teachers should not invade the realm of politics;
↑
where Baha'i institutions would become involved in government

 

[Sheldon]

Its crystal clear to me. For now Baha'is don't involve themselves with partisan politics. In the very distant future, should a clear majority of the world's population become Baha'i, the world may choose a Baha'i system of government.

That wasn't what claimed though, so this is shifting the goal posts.

 

[Sheldon]

If you knew what you were talking about you wouldn’t say those things. It just shows your ignorance about what religion is all about.

Ad hominem fallacy, instead of attacking and insulting me try addressing what I posted.

 

[Sheldon]

What you are referring to is not what religion teaches

Straw man fallacy, I never made the claim, merely extrapolated someone else's claim. Read the post and if you can grasp what was said and understand my response in that context, maybe you can avoid a slew of logical fallacies that don't address the content or point of my post.

 

[Trailblazer]

Then it's your problem. Pretending that the word has a different meaning won't make your problems go away.

No, it is your problem, and also the problem of @KWED and because you do not know the meaning of the word homophobic.

homophobic: having or showing a dislike of or prejudice against gay people.
homophobic means - Google Search

Just because Christians and Baha'is 'disapprove' of homosexual behavior that does not mean we have a 'dislike of or prejudice against gay people.'

I don't have a dislike of or prejudice against gay people.

What is the meaning of Matthew 7 1?

In this verse Jesus warns that one who condemns others will themselves be condemned. The rest of the Bible, including the very next verse, make clear that all manner of judgment is not being condemned.

Matthew 7:1 - Wikipedia

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

It’s a beautiful religion that some oppose only because of ignorance,

Baha'is homophobia is hardly beautiful. Of course, if one chooses to disregard the ugly parts, what's left may be upbeat.

You have a way of casting what we say in the worst possible light.

What's happening here is a challenge to Baha'is to reconcile their desire to be loving with doctrine that is not. It is the believer trying to depict the religion more favorably by downplaying the ugly parts. That's what you are calling the worst possible light. He's shining the light on inconvenient scripture and showing how it affects believers who think it has no damaging effect on their views of homosexuals. Of course that's uncomfortable, but that's inevitable in a process like this.

I will offer my wife and I have a son who has a male partner and we Love and support them both. Your posts are only insulting narrow minded bigotry.

That's to your credit. But if one defines bigotry - I define it as irrational and destructive beliefs about every member of a law-abiding demographic - and looks at the statements to which you will refer, he finds that they are accurate descriptions. His opinions are rational and constructive, apply to a religion (one cannot be bigoted against ideas - the words are irrationally biased or prejudiced). To see what bigotry looks like, refer to the scriptures that irrationally and destructively condemn all gay people for the crime of being gay. THAT'S bigotry, not the repudiation of homophobic bigotry.

It's not about whether you support your gay son. He knows that you belong to a religion that teaches that he is defective. What's he to think except that his dad tries not to subject him to those beliefs. I'll bet you treat him as well as any humanist would, the difference being that he believes that you think he is in rebellion to God's law.

It appears it is only you spouting this across RF.

No, decent people everywhere are calling out the homophobic religions. Isn't that what we're all doing here? Isn't that what I'm doing? Theists spouting homophobic religious beliefs or promoting religions are homophobia are on the wrong side of this aspect of the culture war between religion and humanism.

I don't think they are comparing them. Imo I think they are just simply saying they are all bad, immoral, etc.

saying two or more things are bad isn't comparing them(unless one says equally bad).

A fine point: Compare - "estimate, measure, or note the similarity or dissimilarity between." Note the word similarity there. When you put several items together in a group such as bad or immoral things, you are noting similarities.

Now consider this, a different understanding of compare, which includes ONLY noting similarities. Noting differences is called contrassting: "Comparing involves identifying similarities and/or differences (e.g., apples and oranges are both fruit) whereas contrasting involves comparing two or more objects or events in order to show their differences (e.g., an apple has a thin skin that we can eat; an orange has a thick skin that we cannot eat)."

It took it away yes, meaning in the past I was what could be seen as homophobic, the teaching both in Islam and Baha'i has removed those thoughts within me. It means I am no longer homophobic.

As you've been told by others, that's not what your words means to them, and that's the important point that all of the Baha'i posting here seem to be missing. Your feelings don't define whether your religion or your beliefs are seen as homophobic. It's also not credible what you claim. Your homophobic beliefs come from religion, albeit probably not this one, as you really haven't had time to be affected by its doctrine, and there is nothing about your religion that instructs you that homosexuals are normal, healthy people and usually law-abiding, hardworking, and good neighbors. Your religion teaches otherwise even if you don't know it. It teaches that they are somehow defective and undesirable. It's all over these pages in the words of several well-meaning Baha'i. They're sinners because God says so, and they harm society. Their existence is unnatural, as we are expected to have children, the definition of a family, and homosexuality cannot lead to conception.

Its not my call to say Islam and Baha'i faith helped me get rid of homophobia?

Correct. All you can say is how you feel, but it's not only one's feelings that make him homophobic. It's his beliefs as well. You harbor homophobic attitudes, and you promote a religion that contains homophobic doctrine. It's not a debate. It's a judgment others make. They decide if they find your words homophobic, not you.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I believe that homosexuality is a sexual aberration that is against nature

Yes, you do. Your religion teaches you that. Evidence is to the contrary. Homosexuality is widespread in nature - pretty much the definition of natural.

It is against God's Law because God considers homosexual behavior immoral. I do accept it and it makes sense to me, but I would accept it even it it made no sense to me.

But you have been unable to demonstrate why that belief makes sense. Let's change it to left-handedness. If your scriptures called that immoral, you would likely accept that as well, and also for no better reason than that it appeared in print in a place where you believe makes it correct. That's not it making sense. That's making it doctrine however irrational.

Yes, I know what it means. KWED was optimistic, meaning he was hopeful that he was right

I think I can shed a little light here. Optimistic and hopeful are different. Optimistic means expecting a desirable outcome. Hopeful means preferring it. Consider a baseball game that is 14-0 in the ninth inning. The fans of one team are optimistic of a win. The other fans are pessimistic. They know that a win is unlikely. But both are hopeful for the win.

It may not be against our animal nature but it is against our spiritual nature, Imo.

Once again, the evidence is to the contrary. Homosexuals are just as capable of spirituality and spiritual experiences as heterosexuals.

My point was that it takes a man and a woman to create a child.

I think that evolved from your point that a family has children.

The words and phrases appear in several quotes but not together on any one quote. You are cherry picking from the quotes in order to deliberately misrepresent the Baha'i Faith.

Yes, that is cherry picking. You seem to think that that is wrong. It's how we bring related ideas from a single source together for examination, including scripture, so that we can focus on them rather than the surrounding context that doesn't contribute to the discussion. Just yesterday, I was looking at an apologetics piece on what the Bible says about pedophilia. The author cited several scriptures that he thought were relevant. He left the rest of his Bible out. He cherry picked, and did us a favor in so doing. We were able to see his argument in a way that being handed a Bible wouldn't.

For your complaint to have any significance, one needs to show how the process distorts the truth, which means showing overlooked scripture that negates or significantly modifies the meaning of the cherry-picked ones.

Ask God, not me.

Didn't you say that your god calling homosexuality immoral made sense to you? If so, you would be able to say how. KWED is making the point that your beliefs are accepted blindly. You agreed that you were willing to do that, but didn't need to in this case because the reasons for this judgment made sense to you. I think he'd like you to see that your beliefs are held blindly and are destructive, but it doesn't appear that that will be possible, and it's not necessary for the effort to be of value even if not for you. This thread has clarified the Baha'i faith, the nature of the people drawn to it, and the effect it has on them for me. What I see is the Mother Teresa effect - good people being taught bad things by their religion, people that very much want to be good neighbors and do not want to harm the homosexual community, and who cannot see that their religion does that by convincing them that there is something unnatural and immoral about homosexuality.

You're not atheophobic, but many theists are. When I see their posting, I immediately recognize their religion speaking through them, a religion I already don't respect, and I add them to that list for being willing to think that about somebody like me so thoughtlessly. Such people also don't recognize how they harm atheists, or more properly, used to until they got a voice and began pushing back just like you are seeing in this thread. I'm a retired physician, and last practiced in rural Missouri, very conservative and very Christian. I would occasionally lose patients who discovered I was atheist. They simply considered me immoral and unfit to practice medicine. I didn't think much of them, either. That's what religion does. And you can be sure that those Christians would say that they held no malice for me, which I would believe. These were happy patients until their religious bigotry was activated. Religious homophobia is exactly the same thing as religious atheophobia - and religious misogyny. That judgment is not based in the bigot's feelings about his bigoted beliefs, but in the effect those beliefs have on how he views people.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

I meant that a man's sperm and a woman's egg are required to produce a child. It can be done remotely but that is not how God designed it to be done

We've improved on God's design many times, as with artificial joints and eyeglasses. Do you object to in vitro fertilization? That's not God's design, either, but I don't recall any theist objecting on the basis that the process is unnatural. It's not a compelling argument even if it IS applied consistently, but it's even less compelling if one is inconsistent applying it.

to act like the beasts of the field is unworthy of the station of man.

The station of man? Many people see it the other way around. Much of human behavior is unworthy of both humanity and the beasts.

calling people homophobes can hurt people.

More importantly, it helps other people. The idea is to push back on religious homophobia and make it increasingly less prevalent until it is gone. That's how we modify behavior. That's how the religions attempt to make homosexuals appear immoral, and it has worked, but at their expense. I don't think too many humanists are interested in the feelings of homophobes when they are rebuked.

I do not think homosexual behavior is a sign of inferiority

You've said that, but you've also said things that belie that.

Baha'i homosexuals are treated differently than non-Baha'i homosexuals who are not subject to Baha'i Laws.

If you think about why the Baha'i treat their own homosexuals differently than homosexuals outside of their religion, you might understand where the homophobia is. It's what powers that idea that such people need to be treated any way at all for their homosexuality. Humanists treat homosexuals the same whether they are humanist or Baha'i.

Saying that we consider them 'both bad' is not a comparison since nobody compared one to the other and said which is better or worse.

You might have seen my comment on this to We Never Know. This is a comparison as you have written it. And a judgment.

What do you think of this: "But the fearful, and unbelieving, and the abominable, and murderers, and whoremongers, and sorcerers, and idolaters, and all liars, shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone." - Revelation 21:8 I consider that a comparison. All of these kinds of people are the same in some respect, and different from those left out. And it is bigotry as I defined it to transmuting soul. It irrationally and destructively trashes several law-abiding demographics including one I belong to, unbelievers. We're comparable to whoremongers and murderers, even though it doesn't rank them, except to imply that we're all worse than law-abiding Christians.

The Baha’is do not believe in the suppression of the sex impulse but in its regulation and control.'

This is where you undermine yourself. Regulation and control are achieved by suppressing natural instincts. Also, Bahai's believe that homosexuals should suppress their sex impulses. You may want to argue this, because it just doesn't feel right to you or you can't see it, and that's fine, but hopefully you understand by now that that is irrelevant to those judging the Baha'i religion and its adherents. They don't have to agree, nor is it expected that they will, but they have a choice to recognize this and perhaps modify their language if they don't like the treatment they receive, or not, but they have no other input into how they are perceived and judged, and should get over the shock and resentment of having their homophobic doctrine called that, because I predict that it will never be any other way again.

 

[ppp]

No, it is your problem, and also the problem of @KWED and because you do not know the meaning of the word homophobic.

homophobic: having or showing a dislike of or prejudice against gay people.
homophobic means - Google Search

Even that simplistic definition encompasses Baha'i beliefs. But more completely...

Homophobia can take many different forms, including negative attitudes and beliefs about, aversion to, or prejudice against bisexual, lesbian, and gay people. It’s often based in irrational fear and misunderstanding. Some people’s homophobia may be rooted in conservative religious beliefs. People may hold homophobic beliefs if they were taught them by parents and families.

I don't have a dislike of or prejudice against gay people.

But you do have a Baha'i prejudice and aversion. And even if you don't personally deep down agree with it, you do support it, and you do shill for it. Which is ultimately what matters.

What is the meaning of Matthew 7 1?

I don't care. You want to convince me of something, then you had better come with something with a better moral grounding than the author of Matthew. That do not measure up to my standards.

 

[Trailblazer]

So the issue isn't Bahai laws, it is your own personal ideas of morality and decency then.
In which case, are you personally ok with homosexuality and homosexual sex and only support homophobia because you are told to. Or do you personally support homophobia, irrespective of Bahai laws.

IOW, if you were not a Bahai, would you still think homosexuality was an evil passion, shameful aberration, immoral, against nature, etc?

I do not know what I would think if I was not a Baha'i, because I never thought about homosexuality before I became a Baha'i in 1970.

I do not support homophobia and I am not homophobic.

homophobic: having or showing a dislike of or prejudice against gay people.
homophobic means - Google Search

Just because Baha'is 'disapprove' of homosexual behavior that does not mean we have a 'dislike of or prejudice against gay people.'

I don't have a dislike of or prejudice against gay people.
Likewise, I disapprove of alcoholic behavior, like driving drunk, but I do not have a dislike of or prejudice against alcoholics.

 

[Trailblazer]

You claimed that Bahaism encourages giving up things that feel good.

I never said that, not even once. In fact, I said the exact opposite.

“Should a man wish to adorn himself with the ornaments of the earth, to wear its apparels, or partake of the benefits it can bestow, no harm can befall him, if he alloweth nothing whatever to intervene between him and God, for God hath ordained every good thing, whether created in the heavens or in the earth, for such of His servants as truly believe in Him. Eat ye, O people, of the good things which God hath allowed you, and deprive not yourselves from His wondrous bounties. Render thanks and praise unto Him, and be of them that are truly thankful.”
Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 276

God has allowed sex in accordance with the Law, and it is one of the 'good things' that we are encouraged to partake of and thank God for.

There was no mention of what those things had to be.

There is a lot of mention of what those things are, anything that is against Baha'i Laws, but this pertains only to Baha'is.

 

[Trailblazer]

There you go. Unless you are married to someone of the opposite sex, you must suppress your sex impulses.

Only if you are a Baha'i. You are not a Baha'i, so why get in a huff about it?

 

[Trailblazer]

Why is informed, consensual, adult sex between people in a stable, loving relationship "positively harmful to man and society"?

Because it undermines the institution of marriage and the family, the foundation upon which a stable society rests.

 

[Trailblazer]

So you claim that all non-Bahais exhibit nasty, antisocial, even damaging behavior?

I never said that.
I said: In my opinion, lack of belief causes nasty, antisocial, even damaging behavior.
We all have opinions.

Do you see the word non-Baha'is or the word all in there?

So you accept that the homophobic language in Bahai teachings can harm people.

So do you accept that calling people homophobes can harm them?

 

[Trailblazer]

They don't present any arguments as to why it is evil, immoral, shameful, etc, just that it is.

The reason why it is is because God says so. No arguments are necessary.
QED