Homosexuality and religious.

[KWED]

In your view is a married gay couple adopting and fostering hard to place orphans a positive outcome or a negative outcome if they are not being adopted/fostered by heterosexual couples?

The LGBT couples adopting 'hard to place' children

Especially interesting as on another thread @leroy was claiming that such children remain in the care system because no one wants to adopt them.
Religious anti-abortionists might not, but those they consider morally inferior clearly do.

 

[KWED]

bigotry: obstinate or unreasonable attachment to a belief, opinion, or faction;

That perfectly describes you claim of 100% certainty that Bahaullah was the messenger of a god that might not even exist.

in particular, prejudice against a person or people on the basis of their membership of a particular group.

We have already established that Bahaism is prejudiced against homosexuality.

Yikes! Bet you wish you hadn't posted that now.

 

[KWED]

they are weak and insecure so feel the desperate need to bully others

Pretty much describes the religious approach to homosexuality.

 

[metis]

Interesting that morality is generally not taught in a public school system. I know because I worked for a large school system. Sex education may be taught, how to protect oneself from getting a disease by sexual contact, but not morals. Or abstinence.

It is simply not the public school's role to do that, and if they did there would be hell to pay from parents who disagree with what would be said. Thus, this is the parent's and clergy's role.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Interesting that morality is generally not taught in a public school system. I know because I worked for a large school system. Sex education may be taught, how to protect oneself from getting a disease by sexual contact, but not morals. Or abstinence.

What morals do you want thought? Your or mine?

 

[Sheldon]

Good idea.
I don't like aubergine, so I don't eat it (not a euphemism).
However, I don't call people who like aubergine evil, immoral, etc (weird, yes!). And I certainly won't be demanding that others not eat it, even if I had the power to enforce it.

I'll send you my recipe for ratatouille, again not a metaphor...

 

[Koldo]

In the Baha’i Faith marriage is between a man and a woman. One of the main reasons given is procreation. The perpetuity of the human race is essential to our survival. So I have no problem promoting the Baha’i standard on family and married life as it is based on the survival of our species. No harm is done by standing for what is in humanity’s best interests.

Every child must have a mother and a father and to deprive it of either is in my view positively dangerous because both sexes are important not any one single sex. You must have had a mother and father or you couldn’t exist. So heterosexuality is the very cause of your being. If no one in the world was homosexual it would not matter but heterosexuality is essential for the survival of the human race.

People can do what they like I don’t care, but I believe the Baha’i teachings promoting family life are what is best for our survival not same sex marriage.

However, the human race doesn't need everyone to have children. Period.

 

[Sheldon]

The perpetuity of the human race is essential to our survival.

I'm not sure which is more hilarious, the circular reasoning fallacy, or the idea that our exponentially increasing population is in any danger of dying out.

The biggest risk we face is our exploding population, and the ramifications that inevitably causes.

 

[Sheldon]

I've emboldened and enlarged that part you seem keen to ignore, note the word or....
irrational fear of, aversion to, or discrimination against homosexuality or gay people.

So homophobia could be a or b or c:
a. irrational fear of, or
b. aversion to, or
c. discrimination against homosexuality or gay people.

You've emboldened and enlarged nothing, just copied and pasted what I emboldened and enlarged already???

So bafflingly you've repeated my own point back to me, and only you can know why at this point?

Try reading the claim I was responding to, that was repeatedly and dishonestly trying to suggest homophobia must involve an irrational fear of gay people.

 

[Sheldon]

This post is reportable.

I doubt it, but by all means Knock yourself out. Or are you seriously claiming there are no religious bigots who espouse hate speech and homophobia?

 

[F1fan]

You're entitled to your opinion, amd so are we. Being religious as you are saying here is not a bad thing, in our opinion. We don't see the history of religion as you do. I've studied that history pretty thoroughly. Have you? Whether you have or not can't you respect that I have a different opinion, and not try to force your opinion on me, which seems like an atheist prosyletizing, though it's obvious that the rules of this forum don't see atheists forcing atheism on people as proselytizing. I've heard atheists say before that atheism is the default position, so it can't be proselytizing, but I don't see it that way.

Why, when proselytizing has a specific definition, and atheists don't meet that definition as they dispute religious beliefs, then it indicates an intolerance on your part. You are misrepresenting what atheists are, and doing, and this is due to your religious beliefs, not clear thinking.

A person's behavior is not confined to just his sexual behavior. I admire a lot of gay people who are in a gay sexual realationship.

Yet you believe this "I believe that the main reason for prohibition of homosexual sex is that it spirituality harmful to those engaged in this practice"

Is this your own judgment? Or is it a position you adopted because your religious ideology say so? Either way it falls on you for this negative condemnation.

You should have tolerance for our beliefs. You don't.

Yeah, you want those who are not willing to condemn gays to tolerate your condemnation of gays. Irony at work. At least gays have no choice like believers do.

Not having tolerance is a bad characteristic, which is a religious teaching, however it may have been debased by some adherants over time. My opinion is that your dislike for religion is based on the debased behavior that developed over time, which has nothing to do with the original teachings.

Have you not considered that Bahai happens to have bigoted attitudes that are not consistent with the 21st century?

 

[Sheldon]

No need to act immaturely by accusing people of bigotry.

That's rich given this is the second time you've resorted to petty ad hominem. Nor is it of course immature to challenge vile religious bigotry or homophobia, rather it's a moral imperative to defend gay people's rights from such bullying discrimination.

People need to realise that just because we have differing opinions it doesn’t infer bigotry.

Thats a ludicrous straw man, and the religious bigotry of the religion in question is littering this thread.

That is bullying which I take exception to.

Defending people against homophobic bigotry is not bullying, that's absurd. It's the homophobic prejudice and bigotry that is bullying.

Homosexuality is not a religion

Exactly my point, theists have a choice whether to indulge in bigotry, gay people do not have a choice any more than heterosexual people do.

I respect all people

Oh really....?

My religion says the behaviour is wrong

Irony overload...homosexuality isn't a behaviour anymore than heterosexuality is, it is part of who a person is.

you shouldn’t be making these accusations against me

What accusation, quote it?

It seems you are ok insulting me personally, twice now, but when your religion's bigotry is exposed it's somehow unfair.

If a person's beliefs are too fragile for frank debate, maybe those people should avoid such debate?

Again the only bullying here is the hate speech religions are using to decry gay people.

 

[Vinayaka]

Good idea.
I don't like aubergine, so I don't eat it (not a euphemism).
However, I don't call people who like aubergine evil, immoral, etc (weird, yes!). And I certainly won't be demanding that others not eat it, even if I had the power to enforce it.

One of my favorite vegetables. Since I'm going shopping soon, I think I'll buy me one.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

Why, when proselytizing has a specific definition, and atheists don't meet that definition as they dispute religious beliefs, then it indicates an intolerance on your part. You are misrepresenting what atheists are, and doing, and this is due to your religious beliefs, not clear thinking.

...

Well, yes, atheists as atheists don't proselytize. But some people as otherwise atheists do because of their overall worldview.
I have never met an atheist, who is only an atheist and for some definitions of religion some people proselytize, while otherwise being atheists.

 

[leroy]

Especially interesting as on another thread @leroy was claiming that such children remain in the care system because no one wants to adopt them.
Religious anti-abortionists might not, but those they consider morally inferior clearly do.

Yes this guy Leroy is a moral monster who would rather keep children in the foster care system rather than simply killing these children

 

[KWED]

It is full of irony that when one only wants peace and reconciliation, that talking about it only brings debate and estrangement.

But that is not all you say on here. You make unsubstantiated, extraordinary claims with absolute certainty.
And if part of your "peace and reconciliation" involves condemning homosexuality as evil, immoral, shameful aberration, against nature, to be purged from the world, etc - then of course you are going to be challenged on those views - because they are unacceptable to civilised, tolerant, peaceful, inclusive society (all things you claim your beliefs to be).
And if you insist on defending those views, despite people explaining the problem as seen by much of society, the law, rights groups, etc, then you aren't really interested in peace, reconciliation, tolerance, etc. You are only interested in dogmatic proselytising.

 

[dybmh]

it's obvious that the rules of this forum don't see atheists forcing atheism on people as proselytizing.

I've asked about this in the past and staff have confirmed that preaching atheism is also against the rules and subject to moderation. Please report the posts that you perceive as preaching.

 

[KWED]

I see many problems in this section of your reply. It is very self orientated.

Bahais claim that a narrow definition of "family" is what constitutes purposeful, happy, moral, etc life.
There are any number of people's personal experience that shows otherwise. So of course it is "self-orientated", and obviously that isn't a problem.

 

[KWED]

I endeavour to treat LGBT the same as anyone else.

You endeavour to? What is preventing you? Why is there even a temptation to treat them differently?

 

[dybmh]

I don't have any miraculous stories of gay Baha'is becoming heterosexual. I did find this rather interesting and touching story about a Baha'i coming to terms with being gay.

Being Baha’i and Gay

Interesting read. I noticed that the author confirms that conversion therapy is non-effective and often harmful.