Homosexuality and religious.

[mikkel_the_dane]

I can only speak for myself. I believe I was objective. I became a Baha’i by criticising it. I accidentally found out what I did. I was vehemently opposed to God and religion and considered the concept of God a mental illness and crutch but surprisingly discovered I was wrong. And I can’t lie to myself about what I discovered because I believe in being true to oneself.

Well, I don't consider religion that. I see it as one natural and normal way to cope, but not the only one.

 

[loverofhumanity]

Well, I don't consider religion that. I see it as one natural and normal way to cope, but not the only one.

I viewed it more as a disease not a coping mechanism because I believed we could think for ourselves and didn’t need any so called ‘guidance’. And one day I was alone in my unit and began reading Baha’u’llah’s Book of Certitude and I was so overwhelmed with joy and bliss that now 45 years later I still feel the same. Words like irresistible come to mind.

You know the saying ‘ resistance is futile’? No priests. No ceremony. No singing choir. Just me alone with??

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I viewed it more as a disease not a coping mechanism because I believed we could think for ourselves and didn’t need any so called ‘guidance’. And one day I was alone in my unit and began reading Baha’u’llah’s Book of Certitude and I was so overwhelmed with joy and bliss that now 45 years later I still feel the same. Words like irresistible come to mind.

You know the saying ‘ resistance is futile’? No priests. No ceremony. No singing choir. Just me alone with??

No, you do you and your group. But that is not humanity.

 

[ppp]

From what I can tell, it doesn't say that. This is what it says: (Emphasis Mine)

Observe how pleasing is cleanliness in the sight of God, and how specifically it is emphasized in the Holy Books of the Prophets; for the Scriptures forbid the eating or the use of any unclean thing. Some of these prohibitions were absolute, and binding upon all, and whoso transgressed the given law was abhorred of God and anathematized by the believers. Such, for example, were things categorically forbidden, the perpetration of which was accounted a most grievous sin, among them actions so loathsome that it is shameful even to speak their name.​

And then later this:

O Divine Providence! Bestow Thou in all things purity and cleanliness upon the people of Bahá. Grant that they be freed from all defilement, and released from all addictions. Save them from committing any repugnant act, unbind them from the chains of every evil habit, that they may live pure and free, wholesome and cleanly, worthy to serve at Tevhy Sacred Threshold and fit to be related to their Lord. Deliver them from intoxicating drinks and tobacco, save them, rescue them, from this opium that bringeth on madness, suffer them to enjoy the sweet savours of holiness, that they may drink deep of the mystic cup of heavenly love and know the rapture of being drawn ever closer unto the Realm of the All-Glorious. For it is even as Thou hast said: ‘All that thou hast in thy cellar will not appease the thirst of my love—bring me, O cup-bearer, of the wine of the spirit a cup full as the sea!’​

I can't find anything that explicitly forbids homosexual behavior. Maybe it's alluded to as "actions so loathsome" and "evil habit". But maybe not. The rest of the document is more about abstainence from substances. The point is, so far no one has provided a direct quote from the "manifestation of God" regarding homosexual behavior. It seems to me that there should be / could be some wiggle room on how Gay people are treated in the Baha'i faith if this is what the law is based on.

Only straight sex is allowed, and only sex within marriage is permitted, Even if the law does not directly forbid "homosexual behavior" the fact of the matter is that Baha'i Law law is designed to do so. Moreover, as we have seen throughout this thread and others, Baha'i society is strongly invested in simultaneously defending and denying that discrimination. In effect, Baha'i law instantiates a version of the original "Grandfather Laws" of the Antibellum US South; only the target is gay people, instead of black people.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

And this particular topic isn't even the worst one. My personal favorite was that copper would turn to gold if left alone for 70 years. I recall that one being defended. One simply cannot imagine what other stuff is hidden in B's yet to be translated or other writings.

It's the non-Baha'i including you who have taught me the most about Baha'i doctrine. TransmutingSoul mentioned that Baha'i are to remain apolitical, but short of that, the message seems to be limited to Baha'u'llah has the recipe for world peace, although we don't hear what his plan is or what the Baha'i faith or the individual adherent is doing to advance the plan, and that the world hasn't paid enough attention to him. And, of course, what is common to all faiths - they have chosen to believe it and that makes it correct for them.

Baha'u'llah said,
'For instance, consider the substance of copper. Were it to be protected in its own mine from becoming solidified, it would, within the space of seventy years, attain to the state of gold. There are some, however, who maintain that copper itself is gold, which by becoming solidified is in a diseased condition, and hath not therefore reached its own state. Be that as it may, the real elixir will, in one instant, cause the substance of copper to attain the state of gold, and will traverse the seventy-year stages in a single moment. Could this gold be called copper? Could it be claimed that it hath not attained the state of gold, whilst the touch-stone is at hand to assay it and distinguish it from copper? Likewise, these souls, through the potency of the Divine Elixir, traverse, in the twinkling of an eye, the world of dust and advance into the realm of holiness'

Thanks for that.

Isn't this typical religious thought? Make up some "science" and then make that a morality lesson. This is just poetry. This could have come from Shakespeare, and we wouldn't consider it wise there, either. Why? Because nobody claimed that Shakespeare was channeling a deity, so they're just words. But give it the imprimatur of a god, and the words are understood in the minds of the faithful to divine truth and wisdom.

In the last 2 years my view on homosexuality has changed. Before I was more of a homophobe. Now I dont bother about them at all

That's good progress. Likewise with you becoming much less atheophobic. But ask yourself what helped you there. I would like to think that the people you encounter on these threads who promote both of those ideas influenced you. Your fellow Baha'i who disavow homophobia in themselves and report that they treat homosexuals equally are simply repeating humanist values, except that they won't disavow the doctrine. You trust them more, because they are God-fearing like you, but really, who is teaching you tolerance of homosexuals? Probably both, but I would say that those condoning homophobic scripture are the poorer example of tolerance.

Sex is not wrong if it is for making children, that was the main reason we humans have ability to have sex.

According to humanist values, sex among consenting adults is never immoral unless it is a betrayal of somebody's trust. Furthermore, nature's agenda for all of us is to reproduce, but it need not be yours or mine. Sex for pleasure is a very positive pursuit that facilitates social interaction and intimacy. It is often a spiritual experience. But the religions disapprove. No better reason can be given for this disapproval than that God says so. And as we have read repeatedly in this thread, those that accept that god will have to accept what are said to be its rules however irrational those rules might be, whatever pleasure or other benefit they deny him for nothing in return.

No most people will not be able to control their lust fully. But it is fully possible to do.

In my experience, almost everybody has contained his lust, although my definition for that might not be yours. Fully controlling lust doesn't mean suppressing it to me, but rather, channeling it in healthy ways. I guess that those who can't control their sexual urges tend to end up in prison or shot by a jealous husband. I do know a few whose wives left them for infidelity.

Baha’u’llah called on all the world to unite and they ignored Him so we have had two world wars since then.

The world ignored all pacifist philosophers, not just Baha'u'llah. And why shouldn't the world ignore Baha'u'llah, even those looking for unity, or as humanists call it, tolerance and community. The Baha'i are nowhere to be seen, and Baha'u'llah doesn't appear to have a specific plan. Where are the Baha'i in the American struggle for tolerance being led by the humanists, who are derisively referred to as the woke for their interest in inclusivity? Black Lives Matter is out there struggling for tolerance. The MeToo movement was out there struggling for equality.

So why shouldn't Baha'u'llah be ignored? What better ideas does he offer than humanism's values? What have the Baha'i accomplished to compare with what secular philosophies have accomplished in the last several centuries?

our well being and security I believe rests upon turning to the teachings of Baha’u’llah.

Yes, you believe that. But you believe by faith. Do you have any evidence and argument that might make an empiricist believe it, too?

The more people, the longer and the more reasons people find to turn against God will result in us ignoring the other teachings of Baha’u’llah which can bring peace and prosperity.

Abrahamic religions have been an impediment to intellectual and moral progress according to humanist standards. "Turning against God" brought us the Enlightenment and the modern liberal, secular democratic state with guaranteed personal rights.

 

[Spirit of Light]

It's the non-Baha'i including you who have taught me the most about Baha'i doctrine. TransmutingSoul mentioned that Baha'i are to remain apolitical, but short of that, the message seems to be limited to Baha'u'llah has the recipe for world peace, although we don't hear what his plan is or what the Baha'i faith or the individual adherent is doing to advance the plan, and that the world hasn't paid enough attention to him. And, of course, what is common to all faiths - they have chosen to believe it and that makes it correct for them.



Thanks for that.

Isn't this typical religious thought? Make up some "science" and then make that a morality lesson. This is just poetry. This could have come from Shakespeare, and we wouldn't consider it wise there, either. Why? Because nobody claimed that Shakespeare was channeling a deity, so they're just words. But give it the imprimatur of a god, and the words are understood in the minds of the faithful to divine truth and wisdom.



That's good progress. Likewise with you becoming much less atheophobic. But ask yourself what helped you there. I would like to think that the people you encounter on these threads who promote both of those ideas influenced you. Your fellow Baha'i who disavow homophobia in themselves and report that they treat homosexuals equally are simply repeating humanist values, except that they won't disavow the doctrine. You trust them more, because they are God-fearing like you, but really, who is teaching you tolerance of homosexuals? Probably both, but I would say that those condoning homophobic scripture are the poorer example of tolerance.



According to humanist values, sex among consenting adults is never immoral unless it is a betrayal of somebody's trust. Furthermore, nature's agenda for all of us is to reproduce, but it need not be yours or mine. Sex for pleasure is a very positive pursuit that facilitates social interaction and intimacy. It is often a spiritual experience. But the religions disapprove. No better reason can be given for this disapproval than that God says so. And as we have read repeatedly in this thread, those that accept that god will have to accept what are said to be its rules however irrational those rules might be, whatever pleasure or other benefit they deny him for nothing in return.



In my experience, almost everybody has contained his lust, although my definition for that might not be yours. Fully controlling lust doesn't mean suppressing it to me, but rather, channeling it in healthy ways. I guess that those who can't control their sexual urges tend to end up in prison or shot by a jealous husband. I do know a few whose wives left them for infidelity.



The world ignored all pacifist philosophers, not just Baha'u'llah. And why shouldn't the world ignore Baha'u'llah, even those looking for unity, or as humanists call it, tolerance and community. The Baha'i are nowhere to be seen, and Baha'u'llah doesn't appear to have a specific plan. Where are the Baha'i in the American struggle for tolerance being led by the humanists, who are derisively referred to as the woke for their interest in inclusivity? Black Lives Matter is out there struggling for tolerance. The MeToo movement was out there struggling for equality.

So why shouldn't Baha'u'llah be ignored? What better ideas does he offer than humanism's values? What have the Baha'i accomplished to compare with what secular philosophies have accomplished in the last several centuries?



Yes, you believe that. But you believe by faith. Do you have any evidence and argument that might make an empiricist believe it, too?



Abrahamic religions have been an impediment to intellectual and moral progress according to humanist standards. "Turning against God" brought us the Enlightenment and the modern liberal, secular democratic state with guaranteed personal rights.

To adress the first part of your question to me, I would say its a mix of people who given me insight so that I could form my own understanding for response to the issue about homosexuality.
I am sure a lot of people on the street will think I am gay because of my nail exstentions and blue color. But who cares? I don't its kind of fun actually.

On the topic of sex i can only answer for what my personal views are, if I judge others for what they do, then I am just like them.

I do believe one has to constain ones lust to a very high level if one dedicated ones life to God, but for those who don't its not important.

 

[It Aint Necessarily So]

Atheism and greed are other mindsets which lead us astray.

Really? Is this another of your faith-based beliefs, or do you have some evidence for this this time? I'm referring to the atheism part, not the greed part. Because I see the transformation from a largely theistic population to a reason-based one as perhaps the most important change any community can make. Where we see theistic societies, we see ugliness. We see inquisitions, holy wars, and crusades. We see witches executed, homosexuals pushed off of towers, and people burned in cages alive for impiety. We see mass suicides in societies like Jonestown, Heaven's Gate, and the Branch Davidian complex. Humanists don't do those kinds of things. Where humanist values dominate, all of that is forbidden. Is that what you meant by atheists leading man astray? I think you have that backwards.

Human reasoning is flawed you admit. That’s what I have been trying to get across all along, that the idea that there is no God is flawed reasoning.

Agnostic atheists, who comprise the majority of atheists, do not make that claim. Why do so many theists fixate on this? Have you not read repeatedly that that is a minority position in atheism? Can you speak to the majority - agnostic atheists - who do not say that? Yes, the gnostic (strong) atheist is making a claim of knowledge that it is understood that he cannot possess. YOUR reasoning is flawed in exactly the same way. The idea that a god exists is a flawed idea, an idea that can only be held by faith, the same faith you bemoan when it's faith that there are no gods, but praise as virtue when the faith-based choice is the opposite - a god exists.

Baha’u’llah made the laws and I trust in His wisdom. Accepting Baha’u’llah and His laws is fundamental to Baha’i belief. One cannot be a Baha’i and at the same time be against Baha’u’llah.

Here's a strong argument against belief by faith. You have committed yourself to an ism right or wrong, although you do not see it that way. To you, it is right because - well, just because. Because you liked how it sounded - isn't that what it means to say the messenger's message is evidence that he channeled a deity, that it sounded like it might be from God? - and it made you feel like part of a peaceful community, so it's now the truth to you.

I have all the objective evidence for myself that proves to me that God sent Baha’u’llah. It is for each to investigate the matter for himself and go with that.

Thanks. I have. But I used different standards for belief than you did. I have found no evidence that this isn't just another manmade religion. The critical thinker doesn't consider anything evidence for a god that doesn't make the existence of that god more likely than its nonexistence and a godless universe. None of the words of Baha'u'llah couldn't have been written by millions of human beings. None of the ideas of Baha'u'llah aren't common in human societies.

I see It needs us to embrace dialogues about hygiene, cleanliness and purity.

Why do we need Baha'u'llah's advice on hygiene or cleanliness? Or his ideas of what constitutes purity?

The only way we can address these topics is education and the best education is the examples we set for our children. That comment will also open a can of worms!

I agree that morals are taught by example or words reinforced by example. When the example contradicts the verbal lesson (hypocrisy), the example IS the lesson, not the words.

This is my objection to Christianity calling itself a religion of love because it has a scripture that says love another, yet doesn't do that itself by humanist standards of love, which wouldn't include blood sacrifice, crucifixion, damnation, or hell. There'd be no apple dangling before children to see if they can resist (Spoiler: they can't) then punishing them for being human. There also would be no global flood, a gratuitously cruel attack on all terrestrial life plant or animal.

Apart from the homophobic doctrine, I don't know enough about what the Baha'i believe to critique it analogously. Do they accept original sin, damnation, and hell theology? Do they even believe in an afterlife? A paradise? If so, who goes where and according to what rules? The Christian versions of justice (eternal hell for not believing an unevidenced claim?) and mercy (there are no appeals for the damned) are just as deformed as the example given of love.

The issue we have, is a lot of people have been born this side of the sexual revolution, which was a liberty carried way to far, another can of worms.

Here's where I disagree with you. Theists are willing to make such statements on faith, but the critically thinking empiricist is evidence-based in his beliefs. The evidence suggests the opposite to me, and much of that was observed first-hand. I was a teenager in California in the late sixties and early seventies. Oral contraceptives were relatively new in the world. Women were burning their bras. I was at university and in the Army in those years, and saw an incredible amount of free love with no significant consequences in anybody I knew or heard about until AIDS came along a decade later. I have a half dozen friends still from high school, all of whom emerged unscathed from those years as well. So, it's not surprising that somebody who has seen it first-hand might reject the unevidenced claims of those presenting their received morals from their religions.

I hesitate to say much.

Isn't that your job to be an emissary and spokesperson for what you believe to be a God-given message? The humanists don't hesitate to say anything that they feel strongly about.

 

[Vinayaka]

Now you are talking for all humans. Do as you do. But I am not you. Sorry, but you are doing a "we", that is not there in the everyday world.

Wow. That didn't take long. Using 'we' instead of 'I' is typical of Baha'ispeak. What's it been

To adress the first part of your question to me, I would say its a mix of people who given me insight so that I could form my own understanding for response to the issue about homosexuality.
I am sure a lot of people on the street will think I am gay because of my nail exstentions and blue color. But who cares? I don't its kind of fun actually.

On the topic of sex i can only answer for what my personal views are, if I judge others for what they do, then I am just like them.

I do believe one has to constain ones lust to a very high level if one dedicated ones life to God, but for those who don't its not important.

 

[Vinayaka]

It's very logical, and I don't understand how Baha'i can continue to deny it.
1) The Baha'i faith is homophobic.
2) You are a Baha'i faith adherent.

Basic logic says you re therefore homophobic. If not, you would very quickly denounce Baha'ism. But nobody here is doing that. I guess it's easier just to deny the contradiction.

Personally I simply could not be a member of any faith where I had fundamental differences. But apparently it's no problem at all to some, which begs the question: What possible things could Baha'u'llah or the guardians that followed have done or said to have people leave? Murder? Be a racist? Be very misogynist?

 

[Sheldon]

I hold a belief in God, do i know for certain God exists? No, but I believe in the teaching and have faith.

No different to believing in any other deity then, or in Santa Claus really.

Sex is not wrong if it is for making children,

Why is it wrong otherwise? You are simply making an unevidenced and absolute claim.

that was the main reason we humans have ability to have sex.

That's nonsensical, since we evolved this ability and evolution is not a sentient process, it doesn't have reasons, and evolution is supported by an overwhelming amount of objective evidence, unlike faith based religious beliefs and deities, for which there is none.

No most people will not be able to control their lust fully. But it is fully possible to do.

So what, you are simply assuming that an unhealthy and puritanical religious view of our sexual desires is somehow good or necessary, evidence this claim then.

 

[Sheldon]

I don't try to stop others from having an opinion about difficult topics
And sexual topics are difficult to discuss because they are so personal.

I living in a hetrosexual relationship with out sex. Because non of us wish to have children, and she is allergic to latex.

You can have all manner of sex that doesn't involve procreation, without latex as well, then there is a vasectomy of course.

 

[Sheldon]

Baha’u’llah made the laws and I trust in His wisdom.

Circular reasoning fallacy.

Accepting Baha’u’llah and His laws is fundamental to Baha’i belief.

Appeal to authority fallacy.

One cannot be a Baha’i and at the same time be against Baha’u’llah.

Meaningless tautology.

 

[Sheldon]

The Manifestations of God make it abundantly clear there is only One God.

No they don't, that's just a subjective belief you hold. Like people who believe the world is really flat, or the moon landings never happened.

 

[Sheldon]

I believe the human mind is imperfect

Using your human mind to decide that, and not seeing the irony.

only through the Holy Spirit embedded in the writings of the Manifestation can certainty be attained.

Special pleading fallacy.

 

[Sheldon]

I have all the objective evidence for myself

Oh dear, so that would be subjective by definition then.

It is for each to investigate the matter for himself and go with that. It is up to you if you do likewise or not.

So as I explained you don't care that your claims were irrational, which you have amply demonstrated by simply ignoring them again, and repeating the vapid mantras of indoctrination.

 

[Sheldon]

My understanding is that God is the greatest Scientist as He created us.

Circular reasoning fallacy, yet again.

Human scientists are only learning about what God has given us.

Circular reasoning fallacy, yet again.

But we didn’t create anything.

We created science, try again.

 

[Sheldon]

I investigated Baha’u’llah. and discovered from His Life, Words and teachings that He was sent by God. For me the evidence was overwhelming.

Subjective unevidenced opinion.

 

[Sheldon]

I can only speak for myself. I believe I was objective.

oh good grief....I think I am experiencing an irony overload.

 

[Spirit of Light]

It's very logical, and I don't understand how Baha'i can continue to deny it.
1) The Baha'i faith is homophobic.
2) You are a Baha'i faith adherent.

Basic logic says you re therefore homophobic. If not, you would very quickly denounce Baha'ism. But nobody here is doing that. I guess it's easier just to deny the contradiction.

Personally I simply could not be a member of any faith where I had fundamental differences. But apparently it's no problem at all to some, which begs the question: What possible things could Baha'u'llah or the guardians that followed have done or said to have people leave? Murder? Be a racist? Be very misogynist?

If you want to believe i am homophobic just because I am a Baha'i thats up to you.

 

[Spirit of Light]

No different to believing in any other deity then, or in Santa Claus really.



Why is it wrong otherwise? You are simply making an unevidenced and absolute claim.



That's nonsensical, since we evolved this ability and evolution is not a sentient process, it doesn't have reasons, and evolution is supported by an overwhelming amount of objective evidence, unlike faith based religious beliefs and deities, for which there is none.



So what, you are simply assuming that an unhealthy and puritanical religious view of our sexual desires is somehow good or necessary, evidence this claim then.

You can have your opinion