Homosexuality and religious.

[dybmh]

"outside of marital life there can be no lawful or healthy use of the sex impulse" means it is never lawful or healthy. It is not referring to numbers.

I think you're arguing for the sake fo arguing here. Never means not a single event. Null, zero, none, etc... that's what i said.

"Healthy" in the passage does not refer to physical health status. It refers to overall health, especially spiritual health.

Signs of spiritual unhealth are what is described in the psychology today article.

"psyche tends to grow twisted into grotesque, enraged perversions of desire" - that's spiritual
"guilt shame and ignorant pride" - spiritual
"abuse of the spirit" - spiritual

The author if the article is a PHD.

If you want to refute this, you'll need something that describes spiritual harm from sex out of wedlock.

 

[dybmh]

The passage was not referring to physical health.

Well.... they're related....

“Between material things and spiritual things there is a connection. The more healthful his body the greater will be the power of the spirit of man; the power of the intellect, the power of the memory, the power of reflection will then be greater.” Abdul'Baha (Divine Art of Living, p. 163)

The Bahá'í Community and Health Promotion

So, if someone is physically unhealthy ( sexually repressed ) it effects their spirit.

 

[CG Didymus]

Yes, if a person believes the Baha'i interpretation. But is Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Buddha, Muhammad and Zoroaster manifestations? And who else? Then is Jesus and Krishna incarnations of God? And who else? Since there were several other incarnations prior to Krishna. But how many after Krishna? And is the Jewish Messiah a manifestation or an incarnation or neither one? And how many Messiahs are there? There are several "anointed ones". Were all of them manifestations? Or is there only one The Messiah?

I know you can't answer any of these things any different then you already have, because you believe there is only one truth, the Baha'i truth. And the Baha'i truth only simplifies and generalizes all these things and ignores some of them to come up with their answer.

After all this time you still impart your opinion as to what a Baha'i believes. What you said is incorrect.

Yes I now choose not to offer much of the same again.

This answer fits exactly into what I said. Take the first two, Adam and Noah, Baha'is simplify and generalize the Bible story about them and ignore some of the things. Oh, and I forgot, or Baha'is make it symbolic. Baha'u'llah doesn't even mention the flood when he talks about Noah.

Among the Prophets was Noah. For nine hundred and fifty years He prayerfully exhorted His people and summoned them to the haven of security and peace. None, however, heeded His call. Each day they inflicted on His blessed person such pain and suffering that no one believed He could survive. How frequently they denied Him, how malevolently they hinted their suspicion against Him! Thus it hath been revealed: “And as often as a company of His people passed by Him, they derided Him. To them He said: ‘Though ye scoff at us now, we will scoff at you hereafter even as ye scoff at us. In the end ye shall know.’”3 Long afterward, He several times promised victory to His companions and fixed the hour thereof. But when the hour struck, the divine promise was not fulfilled. This caused a few among the small number of His followers to turn away from Him, and to this testify the records of the best-known books.​

 

[Trailblazer]

In order for the statement in the Baha'i writing to be false, all that's needed is a, single, individual outlet for sexual impulse outside of marriage which is healthy. Just one is needed.

Simple example: 2 previously chaste gay adults desire to know each other intimately. Repressing the desire is unhealthy for them. Therefore expressing it is ... healthy ... for them. Case closed. There's one example. You're welcome.

No, it is not as simple as you would like it to be.
Even if repressing the desire is unhealthy for them that does not mean that expressing it is healthy.
There is no logical connection and this is what I failed to point out before.

Regarding the statement in the Baha'i writings being false, whether it is false or not all depends upon what Shoghi Effendi meant by healthy, and since he was the one who wrote the letter he is the one that knows what he meant. You don't know what he meant. There is no reason to think that he was referring to physical or psychological health, since these are religious writings. He was most likely referring to spiritual health, given Baha'is believe we are spiritual beings, not physical bodies.

 

[Trailblazer]

Signs of spiritual unhealth are what is described in the psychology today article.

"psyche tends to grow twisted into grotesque, enraged perversions of desire" - that's spiritual
"guilt shame and ignorant pride" - spiritual
"abuse of the spirit" - spiritual

The author if the article is a PHD.

No, signs of psychological unhealth are what is described in the psychology today article.
Psychology has nothing to do with spirituality, they are two separate domains.

If you want to refute this, you'll need something that describes spiritual harm from sex out of wedlock.

That cannot be demonstrated since it involves harm to the soul, and the soul cannot be demonstrated since it is s mystery of God.

 

[Trailblazer]

Well.... they're related....

“Between material things and spiritual things there is a connection. The more healthful his body the greater will be the power of the spirit of man; the power of the intellect, the power of the memory, the power of reflection will then be greater.” Abdul'Baha (Divine Art of Living, p. 163)

The Bahá'í Community and Health Promotion

So, if someone is physically unhealthy ( sexually repressed ) it effects their spirit.

It has not been established that the sexually repressed are physically unhealthy. Just for the sake of argument, let's say a nun has sexual desire that she has repressed. She could be in perfect health and live till 90 or 100.

Then of course we have some kinds of sexual expression that leads to all kinds of diseases.

What I consider unhealthy is this obsession about sex. Obsession is psychologically unhealthy, that is a known fact.

 

[dybmh]

No, it is not as simple as you would like it to be.
Even if repressing the desire is unhealthy for them that does not mean that expressing it is healthy.
There is no logical connection and this is what I failed to point out before.

You're arguing, not debating. "I don't get it" isn't an argument. You need to show the logical flaw.

The problem is, repression and expression are opposites. Like light and dark. Resolving repression is expression. Resolving darkness is light. That's just the english language.

Regarding the statement in the Baha'i writings being false, whether it is false or not all depends upon what Shoghi Effendi meant by healthy, and since he was the one who wrote the letter he is the one that knows what he meant. You don't know what he meant. There is no reason to think that he was referring to physical or psychological health, since these are religious writings. He was most likely referring to spiritual health, given Baha'is believe we are spiritual beings, not physical bodies.

ahhhh there is reason. Psychological health is spiritual. Show me, please how much does 'rage' weigh? What's it's density? How many cc's of 'rage' is needed to bring a person to violence compared to harsh words?

Don't know? Can't know? Thats because it's spiritual.

 

[dybmh]

No, signs of psychological unhealth are what is described in the psychology today article.
Psychology has nothing to do with spirituality, they are two separate domains.

"has nothing to do with spirituality" Ha! Prove it! Good luck because you said 'nothing' and that's very hard to prove. All I need is one counter example.

 

[dybmh]

That cannot be demonstrated since it involves harm to the soul, and the soul cannot be demonstrated since it is s mystery of God.

I didn't ask for demonstration. I asked for "something that describes". So anything from Baha'i writings that talk about the spiritual harm from sex out of wedlock will work.

 

[dybmh]

It has not been established that the sexually repressed are physically unhealthy. Just for the sake of argument, let's say a nun has sexual desire that she has repressed. She could be in perfect health and live till 90 or 100.

This is a fail, my friend. You're measuring perfect health by life span. By this logic, all I need is 1 person who has been active sexually out of wedlock to live till 100 and the Baha'i writing is false.

Even if 99% of sexually repressed indivduals are healthy, all I need is one example where their health requires expression of their desire. And there are probably millions of them.

Then of course we have some kinds of sexual expression that leads to all kinds of diseases.

irrelevent

What I consider unhealthy is this obsession about sex. Obsession is psychologically unhealthy, that is a known fact.

irrelevent

 

[TransmutingSoul]

Yeah and it's rather galling to say the least.

Or, it will be the choice of the majority in the future. Time has a way of changing our current perceptions.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

I'm sorry, can you rephase? "but to say we can justify there is"

We can justify anything we want to, if it serves our own perceptions.

Like if I am hungry and I have no money, so I eventually make the choice to steal so I can eat. The act is still stealing, which is unlawful, was justified in one's own mind.

We do this all the time, given into promptings of self. Smokers, Drug Addicts, Sugar cravers, chocolate eaters, those that are addicted to the sex impulse or adrenalin junkies, procrastinators, etc etc.

Baha'u'llah gave us a great challenge. He offered that if God made the fast with no duration, then a true beleiver would embrace that fast, as there is no justification to break it.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

This answer fits exactly into what I said. Take the first two, Adam and Noah, Baha'is simplify and generalize the Bible story about them and ignore some of the things. Oh, and I forgot, or Baha'is make it symbolic. Baha'u'llah doesn't even mention the flood when he talks about Noah.

Among the Prophets was Noah. For nine hundred and fifty years He prayerfully exhorted His people and summoned them to the haven of security and peace. None, however, heeded His call. Each day they inflicted on His blessed person such pain and suffering that no one believed He could survive. How frequently they denied Him, how malevolently they hinted their suspicion against Him! Thus it hath been revealed: “And as often as a company of His people passed by Him, they derided Him. To them He said: ‘Though ye scoff at us now, we will scoff at you hereafter even as ye scoff at us. In the end ye shall know.’”3 Long afterward, He several times promised victory to His companions and fixed the hour thereof. But when the hour struck, the divine promise was not fulfilled. This caused a few among the small number of His followers to turn away from Him, and to this testify the records of the best-known books.​

There are explanations as to what those stories may mean, we can choose to ponder those explanations.

Then the rest is left up to us to explore. We know the story of Adam is not how man was created in the physical realm, it does not fit into the evolution of the species.

So we all get to decide, what can it mean?

Same as Noah, the material research and records do not show a flood as described in the Bible was a material flood.

Regards Tony

 

[TransmutingSoul]

So, if someone is physically unhealthy ( sexually repressed ) it effects their spirit.

Abdul'baha has a talk on this, how that is not the case.

Sorry busy, so cannot look it up.

Example, Viruses, amputee, burn victims etc, these do not effect the soul of man. Much to consider.

Regards Tony

 

[Trailblazer]

You're arguing, not debating. "I don't get it" isn't an argument. You need to show the logical flaw.

The problem is, repression and expression are opposites. Like light and dark. Resolving repression is expression. Resolving darkness is light. That's just the english language.

It is true that they are opposites but that still does not mean that expressing sexual desire is always healthy.
A case in point: Repressing one's feelings is not generally good but sometimes it is necessary for survival.

ahhhh there is reason. Psychological health is spiritual. Show me, please how much does 'rage' weigh? What's it's density? How many cc's of 'rage' is needed to bring a person to violence compared to harsh words?

Don't know? Can't know? Thats because it's spiritual.

There is some overlap between psychological and spiritual but they are not the same.
A case in point: A person can be depressed (psychological) but they can still love God and others (spiritual).

Feelings such as love and hate can be both psychological and spiritual.

 

[Trailblazer]

"has nothing to do with spirituality" Ha! Prove it! Good luck because you said 'nothing' and that's very hard to prove. All I need is one counter example.

As I just said, sometimes there is overlap, but not always.
Spirituality is related to God and religion and how to treat others, psychology is related to self and the human psyche, how we think and feel. Of course those sometimes overlap because people are connected to other people and to God.

 

[Trailblazer]

I didn't ask for demonstration. I asked for "something that describes". So anything from Baha'i writings that talk about the spiritual harm from sex out of wedlock will work.

Oh Lord Jesus! Where so I even start.....?
Let's start with adultery and families split up by divorces...
Then there is abortion which is almost exclusively among unmarried women.
No doubt the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases are higher among the unmarried.

 

[Trailblazer]

Abdul'baha has a talk on this, how that is not the case.

Sorry busy, so cannot look it up.

Example, Viruses, amputee, burn victims etc, these do not effect the soul of man. Much to consider.

Regards Tony

Gosh darn Tony. Will you look it up for me later?

 

[dybmh]

It is true that they are opposites but that still does not mean that expressing sexual desire is always healthy.
A case in point: Repressing one's feelings is not generally good but sometimes it is necessary for survival.

Always is not needed. All that's needed is one example to prove that the Baha'i writing is false on this matter.

There is some overlap between psychological and spiritual but they are not the same.
A case in point: A person can be depressed (psychological) but they can still love God and others (spiritual).

Feelings such as love and hate can be both psychological and spiritual.

Bingo! Sexual repression is one of those ailments which effects both psychological and spiritual.

As I just said, sometimes there is overlap, but not always.
Spirituality is related to God and religion and how to treat others, psychology is related to self and the human psyche, how we think and feel. Of course those sometimes overlap because people are connected to other people and to God.

Always isn't needed for my argument. Just one example of crossover supports my claim.

Oh Lord Jesus! Where so I even start.....?
Let's start with adultery and families split up by divorces...
Then there is abortion which is almost exclusively among unmarried women.
No doubt the incidence of sexually transmitted diseases are higher among the unmarried.

OK, good examples. Thank you.

 

[Trailblazer]

Always is not needed. All that's needed is one example to prove that the Baha'i writing is false on this matter.

That would not prove what you are trying to prove.
This is all purely subjective, so not subject to proof, sorry.

Bingo! Sexual repression is one of those ailments which effects both psychological and spiritual.

It may or may not affect the psychological in a negative way, depends upon the person, but the only way it affects the spiritual is in a positive way.

I'd much rather be repressed than obsessed.
Sexual obsession is one of those ailments which affects both psychological and spiritual.

Always isn't needed for my argument. Just one example of crossover supports my claim.

Not if your claim is that there is always crossover. I admitted there is sometimes crossover.