Featured Homosexuality and religious.

Yes "fornication" can ,mean sex outside of marriage. But where there is commitment that is at least part of the way to marriage and is seen, legally, as close to marriage in many countries these days where the commitment has been ongoing for a while.
But yes, going by the letter of the Bible, I'm probably out of sync.

 

So when I say that such and such a practice could be accepted one day I get people say, 'It won't happen, it's against the law.'
But that's not even an argument - it's a distraction. Anything is possible with future generations.

 

Indeed.
So you consider an unmarried couple in a long-term, monogamous relationship to be morally equivalent to a married couple then.

So any social event where two people commit to each other is morally the same as a marriage.

What do you mean by "modern humans"?

 

Wrong. The argument isn't that something currently illegal cannot become legal in the future "because it is currently against the law" (or vice versa). That's just daft. It is because evidence and arguments change.

Sex with prepubescent children will not become legal because of the medical problems, issues of consent, etc.

 

And no one claimed that was what it was saying.

Seriously?
That was the point I was making!!

I told you that as a Bahai you have to follow whatever Bahaullah said, without question, even if it makes no sense.
You denied that.
Now you admit it.
Flip.
Flop.

Funny how you have been a Bahai for 40? years, and claim to have "thoroughly investigated" it - yet I keep introducing you to Bahai texts and concepts that you seemed to have no idea about and denied existed (I've only been looking into Bahaism for a few months).
I wonder what else I can teach you about Bahaism this week.

 

So let's get this straight, you don't have any negative attitudes towards homosexuality - but you agree that homosexuality is a shameful sexual aberration, an immoral evil that is against nature that should be purged from the world.

*mod edit*

 

Many religionists are better than the religion they follow.
I only assume someone is homophobic when they defend or confirm the homophobic elements in their religion - as the OP did.

 

You denied that there is any homophobia in Bahai teachings.
You weren't aware of the passages in question.

 

So you accept that there is homophobia in Bahai teachings.
Finally!
Why does it always take so long for you to accept the obvious?

 

You completely misunderstand what"nature" is and how it works.
You also misunderstand what "discriminate" means.

 

So why is homosexuality "immoral"?
Is this just one of the things that you blindly accept without doubt, even if it makes no sense?

Also, that group of "immoral" things seems a bit odd. Three types of consensual adult sex, and child abuse.
Still not looking good.

 

I have noticed that of the handful of active Bahais on here, a good proportion claim to be in relationships with gay people. Seems rather odd, considering the homophobia in Bahai teachings. I wonder if it is a kind of "some of my best friends are black..." type argument used by people tacitly defending racism?

 

All you have done is show Bahaullah completely contradicting himself (which is often what happens when people make stuff up as they go along).

You just made this statement...

we are not to question what God has revealed, we are to obey it.
This a clear instruction to obey what God has revealed through the Messenger, even if what was revealed makes no sense to us.

It's Theological Whack-a-Mole™

 

Unfortunately for you, it has now been established beyond doubt that Bahai teachings contain homophobia.
Obviously, that doesn't mean that all Bahais are homophobes - only the ones that defend that homophobia.
(TBH, I was questioning the reality of all these "gay Bahai wives" )

 

What's "not right" about it? (as long as it's adult and consensual)

Did you know that Shoghi Effendi was likely a closet homosexual. Several people close to him have related stories that suggest it.

 

The Bahai texts have been quoted.
It's there in black and white.
The language is unequivocally homophobic, by definition.
Even @Trailblazer has accepted it (although as we both know, she will probably flip her position several times over the next few pages).