Homosexuality and religious.

[Trailblazer]

So the perfect message of a messenger from a deity is a pick and choose, that requires evolved mammals throw out the cruel prejudiced and immoral parts?

That is not what I said.

 

[Trailblazer]

So the deity you imagine has the barbaric immorality of patriarchal iron age Bedouins, and you don't care because you have chosen to abandon morality in favour of archaic religious dogma that condemns and persecutes people who happen to have been born gay.

Not what I said.
I do not believe people are born gay.

Massive Study Finds No Single Genetic Cause of Same-Sex Sexual Behavior

 

[Trailblazer]

Men and women don't need to be heterosexual to bear children, try again.

It requires a man and a woman to produce a child since a sperm needs to meet an egg.
Try again.

 

[KWED]

That is absolutely false and I could prove it to you because I have Word documents from years past that contain those exact quotes, so obviously I have seen them.
What I did not accept was from the Baha'i Writings was what is not in there, a direct quote saying that homosexuality is actually "a shameful sexual aberration that needs to be purged from the world.”

But if you did know that there were passages that contained those words, expressing those sentiments, why did you deny there was any such thing in Bahai teachings?
In response to my post...
Your religion calls homosexuality "immoral", "evil", "shameful aberration" that needs "purging from the world" (note that the first three individual quotes appear verbatim in Bahai texts, and the last one is only a matter of syntax - "purge the world from" is the original)
You said
"But the Baha'i Faith never called homosexuality such.
It demonstrably does, and you denied it. Repeatedly.

 

[Trailblazer]

Why are we asking homosexuals to suppress all sexual desire or heterosexual to suppress all sexual desire?

I am not asking anyone to do anything. People are free to make their own decisions.

 

[Trailblazer]

Lots of heterosexual people never bear children. They're still a family.

That is true, but that was not my point.
My point was that it takes a man and a woman to create a child.

 

[KWED]

The passages are not about the gay people, they are about gay sexual behavior.

And the distinction is irrelevant.
The claim was always that Bahai teachings were intolerant and prejudiced against homosexuality. But the distinction is pretty meaningless. Like saying "I don't hate Dutch people, just hate people being Dutch".

 

[We Never Know]

No problem because if you continue i put you on ignore

Misery loves company. Don't give the miserable the company and attention they seek.

Its not easy sometimes because we(well me) let ourselves fall to their level sometimes but its best not to.

 

[KWED]

I am not asking anyone to do anything.

But Bahaism is.
But you have revealed that you don't agree with all Bahai teachings, so you're off the hook!

 

[KWED]

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

I thought they meant that it wasn't your call to claim you are not homophobic. Which it isn't. That is determined by your words and deeds. And they suggest that you are, even if you like to think you aren't.

 

[KWED]

No, we do not have to, not unless we choose to. We are still Baha'is even if we are not perfect.

But earlier, you stated "After we become a Baha'i we are not to question what God has revealed, we are to obey it."

So what you really meant to say is "After we become a Bahai, we can pick and choose which bits of Bahaullah's revelations we accept".
Is that really how Bahaism works? Any other Bahai's care to confirm this?

 

[KWED]

I am not avoiding any questions.
It is against God's Law because God considers homosexual behavior immoral.

Off we go round the circular logic carousel again!
So why does god consider homosexuality immoral?

I do accept it and it makes sense to me,

It clearly doesn't make sense to you because you can't escape from the never-ending circular logic roundabout.

but I would accept it even it it made no sense to me.

And again you admit to blindly following dogma.

 

[KWED]

Aside from being Baha'i, do you belong to any minority or marginalized groups?

The terminally confused?

 

[Trailblazer]

But according to Bahaullah, part of believing is to unquestioningly accept the word of god as revealed by Bahaullah (you are required to as a necessary part of your duty). So if you don't, then you clearly aren't believing that he is the messenger of god, otherwise you would accept whatever he said.
Kind of a Catch 22 paradox.

I do accept it, I just do not always follow it. I am not perfect, nobody is.

One would well remember the story of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, who when approached by a believer in the depths of discouragement despairing of ever acquiring the qualities and virtues that Bahá’ís are required to possess, replied with the greatest compassion and encouragement, “little by little; day by day”
‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Bahá’í World, 12: 704

Forgetting to do something that is required by god is not the same as wilfully rejecting it.

That is true. I don't reject it, I just forget.

And if you usually forget such an important part of Bahai faith, then it clearly isn't really that important to you. If it was, you would set alarms, leave reminders around, just make more of an effort!

It is important but sometimes I forget. I used to set the alarm, maybe I should try that again.

So I think we need to investigate further why you claim Bahaism is so important, and you are so convinced it is true, yet you aren't really bothered about following it. I'm intrigued.

I am bothered by not following it, but I choose to do what I consider the most important to do on any given day.
Right now I am here with you so maybe you can do the math.

 

[Trailblazer]

Well, if you don't want to be labelled a homophobe, I suggest you stop holding negative attitudes and feelings towards homosexuality.

Label me whatever you want to label me...
Sticks and stones might break my bones but words can never hurt me.

 

[KWED]

Because only a man and a woman can bear children.

Only a woman can bear children. The man does nothing other than fertilise the egg, and that can be done remotely.
And some married heterosexuals cannot have children. I suppose they do not count as "a family" in Bahaism then.
What about a lesbian couple who had children in a heterosexual marriage before being widowed? They are a Bahai approved family then?

This is what happens when you speak in platitudes rather than rationally constructing an argument.

 

[KWED]

First of all, know that I have nothing against homosexual people. So maybe you should pay attention to what I actually write, and not what you think I write.

"I have nothing against homosexual people, but I believe that homosexuality is an evil passion, immoral, shameful aberration, a handicap, against nature, that faithful Bahais are to purge from the world".
Can you even hear yourself?!

If someone said "I have nothing against black people, but I believe that being black is genetically inferior and prone to laziness and criminality" - what would you think?
Correct - "****ing racist!"

 

[Trailblazer]

But if you did know that there were passages that contained those words, expressing those sentiments, why did you deny there was any such thing in Bahai teachings?

I only denied that there is a quote saying that homosexuality is actually "a shameful sexual aberration that needs to be purged from the world.” because there is no direct quote saying that.

In response to my post...
Your religion calls homosexuality "immoral", "evil", "shameful aberration" that needs "purging from the world" (note that the first three individual quotes appear verbatim in Bahai texts, and the last one is only a matter of syntax - "purge the world from" is the original)
You said
"But the Baha'i Faith never called homosexuality such.
It demonstrably does, and you denied it. Repeatedly.

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.

Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related and similar cases or data that may contradict that position.

Cherry picking - Wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org › wiki › Cherry_picking

 

[Trailblazer]

And the distinction is irrelevant.

It is completely relevant.
Like the Bible says, love the sinner but hate the sin.

 

[KWED]

It is okay by me and Imo it is a lot better than an unmarried heterosexual couple with children.

But you just said that it was the ability to bear children that was the defining feature of a "family". Now you are claiming that it is a piece of paper.
Flip.
Flop.