Noexalt

Has anyone ever had the experience either with Baha'is or non-Baha'is that feel that the Faith is not strict enough on it's teachings on homosexuality?

Anyone heard others feel that gays SHOULDN'T be allowed in the Faith, or that they SHOULDN'T be allowed certain privileges or roles in the community like teaching children's classes, being on an LSA, or having any visible role in community or administrative life?

Have you ever had anyone reject the Faith due to what they perceive as permissiveness or liberalism in terms of it's views toward homosexuality?

Zhang

I think Iconodule would prefer them round up and stoned alongside Muslims?

Other than that the community in this town is all of like, 6 people, and they are all older and all straight, so that should answer your question.

rreini

I have never heard such sentiments expressed in my community.

Napkin

We had a gay LSA member and once she was telling a new gay seeker about the evils of homosexuality

Zhang

Say what?!

Noexalt

UNBELIEVABLE...was she in the reparitive therapy movement?

Noexalt

excellent!!!

Emilia

No, can't say I have.

Occcasionally some non-Baha'i assumes it's a "new age anything goes" sort of religion, and criticizes us for being "too liberal" in our attitudes surrounding sex and marriage. Those exchanges can be sort of amusing.

No. I do know of a couple of Americans who left the faith for various reasons, and they each did say that (among other things) they couldn't get past the prohibition of marriage for gays.

But you never know, there might be someone out there who fits your description. *shrug*

Noexalt

It's interesting about the new age movement. So many of the new age beliefs are so close to the Bahai Faith, but as soon as you mention the AO, and that we are "organized", then the back goes up, there are laws, and we do not believe in reincarnation.

Yet I find many new agers align themselves with very heirarchical organization, and flock around gurus, masters, teachers, etc.

Honestly, I think new agers could be very receptive to the Faith, but somehow we just haven't built that connection very well.

Fadl

Never, to any of the above. Actually, if any of this were to occur in any of the communities I have ever known, it would be condemned by community members. While the laws of the Faith may be difficult to live by at times, I have never experienced anything in a Baha'i community where it felt like there was policing or judging going on by members, and this is something about the Faith that makes me feel really good. We all get to be imerfect and do the best we can to strive towards being better and nobody raises an eyebrow when you stumble or come up short.

On another note, this is maybe the 5th thread that has something to do with homosexuality in a week. Do you think this is necessary? I respect your right to discuss this issue, and I can understand its great importance to you personally, but this starts to feel more like an agenda. Maybe it isn't, but surely you have greater interests than only this, and perhaps you have greater interests in the Faith than its teachings on homosexuality. Just a thought.


Cheers

Noexalt

I hear you. Don't worry, I have more subjects to post about, this is just on my mind right now, and I have posted in other threads other subject matters.

Emilia

I think the associations were more readily made during times like the 80s, though I still run up against it sometimes.

And yes, there is resistance among those who are "spiritual not religious" because there is an organization (and of course all organizations are hierarchical oppressive things) and yeah, the rejection of reincarnation is occsionally an issue.

I may see less of that than you do. Certainly people seek out others for wisdom, and some are notable, but as for gurus, I don't see much of that.

Oh, sometimes the best connection is just working together on things of common interest anyway. I've been active in some environmental concerns, and meet people who are not part of any organized faith but are still quite interested in spiritual concerns, and there is some openness to mutual sharing on the subject on matters of wisdom and faith.

mytmouse57

The contemporary discussion regarding homosexuality is too often framed in zero-sum terms by two polarized and, I think, equally irrational views.

On one hand, there is religious puritanism. Enough said.

On the other is the current, mostly Western, politically correct narrative regarding homosexuality, which has more logical holes in it than Swiss Cheese, and constantly resorts to calling anybody who disagrees "hateful" or a "bigot."

That nonsense must be overcome, before an intelligent, honest, fair and rational conversation about homosexuality can even be had.

Noexalt

Can you explain more about this? Can you give some examples?

mytmouse57

Examples? Do you not pay attention to the popular media?

Any opposition to gay marriage is framed in terms of "hatred" toward gays.

Noexalt

Okay, thank you for clarifying..somewhat... you said

You did not mention gay marriage, you mentioned homosexuality..there is a difference.

Secondly, surely you don't deny that opposition towards gay marriage, CAN BE ROOTED in pure, unadulterated HATE.

What other reasons do you think that people oppose gay marriage outside of hateful reasons?

Napkin

You guys really sound like Rush Limbaugh

mytmouse57

I like the band, Rush -- from Canada.

mytmouse57

Can be, of course. Some people really do actually hate gays. But far fewer people actually hate gays, than are accused of hating gays.

Lots of philosophical, or moral, reasons to oppose or object to gay marriage. Some might include, the entire concept of "equality" between homosexual unions and man-woman marriage is really a feel-good farce.

Also, the ideal for children is being raised by two, married, biological parents.

None of that has anything to do with hating gay people -- so much as simply a refusal to deny reality, in order to pander to a feel-good, but essentially irrational, narrative.

However, I don't think there are any good legal arguments against gay marriage -- as a matter of civil, secular law.

Seems to me, under secular law in the U.S., the very basic legal defintion of marriage is a civil contract between two consenting adults.

I don't see how that legally excludes same-sex couples.

Noexalt

I'm not sure about this. I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm just saying, that, well, kind of like what you are saying, that there is no legal reason to deny gay marriage....I wonder how many people are prejudice against gays for certain undisclosed reasons and use the moral, equality, or children issue as a cover.

Personally I think that prejudice against gays is rooted, first, in the fact that most people are naturally uncomfortable or disgusted by an attraction that they don't feel. (Ex: a straight male would most likely be repulsed by the thought of being intimate with another man which would include physical contact) Secondly, the economics of a gay union, which would traditionally NOT involve the depletion of resources to support children and mother, may lead to some resentment or jealousy by the "hard working family man" who does not have the resources, mobility, or "freedom" if you will, that gay men do. Add that along with the repulsiveness of it, and you have quite a powder keg of resentment.
Lastly, I think it has to do with traditional gender roles all the way around. Gay men as "feminized" males are seen as weak, Lesbians with strong male qualities are seen as "b******" or if they project themselves in a masculine way can be seen as just plain "ugly and mean". I think if we get to the point of what "unambiguous equality" of women and men really mean, I think the gender roles will go in the garbage, and so will this factor of discrimination toward homosexuals.

mytmouse57

Some people might oppose gay marriage for those reasons.

But I would say, most do not. I think most oppose them for the more logical reasons I cited. Assigning pathology to people with whom one might disagree is an inaccurate and unfair game, IMO. Yet, as I see it, gay rights activism often does that to people with dissenting opinions or opposing views.

From the "anti" side, I don't problem is largely one of pathology. Rather, I think it comes in trying to mix a moral/values issue with a purely legal one -- that's where I think political opposition to gay marriage hits a snag.