I at 49, having been a Baha’i my whole life am finding I have many nagging questions. These questions began as little murmurs in my early twenties, and now are becoming a roar. These questions are regarding the Baha’i Faith and it’s current stance on homosexuality. I begin this by introducing it with some quotes that talk about seeking truth and the importance of science and reason as that is the spirit and principle in which I write.
(Various Baha’i Writings)- Abdu’l-Baha’
Among these teachings was the independent investigation of reality so that the world of humanity may be saved from the darkness of imitation and attain to the truth; may tear off and cast away this ragged and outgrown garment of a thousand years ago and may put on the robe woven in the utmost purity and holiness in the loom of reality. As reality is one and cannot admit of multiplicity, therefore different opinions must ultimately become fused into one.
And among the teachings of Bahá’u’lláh is that religion must be the cause of fellowship and love. If it becomes the cause of estrangement then it is not needed, for religion is like a remedy; if it aggravates the disease then it becomes unnecessary.
And among the teachings of Bahá’u’lláh is that religion must be in conformity with science and reason, so that it may influence the hearts of men. The foundation must be solid and must not consist of imitations.
And here I transition to the topic of LGBTQ+ human rights and what I am concerned about–Harm towards the LGBTQ+ community by silencing and excluding them. I argue that the Baha’i community even if they are kind to them and include them in meetings; or include them if they try to conform to the Baha’i laws; they are not fully including them for WHO they are by asking them to change or sacrifice living with potential life partners that could be a source of comfort, companionship and stability. It also creates a culture of hiding it; gay Baha’is being afraid to disclose they are gay. Gay adolescents who are ashamed, afraid, and alone.
Discrimination against LGBTQ+ individuals causes harm: It is clear to me that by silencing, excluding (in any form), treating as less than to ANYONE causes harm to people and increases their risk for suicide or at the very least mental health anguish.
Quote from: https://www.childtrends.org/publications/anti-lgbtq-policy-proposals-can-harm-youth-mental-health
Discrimination against lesbian, gay, bisexual, queer, and/or questioning (LGBTQ)* youth remains a contributing factor to the disproportionately high rates of socio-emotional distress and mental illness among LGBTQ youth, when compared to straight and cisgender youth.
This exploratory analysis compares proposed anti-LGBTQ legislation to the volume of Crisis Text Line (CTL) conversations from LGBTQ texters under age 18 and suggests that proposed anti-LGBTQ legislation may contribute to LGBTQ youth’s experiences of emotional distress. Our policy analysis shows that state legislatures proposed over 200 pieces of anti-LGBTQ legislation from 2015 to 2019. At the time of this publication, 2021 has already seen more than 200 pieces of legislation of this type in 35 states. This stark increase highlights an urgent need to understand how such legislation—whether enacted or not—impacts LGBTQ youth well-being.
https://www.hrc.org/resources/the-lies-and-dangers-of-reparative-therapy
Research on the Impacts of Reparative Therapy, Harms Caused by Societal Prejudice
In 2007, a task force of the American Psychological Association undertook a thorough review of the existing research on the efficacy of conversion therapy. Their report noted that there was very little methodologically sound research on sexual orientation change efforts (SOCEs) and that the “results of scientifically valid research indicate that it is unlikely that individuals will be able to reduce same-sex attractions or increase other-sex sexual attractions through SOCE.” In addition, the task force found that “there are no methodologically sound studies of recent SOCE that would enable the task force to make a definitive statement about whether or not recent SOCE is safe or harmful and for whom.” Read the full report.
In short, there is clear evidence that conversion therapy does not work, and some significant evidence that it is also harmful to LGBTQ people.
In contrast, there is ample evidence that societal prejudice causes significant medical, psychological and other harms to LGBTQ people. For example, research on the issue of family acceptance of LGBTQ youth conducted at San Francisco State University found that “compared with LGBTQ young people who were not rejected or were only a little rejected by their parents and caregivers because of their gay or transgender identity, highly rejected LGBTQ young people were:
(see link above for more examples)
I do not know of research about the impacts of asking people to be celibate, but I have questions:
What is the impact of the celibacy mandate in religion? In Christianity? Has it worked? What is its impact of the mental health and acceptance on those who attempt the “celibacy solution.”?
What is the impact on those who are gay but choose to try to live a heterosexual life; marry; have children? How well does that solution work? How does it impact their spouses and children? Long term; do those marriages work out? Long term effects on the mental health of the the members of the families…If this is the recommended solution: Do they have data on its results? Or do they blindly offer this as the solution without knowing any consequences of this counseling? Are they even looking at the science and impact of their official solutions and counseling?
And here is the clincher that really bothers me: The above Baha’i quotes stress the importance of SCIENCE and REASON. What I quote next contradicts that from extrapolated quotes used by the Universal House of Justice. My questions from that are:
If current sciences are not to be trusted; what sciences then are you suggesting are to be trusted. All we have are current sciences and yes, it evolves as we learn more from more and more studies. How does the UHJ connect this to materialism? I do not think the issues about being homosexual relate to being materialistic. Love is love. Love is spiritual. Love crosses the barriers of sex. There are so many assumptions in the letter from the UHJ that I cannot even begin to address here.
First of all: it seems (to me) they correlate moral depravity to being homosexual. They correlate the disintegration of society with homosexuality. They correlate an obsession of sex and Western culture with homosexuality. Those are all different things and many different issues.
They lump homosexuality in with illness and being immoral. (or so it seems to me) I think there is a lot of ignorance here, bias, misunderstanding and unwillingness to try to truly understand what they are asking of people when they are telling them they cannot be a full member of the Baha’i community if they marry someone of the same sex.
They say it is just one of the many struggles we all have to work on. Everyone has a struggle. All of those arguments do not add up for me. If I reason it out; those arguments do not seem very valid. (for my brain and heart)
Then there is the faith argument. Accepting Baha’u’llah and trusting that He knows better than I do. I question that as well. It seems to me it is asking me to not reason it out and that people in general cannot reason it out; or are incapable of reasoning it out, so use the argument that someone knows better and someone knows the future so I should just let go of reason and have Faith. In this case, it sends out too many red flags for me to buy that.. and the result is HARM towards others. There are only so many times you can use the “have faith card” before it starts to sound like an excuse or because there is no good reason.
I NEED better concrete reasons that make sense. Otherwise it does seem to me that this is too far of a reach of logic and not supported by science at all; and falls into the realm of superstition referenced from the first quotations on the importance of science and reason.
I am not even convinced that Shoghi Effendi meant homosexuality for certain; he referenced the practice of men abusing boys.
Here are some excerpts from different letters from the UHJ answering individuals’ question about this issue:
The contemporary discussion surrounding homosexuality, which began in the West and is increasingly promoted in other parts of the world, generally takes the form of a false dichotomy, which compels one to choose between a position that is either affirming or rejecting….But to align with either side in the public debate is to accept the premises on which it is based.
But the UHJ does take a side in the dichotomy the minute they say marriage is only between a man and a women.
Moreover, this debate occurs within the context of a rising tide of materialism and consequent reorientation of society, over more than a century, which has among its outcomes a destructive emphasis on sexuality.
Various philosophies and theories have eroded precepts of right and wrong that govern personal behavior. For some, relativism reigns and individuals are to determine their own moral preferences; others dismiss the very conception of personal morality, maintaining that any standard that restrains what is considered a natural impulse is harmful to the individual and ultimately to society. Self- indulgence, in the guise of expressing one’s true nature, becomes the norm, even the touchstone of healthy living. Consequently, sexuality has become a preoccupation, pervading commerce, media, the arts, and popular culture, influencing disciplines such as medicine, psychology, and education and reducing the human being to an object. It is no longer merely a part of life, but becomes the defining element of a person’s identity. At its most extreme, the doctrine aggressively propagated in some societies is that it is abnormal for adolescents to restrain their sexual impulses, unreasonable for young adults to marry without first having had sexual relations, and impossible for a married couple to remain monogamous. The unbounded expression of sexuality in almost any form is thought to be natural and is accepted as a matter of course, the only limitation being to cause no harm to others, while any notion to the contrary is deemed narrow-minded or retrogressive. The question of same-sex marriage arises not simply as an appeal for fairness within a framework of existing values but as another step, presumed to be inevitable, in clearing away the vestiges of what is regarded to be a repressive traditional morality.
I notice a lot of very emotionally laden and biased language here—
” The response of the Bahá’í community to the challenges facing humanity lies not in combating specific issues one by one but rather in making efforts to uplift the vision of their compatriots and to work with them for the betterment of the world. In their involvement in society at all levels, the friends should distinguish between those discourses associated with forces of disintegration, such as those which overemphasize sexuality, where involvement would be unproductive, and those associated with forces of integration, whose aim is unity and the collaborative resolution of social ills, to which they can constructively contribute. They should be mindful that the divisive issues of the day, diametrically opposed to the Teachings
Shoghi Effendi writes, “can tolerate no compromise with the theories, the standards, the habits, and the excesses of a decadent age.”…
Bahá’u’lláh counsels not to weigh “the Book of God with such standards and sciences as are current amongst you, for the Book itself is the unerring Balance established amongst men,”
…and “in this most perfect Balance whatsoever the peoples and kindreds of the earth possess must be weighed….”
…To accept Bahá’u’lláh is to accept His Teachings, including those that pertain to personal morality, even if one must struggle to live up to His standard. It would be a profound contradiction for someone to profess to be a Bahá’í, yet reject, disregard, or contend with aspects of belief or practice He ordained.
…You are, of course, well aware of the explicit Bahá’í standard. Marriage is a union between a man and a woman, and sexual relations are only permissible between husband and wife. These points are laid down in the writings of Bahá’u’lláh, ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, and Shoghi Effendi and are not subject to change by the Universal House of Justice. Bahá’u’lláh also prohibits certain sexual acts, including homosexual relations;
from another letter:
It may be reassuring to you to know that Shoghi Effendi has stated, in letters written on his behalf, that a Bahá’í who has a homosexual orientation must strive daily to come closer to the Bahá’í standard and, in this process, should be treated with tolerance and receive help, advice, and sympathy; he also acknowledges that such an inclination can be “a great burden to a conscientious soul”
this sounds really condescending (to me).
and from another letter:
With regard to your suggestion that Bahá’ís be allowed to live with a partner in a homosexual lifestyle without losing their voting rights if a physician were to recommend this course of action, the Bahá’í writings unambiguously affirm that marriage is a union between a man and a woman, and sexual relations are only permissible between a couple who are married to each other. These teachings are set forth in the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh and in the authoritative statements of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá and Shoghi Effendi and are not susceptible to change by the House of Justice. Therefore, it cannot adopt your suggestion.
Baha’i teaching on seeking advice from a doctor:
“According to the explicit decree of Bahá’u’lláh one must not turn aside from the advice of a competent doctor. It is imperative to consult one even if the patient himself be a well-known and eminent physician. In short, the point is that you should maintain your health by consulting a highly-skilled physician.”(‘Abdu’l-Bahá, Selections from the Writings of ‘Abdu’l-Bahá, sec. 135, p. 156, in Lights of Guidance, no. 945 and 965)
I conclude this in the spirit of questions. In the spirit of reason and seeking out truth. I recognize I am in this place in time in my own finite mind and understanding, but it is what I have and where I am and I know I will keep learning and hopefully gaining wisdom. I acknowledge I am learning and questioning and imperfect and biased. But from where I am right now; this is a source of confusion and pain for me. It does not make sense to me; and it still seems to be bad advice. Offer me more information that makes sense. Offer me answers that reference the best of science and the consideration of it, but please don’t tell me a time in the distant future after I die, it will make sense and ask me to trust that. Don’t tell me there is a greater wisdom but I am not privy with the reasoning of it. It needs to make sense and right now it does not make sense. It contradicts itself and it smells of bias that is just as human as I am; yet claims the advice transcends being just human. These reasons are not good enough…. And I think it will stunt our beloved Baha’i Faith.. IS STUNTING it…making it stuck.. and stuck like often religions get stuck when they are inflexible and attached to a specific dogma and I think it could create toxicity and a breeding of intolerances and prejudices. Do we really need to wait another thousand years before the latest religion of God welcomes LGBTQ+ to live as they are and to be fully accepted within our faith? I think; what will happen in the future is that we will look back and see how this was a mistake just like women being treated as inferior was a mistake. Are we not ready yet to realize this?
The UHJ claims there is a false dichotomy and the solution is outside of that; and then actually does chose one side of that dichotomy by saying marriage is between a man and a women. And I wonder if I am not really allowed to question the letters of the UHJ… ? and that others may think I lack Faith by doing that? Yet-Abdul-Baha’ encouraged it. (another source of cognitive dissonance) I will conclude here.
I accessed these letters from the Universal House of Justice from these websites:
Wondering Wandering Thoughts 
Leave a comment