I conclude: it is a Baha'i right and duty to exclude this particular...

This is an archived post from the old bulletin board. For new posts, see the forum.

Posted by Stuart Gilman ( on December 15, 2002 at 12:32:23:

In Reply to: Re: Rejecting an active, promiscuous Gay Man from our home posted by Nick Stone on December 15, 2002 at 05:34:26:

I conclude: it is a Baha'i right and duty to exclude this particular person from my home, discussion follows -

I thank all the people who have commented on my dilemma. Yet, it is as though we are in a conflict over different fundamental principles. No-one denies our right to an emotional revulsion and a view of my friend's behaviour as sinful. Yet, as Baha'is there still seems to be a reluctance to exclude by Edict. I understand why, of course, since it is part of the Faith that we must do everything to include non-Baha'is and perhaps lead them to acceptance of the Covenant. If I could have Hitler in my home in such a way that I was not threatened and had a 1% chance of reaching out to him with the Word, I would do it.

If, however, Hitler sat in my home and boasted about the millions he had killed, the more millions he would kill and showed no interest at all in any view other than his own - as is the case with megalomaniacs and other psychopaths - not only would I be offended, but I might even conclude I had a duty to kill him, and that this was a sacred duty for the salvation of mankind and would be accepted as a Baha'i act.

With regard to my promiscuous, vulgar, lecherous, self-satisfied homosexual friend who loves to describe in detail his frequent conquests of young men (not boys) and acts of sodomy, I think I would dare to say that I have a Baha'i right to exclude him. Based on his affirmation of his actions, his boasting and his revelry in decadence.


this topic is closed - post at bahai-library.com/forum